Why does embassy deny visas when the NVC approves petition?

[Dana and Divine 61]

WOW! That is worth the read. Seems like the USCIS is saying stop going off gut feelings and go by evidence. Without hard facts to back up the rejection, issue the visa.

yep, that's what I got out of it too...like the USCIS sees way too many petitions returned for no reason and it causes undue grief to the petitioner and beneficiary.

[Dana and Divine 61]

Not just wimpy evidence like silly stuff like pictures were not dated (how about all the other evidence that petitioner and beneficiary were at the same place together like boarding passes, tickets, etc), not sure if Petitioner is still in love with Ex (purely speculative deal by CO) but hard core evidences that can withstand litigation. I am thinking, beneficiary comes in with stolen/forged passport, beneficiary has multiple contagious diseases and tried to bite CO, beneficiary comes in and straight up defacates a steaming pile right in the lobby. Stuff like that.

:rofl: Yeah...real evidence!

[Lonelywithouthim 5]

May I refer you to the first link in my signature? Seems that even the almighty USCIS is perplexed.

Great reading material.... I would love to email that to the Nairobi embassy.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Lonelywithouthim

[del-2-5-2014 1,339]

Imagine if we could get Mrs. Clinton to have her folks read this every Monday morning before they open for business?

The uncertainty of the Embassy process really puts us USC in a bad situation but I guess it affects those of us dealing with Embassies in high fraud regions more.

[Shiobhan 235]

I think I would deny my own Fiancee's visa if she walked in and layed a big stanley steamer on the lobby floor. I'd laugh a few times in disbelief first.

HA HA HA HA HAAAA

[PSM 8]

I think I would deny my own Fiancee's visa if she walked in and layed a big stanley steamer on the lobby floor. I'd laugh a few times in disbelief first.

...hilarious

[GlobeHopperMama 95]

I am surprised by some of these embassies that deny visas solely on suspicion that the marriage isn't bonafide, especially in the face of a wealth of solid relationship evidence. I believe that goes against the spirit of the process, but whatever, our opinions don't matter on this stuff, and yeah, consular non-reviewability is a monster of a reality that really gives them freedom to make lots of baseless decisions and claim that applicants even made statements that they didn't during the interview. Yuck.

Anyway, yeah, petition approval is done by USCIS, and the entire purpose of the petition is to establish that the applicant is in a qualifying category to apply for a visa (i.e. spouse or fiance of US citizen, or prospective employee in a qualified job, etc.). The petition is not meant to establish actual visa eligibility - that is done by the Dept of State's Immigrant Visa unit at the embassy/consulate. Which is why a petition should be approved as long as the relationship is legit, but the visa could be denied on all sorts of grounds, including medical or criminal inadmissibility or prior immigration violations.

Also, about the NVC. They're really just a middleman, they're a center that collects and checks over documents to make the embassy/consulate's job simpler, but they neither approve nor deny anything and they aren't really even the ultimate authority on judging whether documents are satisfactory. For one thing, those of us filing directly with the consulate skip the NVC altogether and only ever engage with the consulate. For another thing, the ultimate decision on whether documents are acceptable lies with the individual consulate issuing the visa. And finally, because of their status as a middleman document-collector with no real deciding power, it actually IS possible in many cases to move your case past the NVC even without having their final OK on everything submitted, if you can kindly convince them that your documents will be up to embassy requirements in time for the interview. I've personally known half a dozen people who did this, especially in countries (i.e. El Salvador) where the interview scheduling takes a very long time and they preferred to get their police certs or other time-sensitive documents together while waiting for an interview rather than in advance.

And yeah, I'm pretty sure leaving a heaping pile of....gift...for the consular officer would warrant a reference back to the psychologist and a medical inadmissibility on mental health grounds. Ha!

Edited October 21, 2012 by GlobeHopperMama

[Bumbero 130]

And yeah, I'm pretty sure leaving a heaping pile of....gift...for the consular officer would warrant a reference back to the psychologist and a medical inadmissibility on mental health grounds. Ha!

I would hope so, otherwise it could make the long flight to the US interesting.

[FB14 14]

I think it is totally unfair dat an IO at the US Consulate gets to dictate a person's love life depending on their moods. For example, the Kingston embassy I notice dat they approve a bunch of visas but denies at least three all stating lack of evidence when evidence was clearly provided. Its funny I see women who are way older than their fiances only visited once n they get approved. Then there are people who visited more than once n been in the relationship for a while and get denied. And I think its wrong dat they ask questions like how come your fiance only visited once? Hello.do or do they not require us to have a jon. This whole immigration thing is bullsh@t.

[bestofboston 36]

K1 visa approval is a touch and go thing at the embassy. They can be denied easily by the embassy. Hopefully the interviewer is not in a bad mood.

Condition for denial by the embassy for a IR1/CR1 already married) visa is different. When the paperwork leaves the NVC enroute to the Embassy for a IR1/CR1 visa, the only way that the embassy can deny the visa is to prove that fraud was comitted by the petitioner and spouse and forward the documentation back to the NVC for denial of visa based on new evidence. The key word is the embassy must have new evidence that previous documentation provided to the NVC was fraudulent.

So for you who are trying to decide which way to go, K1 or IR1/CR1 visa, I recommend the IR1/CR1 I-130 visa.

[krd 5]

Not just wimpy evidence like silly stuff like pictures were not dated (how about all the other evidence that petitioner and beneficiary were at the same place together like boarding passes, tickets, etc), not sure if Petitioner is still in love with Ex (purely speculative deal by CO) but hard core evidences that can withstand litigation. I am thinking, beneficiary comes in with stolen/forged passport, beneficiary has multiple contagious diseases and tried to bite CO, beneficiary comes in and straight up defacates a steaming pile right in the lobby. Stuff like that.

:rofl:

genius!!!

:lol:

[FB14 14]

I think it is totally unfair dat an IO at the US Consulate gets to dictate a person's love life depending on their moods. For example, the Kingston embassy I notice dat they approve a bunch of visas but denies at least three all stating lack of evidence when evidence was clearly provided. Its funny I see women who are way older than their fiances only visited once n they get approved. Then there are people who visited more than once n been in the relationship for a while and get denied. And I think its wrong dat they ask questions like how come your fiance only visited once? Hello.do or do they not require us to have a job. This whole immigration thing is bullsh@t.

[wilfon 30]

You are not understanding the process.

The NVC does not approve anything. The NVC does approve the I-130; USCIS approves the I-130. The NVC does not approve the DS-230 or the I-864; the US Embassy approves the DS-230 and I-864.

The NVC collects the information, check if it for completeness, and then forwards it to the US Embassy. The US Embassy makes the decision if a visa can be issued to a beneficiary.

I had to laugh a little because you said in your first line "The NVC does not approve anything" and immediately followed with "The NVC does approve the I-130" I know what you mean, but it was still funny.