Why would a Russian be denied K1 visa at interview?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Continuing to meet is the best way to demonstrate an ongoing relationship

Actually I could make an argument to the contrary, pure meetings alone, and proof of multiple meetings do not s relationship make.

But generating good and different evidences do help to prove a legitimate relationship.....for example what me wife and I did was to take Skype screenshot or snapshots of each other for example of her and Leonid as we talked on Skype....or.... when she was visiting her folks I took snapshot of her and her folks as we all talked on Skype.

I've still never personally met her folks but we talk and see each other all the time.

Using the modern communication mediums is a big advantage.

As I always state over in the K-1 forum,

Purposefully generate different kinds of evidences; you have to convince a total stranger, the Embassy CO, that you have a legit relationship and that it is not for illegal

immigration purposes

Relationships generate evidence constantly. US citizens tend to throw this out because it is not needed for anything to marry the girl next door...or in the next state.

Too many posts at this site say "We didn't take any photos" or "We lived in an apartment owned by his parents and had no lease" Just dumb@ss stuff. If I married a girl from far away Massachusetts ...or Oklahoma...this would be OK. But if I marry a girl from nearby Quebec, I had better have a lease with my parents.

Buying a phone card for calling her? Get one that generates a record of calls made! It is just a matter of paying attention.

When does the period to prepare for Removal of Conditions begin? 90 days before the green card expires? NO! On the WEDDING DAY. When the newsletter from the local school comes in the mail addressed to "Gary and Alla" (and you make SURE, it is addressed to "Gary and Alla" because you went to the school and explained your immigration status and the need for this to the counselor) Where does that letter go? The trash? The recycle bin? NO! It goes in the "ROC" file which you started the day you got married BEFORE the wedding night!

Do you have a living will saying your spouse can decide whether you live or die in an emergency? No? Why not? You don't like those? TOO BAD! Get one. There is no better evidence that your relationship is genuine than something like that OR a legal directive from the foreign spouse that in the case of their death the US citizen spouse is designated the guardian of her children...a WILL! That is way better than a joint checking account used to pay utilities and rent or both names on an electric bill (something we never bothered with because it is meaningless)

Debating about meeting here or there, near or far, willy or nilly is ludicrous...oh yeah, and 11 ghosts can dance on the head of a pin.

[SMR 368]

SMR this is simply a ridiculous statement. You have nothing to support that other than imagination or speculation or rumor. Period. There is no such thing as a "preference" of where a meeting occurs. same country? Same Oblast? Same city? SMR, be serious, think about this.

I met Alla 6 times during our relatively short processing, about every 3-4 weeks. Once in Prague (OH NO! Another country!) and only once in Donetsk, where my wife lived. Is it weaker that we met in Kiev, Odessa? Because she does not live there? Where does one draw this "typically weaker" line? The city limits? The Oblast? How does being in a third country make the relationship any "weaker"?

Our visa interview was NO QUESTIONS ASKED. I know of others who were requested additional information and NONE were requested to provide additional evidence of meeting with the home country of either of the parties to the marriage.

Have you EVER actually heard such a thing, SMR? Have you ever heard of a case where the parties were asked to prove they had met in their home countries?Can you find even ONE reference to this in any instructions or suggested evidence from either USCIS or DOS?

Please, this site is far beyond spreading nonsense.

There is no such thing SMR

The advantages you point out are REAL and beneficial but have nothing to do with visas or immigration. Yes, I met Alla's mother and children, and both of us wanted that, but we provided NO evidence of that at any point in the process and no one asked.

You need to separate what is personally beneficial to a relationship from what is required to obtain a visa in Russia or Ukraine. Not Morocco or United Arab Emirates or VietNam or Afghanistan.

To be honest, I'm a little bit curious as to why my comments have hit such a nerve. No, of course the question about what country you met in never comes up as a condition of approval. But there are very real reasons, some of which I have mentioned, why meeting in a home country makes the story better and more solid. Gary, you met 6 times, including where Alla lived. That's an entirely different story from someone who met once while vacationing in Mexico. That's not meant as a jab at the OP, but rather a point that he needs to understand that further evidence is probably a good idea.

We all understand that there are basic minimum requirements that have to be met in addition to a bunch of squishy requirements. You're correct that exactly what those squishy requirements are is a matter of speculation, rumor, and imagination. If there was something more concrete then they would cease to be squishy requirements. The OP came with the intention of trying to understand those requirements. I believe that as visits go the OPs visit is on the weaker side for establishing proof of a relationship. Obviously it wouldn't instantly become better just because they met in one of the home countries, but it would give it more potential. I can't really understand why you would disagree that if he had the opportunity to visit her at home and meet her family and friends that would show stronger evidence of an ongoing relationship. That doesn't mean he has to do it. He just needs to consider that evidence of an ongoing relationship will probably be required at some level and that he should be actively trying to generate and save said proof.

