unprofessional comment by interviewing officer

[maybenexttime 0]

my husband had his interview almost two weeks now and i was allowed to be there. while being a step away from the counter, the interviewing officer looked at me, then the file, then me again and said, are you the petitioner or some woman off the streets that tagged along with him today? she said it with what i felt was a crude smile.

i know when i worked with the public, a warm up comment helps with personalizing the situation, but this comment was way too unprofessional considering the type of security you go through just to get to the floor for the interview. and calling me a woman off the streets?

my immediate thought was wth? i just laughed it off and said something like i hope i'm the petitioner! a simple hi, how are you today with a nice smile would of done. i am not a prude, yet i feel this was so inappropriate for the circumstances. as an u.s. citizen, i feel i have a right to be treated with dignity. especially from my own people and in my own consulate. and come to think of it now that i see it in writing, this comment could of been a jab towards my husband. whichever, it is still inappropriate.

it went downhill from there. i feel she did her job in some ways, and went far beyond in other ways.

it boiled down to a denial until further documents. one document i feel is unreasonable but i understand it doesn't matter what i feel on it. just doubt we would be able to obtain it to her specifications.

which is the other thing...she placed a lot of verbal restrictions and conditions that she did not write down on the denial. i have asked those to be put in writing. so far, nada. unsure if i should ask again or make a complaint on that. i feel this leaves us open to get something done that was verbal and then told that is not what they demanded.

so since we are walking on eggshells, yet also have to protect ourselves in some ways, when/how would you start the complaint? or should i just chalk it up to a lousy interview and pray we get it right?

[canadian_wife 1,829]

Well, firstly you don't have a denial. They require more documentation before the visa can be issued

Secondly, I'd chalk it up to a CO with a sense of humour that missed the mark. Our CO made jokes to us that were off colour but the power is in their hands. Complaining isn't going to make them change, it isn't going to get them fired, it isn't going to help your case. It is just going to make you feel like you are doing something but in reality, I doubt it will. I bet they get complaints upon complaints upon complaints. There is not 'right' for you to bring your husband over to the US so I believe a complaint about an off colour comment won't go very far

I'm sorry you had a bad experience, I hope it turns around for you quickly

Good luck

[newlyweds2010 208]

my husband had his interview almost two weeks now and i was allowed to be there. while being a step away from the counter, the interviewing officer looked at me, then the file, then me again and said, are you the petitioner or some woman off the streets that tagged along with him today? she said it with what i felt was a crude smile.

i know when i worked with the public, a warm up comment helps with personalizing the situation, but this comment was way too unprofessional considering the type of security you go through just to get to the floor for the interview. and calling me a woman off the streets?

my immediate thought was wth? i just laughed it off and said something like i hope i'm the petitioner! a simple hi, how are you today with a nice smile would of done. i am not a prude, yet i feel this was so inappropriate for the circumstances. as an u.s. citizen, i feel i have a right to be treated with dignity. especially from my own people and in my own consulate. and come to think of it now that i see it in writing, this comment could of been a jab towards my husband. whichever, it is still inappropriate.

it went downhill from there. i feel she did her job in some ways, and went far beyond in other ways.

it boiled down to a denial until further documents. one document i feel is unreasonable but i understand it doesn't matter what i feel on it. just doubt we would be able to obtain it to her specifications.

which is the other thing...she placed a lot of verbal restrictions and conditions that she did not write down on the denial. i have asked those to be put in writing. so far, nada. unsure if i should ask again or make a complaint on that. i feel this leaves us open to get something done that was verbal and then told that is not what they demanded.

so since we are walking on eggshells, yet also have to protect ourselves in some ways, when/how would you start the complaint? or should i just chalk it up to a lousy interview and pray we get it right?

actually you should feel the same right regardless of where you are from. being a US citizen doesn't give any special rights when it comes to be treated with dignity and respect. I think that comment was inappropriate both towards you and your husband. I certainly would not have taken it with a laugh. wait until you are approved, then file a complaint against "officer #######".

[maybenexttime 0]

thanks for the suggestions. always good to get someone else's opinions

what do you think of the verbal restrictions and conditions not in writing? i am sure they are in our computer file. should i ask again them put in writing?

thanks again.

[newlyweds2010 208]

thanks for the suggestions. always good to get someone else's opinions

what do you think of the verbal restrictions and conditions not in writing? i am sure they are in our computer file. should i ask again them put in writing?

thanks again.

what restrictions and conditions?

