A word of advice make sure spouse attends interview

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

I was not able to attend the interview in 2006 because I had no vacation time left after making several trips to visit my fiance. Of course it would be a very nice thing for the petitioner to accompany the beneficiary to the interview, but to suggest they may be denied for not attending is ludicrous. The stats don't bear that out, and it's only speculation that a denial happens for that reason. If someone has the means and the time off to attend the interview, then by all means, they should. But, it's not worth losing one's job because they were led to believe if they were not there then their partner would be denied.

You're over thinking this.

OP gave an advice based from her experiences. Many of us here share the same opinion.

My advice to those starting the journey is to space out the trips so that they can have both time off as well as money for the flight for the interview.

[BethAnn and Omar 42]

As the OP stated it's can be helpful to be there. But, to suggest that a couple will be denied for having a lack of proof of a bonafide relationship is inaccurate. Couples are rejected every day because the evidence they submitted to the USCIS is weak at best. But, for those couples who have dated photos, passport stamps, receipts, boarding passes, proof of ongoing communication, this will NEVER be an issue.

Ok I'm not trying to be rude here but when don't you understand? If Ihhadn't been there my husband would have been denied. Period. He would not be coming here on Thursday.

[Girl from Celebes 588]

If I'm not mistakenly remember, there was a thread sometime ago talking about this. I'm not sure which country the beneficiary comes from, but I do remember the CO asked him why the petitioner wasn't there. And the embassy required a second interview and asked the beneficiary to bring the petitioner to the second interview.

I'm a K-1 visa filer. Even it is not required my fiance to attend the interview, we are going together when the time comes up. It is much nicer to have someone next to you to share the moment. My fiance willing to do many requirements for travel training, ask higher up command permission, etc, - since he is in the military- just to be with me.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Girl from Celebes

[Jawaree 717]

In DR its the norm ...not all consulates allows this & very rarely does Jamaica,

many spouses R made to sit outside under a shed during process, if an occasion

arises where the beneficiary seem to be not lie-ing but struggling to, whether explain

oneself or just not really being understood (even clueless) then if a spouse is outside

depending on CO, they will say go get the spouse....absolutely not the norm , go to

website and also read past reviews.

Everyone case is different, spouse is different & draw of luck ...so good all's well that ends well

Countries Like Jamaica ....what does that mean?

Edited December 16, 2013 by Jawaree

[TBoneTX 45,071]

There is no requirement according to US Law that requires a petitioner to attend an interview. If a consulate demands the petitioner to attend then you should immediately consult with a lawyer. All consulates and embassies answer to and must obey US law. They cannot make up their own requirements to suit their perceived needs. Now, that is not to say that some are not doing it.

How wrong is this? Maybe there's no written requirement in accordance with U.S. law, but the consulates can do anything that they damned well please. Lawyers will advise only doing what the consulate says, then filing an after-visa complaint (which has its own perils, despite the "requirement according to US Law" that every citizen has the right to petition his government for redress of grievances).

Not even the President of the United States can overrule a consular officer's decision.

Because the quoted poster is so sure of himself, here is but one example of how consulates can operate:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/110313-us-consulate-in-guayaquil-ecuador/

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/180306-guayaquil-consulate-administrative-process/

We can all guarantee that if we, the petitioners, had been present at the first interview, the petitions might well have been approved then. As it was, our U.S. Citizen hindquarters were each ordered down there to appear for "marriage interviews" that turned out to be Stokes.

Every VJ member, before filing any marriage-based petition, should read "Embassy Info" and "Reviews: Embassy" for the appropriate consulate and pay particular attention to the worst reviews.

There are oft-overlooked differences between "attending the actual interview with the beneficiary," "being in the waiting area of the consulate while the interview occurs," and "being on or just outside the consular premises as the interview occurs." In many if not most places, it scores points beyond belief when the beneficiary meets the interviewing consul and crams the U.S. petitioner's passport under the Plexiglass. This can result in the petitioner's being invited in to the actual interview.

Anyone who falls for what the quoted poster says in this thread could be playing with very hot fire.

Edited December 16, 2013 by TBoneTX

[Tina Marnia 7]

What is DR/ Which country is DR?.......

[Tosh Love 77]

As the OP stated it's can be helpful to be there. But, to suggest that a couple will be denied for having a lack of proof of a bonafide relationship is inaccurate. Couples are rejected every day because the evidence they submitted to the USCIS is weak at best. But, for those couples who have dated photos, passport stamps, receipts, boarding passes, proof of ongoing communication, this will NEVER be an issue.

This post is too funny for a comment. R U Serious????