[james&olya 1,121]

To be honest, I'm a little bit curious as to why my comments have hit such a nerve. No, of course the question about what country you met in never comes up as a condition of approval. But there are very real reasons, some of which I have mentioned, why meeting in a home country makes the story better and more solid. Gary, you met 6 times, including where Alla lived. That's an entirely different story from someone who met once while vacationing in Mexico. That's not meant as a jab at the OP, but rather a point that he needs to understand that further evidence is probably a good idea.

We all understand that there are basic minimum requirements that have to be met in addition to a bunch of squishy requirements. You're correct that exactly what those squishy requirements are is a matter of speculation, rumor, and imagination. If there was something more concrete then they would cease to be squishy requirements. The OP came with the intention of trying to understand those requirements. I believe that as visits go the OPs visit is on the weaker side for establishing proof of a relationship. Obviously it wouldn't instantly become better just because they met in one of the home countries, but it would give it more potential. I can't really understand why you would disagree that if he had the opportunity to visit her at home and meet her family and friends that would show stronger evidence of an ongoing relationship. That doesn't mean he has to do it. He just needs to consider that evidence of an ongoing relationship will probably be required at some level and that he should be actively trying to generate and save said proof.

Getting approval of the I-129 probably does not require any more than meeting minimum requirements and passing the background checks. The battle, if there is to be one, is at the consulate interview. All of this is of greater importance when dealing with tougher consulates. Fortunately Kyiv and Moscow are relatively easy. You are right, of course, that it makes sense to give them more than the bare minimum whenever possible. After all, you are dealing with people and you never know when somebody at USCIS or the consulate might be having a hard day and decides to take it out on some poor, unsuspecting K-1 applicant/beneficiary. Sometimes the process can seem quite arbitrary. Why not do everything possible to assure a positive outcome? I have to agree with you on this even though I am sure, as Gary tells us, that it is quite possible to get approval with a single meeting somewhere far from the homes of both petitioner and beneficiary.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

To be honest, I'm a little bit curious as to why my comments have hit such a nerve. No, of course the question about what country you met in never comes up as a condition of approval. But there are very real reasons, some of which I have mentioned, why meeting in a home country makes the story better and more solid. Gary, you met 6 times, including where Alla lived. That's an entirely different story from someone who met once while vacationing in Mexico. That's not meant as a jab at the OP, but rather a point that he needs to understand that further evidence is probably a good idea.

We all understand that there are basic minimum requirements that have to be met in addition to a bunch of squishy requirements. You're correct that exactly what those squishy requirements are is a matter of speculation, rumor, and imagination. If there was something more concrete then they would cease to be squishy requirements. The OP came with the intention of trying to understand those requirements. I believe that as visits go the OPs visit is on the weaker side for establishing proof of a relationship. Obviously it wouldn't instantly become better just because they met in one of the home countries, but it would give it more potential. I can't really understand why you would disagree that if he had the opportunity to visit her at home and meet her family and friends that would show stronger evidence of an ongoing relationship. That doesn't mean he has to do it. He just needs to consider that evidence of an ongoing relationship will probably be required at some level and that he should be actively trying to generate and save said proof.

Your comments hit a nerve because they are wrong.

Yes, meeting 6 times including in the city where she lives is different than meeting one time in Mexico. But it is NOT different than meeting one time in Kiev if she lives in Donetsk or even if she lives in Kiev. I have an issue with you saying that meeting in another country is "weaker" than meeting in the same country. It is not. Meeting ONCE is weaker than meeting 6 times. Agreed. WHERE you meet does not matter. Meeting once can, and often does result in no problems in getting a visa. I am sure there are plenty of VJ members from Russia and Ukraine that met only once.