[maybenexttime 0]

what restrictions and conditions?

on the 221(g)we received, she wrote in two things she wants.

first is the "estimate of medical cost - joint sponsor". nothing else after this on the form.

the second tick is "annual costs, follow up and medications in the u.s". again nothing else after this on the form.

her restrictions/conditions are (what i can remember) is she wants a u.s. doctor's only on the annual medical costs of my husband's condition. she also stated that not only does my daughter's income and assets has to meet the i864p, but she also has to have 3x the annual costs provided by a doctor. she then said later that she would accept the panel physician annual costs, which we did, however, he was unable to provide all that she asked, so now that will probably be refused. she will only accept my daughter as a joint sponsor. she will not accept joint sponsor from any one else. at first she said a family member only, then the next sentence was daughter only. if she doesn't make it, we would not be allowed another joint sponsor. my daughter also has to testify with a letter on numerous questions the officer wants pertaining to my husband and i.

this is just a breakdown, it was rifled off so fast, and i didn't have a pen or extra paper ready and i think she made herself a little confused at times with her making one statement and then saying, no she wants it this way which made me a little confused on following it. most i remember, but i am afraid what might of gotten past me it would be cause to not fulfilling what she wants. some i probably did missed.

the testifying letter from my daughter even isn't on the form. but i remember her saying it has to be in file.

i know she is looking at a public charge. with something this serious, i would think there should be written precise instructions on what she wants. right now on the form, it looks like a simple internet search would suffice and a regular joint sponsor requirement when it won't. i don't want to foul this up. and i am afraid one little thing that zinged past my head may do it.

it also has PTO on the 221(g). when i asked, i was told that is their code, but it under "the following remarks apply in your case".

so when we left, i asked if all of this was on the form. she handed it back to me and said just do what is on the form. i asked if we were done, she said yes. my fault, i should of asked for all that in writing then. but as i mentioned it all went downhill. i emailed them when we got home with a few questions and a request to put it in writing. the response ignored that request.

so i don't know to request again, or hope we get it all right....however, finding a u.s. doctor to commit himself to a annual cost to me is unreasonable. first, they wouldn't do it without examining him, second they won't make themselves liable. if we lived and applied for this visa in the states it would be possible.

i don't want to be a #######, but i also don't want us to be told we didn't fulfill all they want.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

This might be hard to believe, but it sounds like the CO might have been helping you out. On a 221(g) notice they will usually only write a brief statement describing what they require according to the law, or the DoS policy, or the consulate policy. However, she went into much more detail with you verbally, basically telling you what would be accepted by the consulate to meet the requirements of the evidence they asked for on the 221(g). Most people don't get that sort of extra information from the CO. They're left guessing what will be sufficient to satisfy the 221(g) request. Unfortunately, the consulate isn't required to spell it out for you, especially when it's a matter of the CO's discretion. The "public charge" requirement is entirely the CO's discretion. The Foreign Affairs Manual lists a variety of things which the CO is required to consider. For the majority of immigrants, those things don't apply, so the only real consideration is the affidavit of support. Your husband apparently has a medical condition that will require ongoing care in the US. The health of the intending immigrant is one of those factors that the CO is required to consider, both according to law and according to DoS policy. The CO has apparently concluded that there's a risk your husband might become a public charge for that medical care, and she wants rock solid assurance from you and your joint sponsor that isn't going to happen.

There is no statutory requirement that a joint sponsor be a family member, but the CO is allowed to consider the risk that a sponsor may not fulfill their obligations under the affidavit of support contract. The US government doesn't want to be in a position where they have to enforce the affidavit of support, and they definitely don't want to be in a position where they have to go to court to obtain an enforcement order. A family member is considered less likely to leave the primary sponsor hanging out to dry if they get into a financial crunch over medical bills.

The CO is simply telling you in advance how they're likely to exercise their discretion, depending on what evidence you provide in response to the 221(g) notice. If I were you I'd try like heck to get what the CO asked for at the interview.

[maybenexttime 0]

This might be hard to believe, but it sounds like the CO might have been helping you out. On a 221(g) notice they will usually only write a brief statement describing what they require according to the law, or the DoS policy, or the consulate policy. However, she went into much more detail with you verbally, basically telling you what would be accepted by the consulate to meet the requirements of the evidence they asked for on the 221(g). Most people don't get that sort of extra information from the CO. They're left guessing what will be sufficient to satisfy the 221(g) request. Unfortunately, the consulate isn't required to spell it out for you, especially when it's a matter of the CO's discretion. The "public charge" requirement is entirely the CO's discretion. The Foreign Affairs Manual lists a variety of things which the CO is required to consider. For the majority of immigrants, those things don't apply, so the only real consideration is the affidavit of support. Your husband apparently has a medical condition that will require ongoing care in the US. The health of the intending immigrant is one of those factors that the CO is required to consider, both according to law and according to DoS policy. The CO has apparently concluded that there's a risk your husband might become a public charge for that medical care, and she wants rock solid assurance from you and your joint sponsor that isn't going to happen.