[dwheels76 5,468]

What is DR/ Which country is DR?.......

Dominican Republic

[BethAnn and Omar 42]

In DR its the norm ...not all consulates allows this & very rarely does Jamaica,

many spouses R made to sit outside under a shed during process, if an occasion

arises where the beneficiary seem to be not lie-ing but struggling to, whether explain

oneself or just not really being understood (even clueless) then if a spouse is outside

depending on CO, they will say go get the spouse....absolutely not the norm , go to

website and also read past reviews.

Everyone case is different, spouse is different & draw of luck ...so good all's well that ends well

Countries Like Jamaica ....what does that mean?

Ok i love you Jawaree but I have to disagree here. My husband wasn't lying about anything he simply didn't remember the date of my last visit. Had I hadn't been there to clarify things our visa would not have been issued.

[Removed030114 48]

First let me say that it wasn't my intention to touch anyone's hot button. Going through the Visa process is very expensive and emotionally taxing. I agree with those who responded to my posts that it's best to plan in advance to attend the interview IF YOU HAVE THE MEANS to do so. For those who do not consider the variables carefully. Sure, one can be unfortunate to draw the short straw and get an interviewer who woke up on the wrong side of the bed. If your partner is articulate, able to answer all questions clearly and concisely matters a lot more than just having the petitioner there. If the adjudicator is pre-disposed to deny, then they will probably deny. Will it help if the petitioner is there? Maybe, maybe not. So, if possible, it's better to be there.

Some petitions submitted for approval have issues before they reach the consulate. No one really knows what goes on behind closed doors, or what exactly is the precise content of a petition, their background, and so on. If your partner has weak communication skills, then it's a good idea to bone up and practice the questions they may face, and to learn how to present any documents that corroborate.

The fact is, some of the people who petition just don't have the money or means to travel. So, in the place of not attending the interview, it's important to make sure the evidence is strong. Again, I agree that if possible that the petitioner should attend the interview, but in most cases they will simply wait outside, never meet, or know anything until the interview is complete.

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

First let me say that it wasn't my intention to touch anyone's hot button. Going through the Visa process is very expensive and emotionally taxing. I agree with those who responded to my posts that it's best to plan in advance to attend the interview IF YOU HAVE THE MEANS to do so. For those who do not consider the variables carefully. Sure, one can be unfortunate to draw the short straw and get an interviewer who woke up on the wrong side of the bed. If your partner is articulate, able to answer all questions clearly and concisely matters a lot more than just having the petitioner there. If the adjudicator is pre-disposed to deny, then they will probably deny. Will it help if the petitioner is there? Maybe, maybe not. So, if possible, it's better to be there.

Some petitions submitted for approval have issues before they reach the consulate. No one really knows what goes on behind closed doors, or what exactly is the precise content of a petition, their background, and so on. If your partner has weak communication skills, then it's a good idea to bone up and practice the questions they may face, and to learn how to present any documents that corroborate.

The fact is, some of the people who petition just don't have the money or means to travel. So, in the place of not attending the interview, it's important to make sure the evidence is strong. Again, I agree that if possible that the petitioner should attend the interview, but in most cases they will simply wait outside, never meet, or know anything until the interview is complete.

You continue to underestimate the emotional support to the ben because the pet is there or the massive proof of a relationship to the CO.

Do the chap in London or Sydney needs the pet to be there? Maybe not, but for those of us in iffy consulates it's worth it's weight in gold.

[BethAnn and Omar 42]

We had no issues. We had a perfect case. The CO

still asked to meet me. My husband didn't remember the exact date of my last visit. This could happen to anyone. I'm trying to warn people here. The CO told me he was concerned. Had I not been there my husband would have been denied.

[Removed030114 48]

You continue to underestimate the emotional support to the ben because the pet is there or the massive proof of a relationship to the CO.

Do the chap in London or Sydney needs the pet to be there? Maybe not, but for those of us in iffy consulates it's worth it's weight in gold.

I've neither underestimated nor forgotten the importance of emotional support. However, you have in fact misrepresented the intention of my posts. Have you considered that there are many petitioners who are poor? What if they don't have the money to travel? Will you say that they have somehow underestimated their responsibility? All anyone can do is the best they can with what they have available.

[BethAnn and Omar 42]

You find the money to attend!!!!! I'm poor but I made sure I was at my husband's interview because I love him and wanted to do everything to support him. And in fact it turns out it made all the difference in our case.

[Lifehastomoveon 37]

I m curious to know abt india, if they require petitioners presence for interview.

Edited December 16, 2013 by CresentMoon