The decision is made on the body of evidence presented, if your evidence is weak in one area...only one meeting for example...then make up for it with something else. And interestingly enough, while we met 6 times, they never looked at any evidence of that, so the person making the decision had no idea we met more than once...and we had no questions asked. the only other thing they looked at was FOUR photos. I did give different photos which you could tell by the manner of dress was at different times of the year...but no one asked. They never even looked at the stack I brought in. maybe they were intimidated. D'ya think?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Getting approval of the I-129 probably does not require any more than meeting minimum requirements and passing the background checks. The battle, if there is to be one, is at the consulate interview. All of this is of greater importance when dealing with tougher consulates. Fortunately Kyiv and Moscow are relatively easy. You are right, of course, that it makes sense to give them more than the bare minimum whenever possible. After all, you are dealing with people and you never know when somebody at USCIS or the consulate might be having a hard day and decides to take it out on some poor, unsuspecting K-1 applicant/beneficiary. Sometimes the process can seem quite arbitrary. Why not do everything possible to assure a positive outcome? I have to agree with you on this even though I am sure, as Gary tells us, that it is quite possible to get approval with a single meeting somewhere far from the homes of both petitioner and beneficiary.

James. I brought evidence of meeting 6 times, and a stack of phone logs, email logs, dozens and dozens of photos, maybe 100, I do not remember. I had every form of back u for the I-134 possible and a couple extra. I brought every document that had ever been mailed to anyone. I carried it with me on my lap on the plane and brought it by hand delivery to the interview myself. I basically killed a fly with a thermonuclear warhead!

There is no one that says "use enough gun" more than me. Better to be slightly over-gunned than be trampled by an elephant.

But it simply is not true that meeting one time or 10 times in a third country is "weaker" than meeting one time or 10 times in their home country.

I met with Alla 6 times because that was the best I could with my work schedule and because I wanted to meet with her that many times...more if I could have. It was not to generate evidence, but of course it did. I encourage people, always, to meet as many times as possible and to d=go to the interview and make it a priority to go to the interview (not because it is better evidence, but because I believe you do things together in this process)

there is no one more conservative than I on this matter...but I admit it is not required and that it gets ridiculous when people start saying..."well it is weaker if you meet somewhere else." Maybe it is weaker if you meet in summer because you were not willing to endure winter weather for your fiancee? C'mon, how silly can we get? Is it stronger evidence if I wear poor fitting shoes so my feet hurt?

[BatmanUSA 105]

I do not understand why someone would say Russia/USA is critical against fiancé visas.. This is absolutely NOT TRUE.

Here is my experience from last week...

I was in Moscow last week to be with my fiancé and her daughter for the interview... It all went well and we were approved. The staff in the embassy are pleasant, and the interview was easy... I met my fiancé on-line in November 2011, visited her in May 2012, and applied for the K-1 in June 2012... All our paperwork was in order and we had no problems or hassles at all.

[baron555 934]

Maybe it is weaker if you meet in summer because you were not willing to endure winter weather for your fiancee?

Yep for sure meeting in the summer is weaker than meeting in the winter.

That's one big big reason Alla and I agreed to meet in Kiev in February, since we only met one we wanted to maximize the effect.

Do you think this statement is true?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Maybe it is weaker if you meet in summer because you were not willing to endure winter weather for your fiancee?

Yep for sure meeting in the summer is weaker than meeting in the winter.

That's one big big reason Alla and I agreed to meet in Kiev in February, since we only met one we wanted to maximize the effect.

Do you think this statement is true?

I have been to Kiev in February (and January) YES it is true

Kiev in August would not even count because any red-blooded heterosexual male on earth wants to be in Kiev in August!

[Hollyday 122]

I have been to Kiev in February (and January) YES it is true

Kiev in August would not even count because any red-blooded heterosexual male on earth wants to be in Kiev in August!

Lol so true on both points. Kiev in Feb: yuck! In August (for males): 'Well, hello there!'

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Lol so true on both points. Kiev in Feb: yuck! In August (for males): 'Well, hello there!'

Hellloooooooooooooo there! Oh yes. It was a difficult place to visit with Alla in the summer. Our interview was in August.

Gary

Alla: Voooowhat?

Gary: What?

Alla: Vooowhat are you looking at?

Gary: Looking at?

Alla: I saw you

Gary: saw what?

Gary

[james&olya 1,121]

James. I brought evidence of meeting 6 times, and a stack of phone logs, email logs, dozens and dozens of photos, maybe 100, I do not remember. I had every form of back u for the I-134 possible and a couple extra. I brought every document that had ever been mailed to anyone. I carried it with me on my lap on the plane and brought it by hand delivery to the interview myself. I basically killed a fly with a thermonuclear warhead!

There is no one that says "use enough gun" more than me. Better to be slightly over-gunned than be trampled by an elephant.

But it simply is not true that meeting one time or 10 times in a third country is "weaker" than meeting one time or 10 times in their home country.