There is no statutory requirement that a joint sponsor be a family member, but the CO is allowed to consider the risk that a sponsor may not fulfill their obligations under the affidavit of support contract. The US government doesn't want to be in a position where they have to enforce the affidavit of support, and they definitely don't want to be in a position where they have to go to court to obtain an enforcement order. A family member is considered less likely to leave the primary sponsor hanging out to dry if they get into a financial crunch over medical bills.

The CO is simply telling you in advance how they're likely to exercise their discretion, depending on what evidence you provide in response to the 221(g) notice. If I were you I'd try like heck to get what the CO asked for at the interview.

thank you so much, your response really put it all in perspective for us.

i think when i get over being a ####### later today, i will request it in writing again. if i do not get it, then at least i have it in writing that i requested twice with no response.

we had some quiet time and had a long think about all this. a huge positive realization happened to us on the dynamics of the interview and why it flowed the way it did. and your response really helped...so we will go from here....

fingers crossed!

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

thank you so much, your response really put it all in perspective for us.

i think when i get over being a ####### later today, i will request it in writing again. if i do not get it, then at least i have it in writing that i requested twice with no response.

we had some quiet time and had a long think about all this. a huge positive realization happened to us on the dynamics of the interview and why it flowed the way it did. and your response really helped...so we will go from here....

fingers crossed!

Don't get your hopes up about them giving you the same information in writing that the CO gave you verbally at the interview. If my suspicions are correct then what she was doing may have been in conflict with the policies of the consulate to not share with the petitioner or beneficiary any of the factors they use in making a discretionary decision, beyond the vague descriptions provided in the Foreign Affairs Manual. If it were widely known what factors they look for then visa scammers would exploit that knowledge to get a visa, which makes it unlikely she's going to want to write those factors down for you, and then subsequently have to face her supervisor when they get posted on the internet. She's basically shown you her cards, which is something a CO doesn't often do. You now know exactly what cards you need in order to win the hand. Most people who get a 221(g) are not nearly as lucky.

[maybenexttime 0]

Don't get your hopes up about them giving you the same information in writing that the CO gave you verbally at the interview. If my suspicions are correct then what she was doing may have been in conflict with the policies of the consulate to not share with the petitioner or beneficiary any of the factors they use in making a discretionary decision, beyond the vague descriptions provided in the Foreign Affairs Manual. If it were widely known what factors they look for then visa scammers would exploit that knowledge to get a visa, which makes it unlikely she's going to want to write those factors down for you, and then subsequently have to face her supervisor when they get posted on the internet. She's basically shown you her cards, which is something a CO doesn't often do. You now know exactly what cards you need in order to win the hand. Most people who get a 221(g) are not nearly as lucky.

i realized exactly what you said about getting the same info in writing and decided not to ask again for that reason. i agree with you and believe i won't get it. and i agree with you on how too much info out there encourages the scammers. i received a second email from the embassy today and no mention of the restrictions/conditions...after doing a lot of thinking, i now understand what happened and why it happened in our interview. i even figured out why she made that off colour opening comment.

good news is i talked with a u.s. doctor today who is in australia here locally! for a few more months before going back to the states...she understands what complicated information is needed and said it is no problem to do. i am gathering documents for her now and will drop it off to her tomorrow. i should have her letter for the embassy in about a week.

i am very relieved and thank all for their responses. it really helped to sort some things out. i am not too worried now about anything that might of zinged over my head. i talked with my daughter today too...we developed a plan of action on what all they want from her. she can't send me anything yet because her documents relies on the doctor's letter. but at least we got a plan going.

the first week after the interview, i was in shock, had other stressers that came up, and was very tired from traveling. the second week, i sent the email asking for all in writing. took almost a week to get back nothing...during that time, i was afraid to make any arrangements on obtaining the documents she wanted because i thought i would not do it according to the verbal stuff. now in the third week, things are making more sense.

will let you all know...

Edited November 9, 2011 by maybenexttime