I met with Alla 6 times because that was the best I could with my work schedule and because I wanted to meet with her that many times...more if I could have. It was not to generate evidence, but of course it did. I encourage people, always, to meet as many times as possible and to d=go to the interview and make it a priority to go to the interview (not because it is better evidence, but because I believe you do things together in this process)

there is no one more conservative than I on this matter...but I admit it is not required and that it gets ridiculous when people start saying..."well it is weaker if you meet somewhere else." Maybe it is weaker if you meet in summer because you were not willing to endure winter weather for your fiancee? C'mon, how silly can we get? Is it stronger evidence if I wear poor fitting shoes so my feet hurt?

I really think you are both right. On the narrow issue of where, specifically, the meeting occurs, who cares? But on the larger issue of whether you have met each other's family and friends as well, and can document all that with photos, etc., it will go far in helping to establish you have a bona-fide relationship when you need to prove that later on. From what I have seen personally though, I don't believe that most people who actually do have that bona-fide relationship will have any significant problem in demonstrating that to the officials involved. Most of this advice is probably only needed by those trying to prove something that is not as real as it should be. So I guess I am pretty close to your position on this but I can see the point SMR was making.

[SMR 368]

I really think you are both right. On the narrow issue of where, specifically, the meeting occurs, who cares? But on the larger issue of whether you have met each other's family and friends as well, and can document all that with photos, etc., it will go far in helping to establish you have a bona-fide relationship when you need to prove that later on. From what I have seen personally though, I don't believe that most people who actually do have that bona-fide relationship will have any significant problem in demonstrating that to the officials involved. Most of this advice is probably only needed by those trying to prove something that is not as real as it should be. So I guess I am pretty close to your position on this but I can see the point SMR was making.

Taken in general, I'm obviously oversimplifying it and making blanket statements. But in the context of what the OP was asking, I think that my advice is good. Whether or not a 'bona-fide' relationship will generate enough documentable evidence naturally really depends on your definitions of bona-fide, enough, and naturally. In any event, it helps to think about it as soon as possible.

[paws057 9]

Privet everyone! I am relatively new to the forums here, as well as to international relationships and immigration law, so I beg your forgiveness for my ignorance in advance)))

I met my fiance online last year, and after several interesting trials (check my posts here if you are curious), we are ready to marry. A good friend of mine, who I completely trust to give me good and accurate advice told me that the US consulate in Russian is extremely critical on couples applying for visa. She explained that Russia is a high visa fraud country and that meeting once is no longer acceptable in their eyes, insisting that we meet twice to have any real chance to be approved for a visa.

She also asked me to check with you guys in the RUB forum, and praised all of you for your kindness and unbiased advice. What I would like to know is do we really have to meet again? My girl has a 7 year old daughter, and besides the financial burden it will place on us to take another vacation together, it is extremely difficult for her to secure someone she trusts to watch her little girl while she leaves the country to visit a man.

Furthermore, is there any advice you can give that pertains to the US consulate in St. Petersburg that can help us not to make any mistakes, or things they like to see in lieu of a second meeting? I understand that it is not all of you I must convince that the relationship is real. All of you are no different than me in this regard. But I really love this woman and her daughter, and only want the chance to provide the life for them that I know they deserve.

Thank you for your help. I am proud to be part of this community.

Yes, her interview will be in Moscow as it is the only Embassy in Russia that processes K1 visa to my knowledge. I really don't think it matters where you meet as long as you have met her in person.

[paws057 9]

James. I brought evidence of meeting 6 times, and a stack of phone logs, email logs, dozens and dozens of photos, maybe 100, I do not remember. I had every form of back u for the I-134 possible and a couple extra. I brought every document that had ever been mailed to anyone. I carried it with me on my lap on the plane and brought it by hand delivery to the interview myself. I basically killed a fly with a thermonuclear warhead!

There is no one that says "use enough gun" more than me. Better to be slightly over-gunned than be trampled by an elephant.

I'm not sure how in the world I'm going to carry all this stuff to the interview but I will. I have everything I have ever sent her, letters, Skype chat logs, phone bills, gifts, photos, plane tickets and luggage tags, every letter she has sent to me. It might be overkill but I would rather have everything then have them ask me for something and opps, I don't have it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I'm not sure how in the world I'm going to carry all this stuff to the interview but I will. I have everything I have ever sent her, letters, Skype chat logs, phone bills, gifts, photos, plane tickets and luggage tags, every letter she has sent to me. It might be overkill but I would rather have everything then have them ask me for something and opps, I don't have it.

I brought it in a carry on bag. Good thing because Air France was right on their game and sent my luggage somewhere else. Air France/CDG layover virtually assures lost luggage. Carry it on, hold it in your hand.

In our case it was WAY overkill but who cares? I only recently discarded all that stuff...after citizenship