I 134 - example form/mortgage question

[TracyTN 237]

I asked this in the UK forum, but am getting no joy on an answer so I thought I'd try here.

Using due dilligence, I downloaded VJ's example form of the I 134. The part that has me confused is question 7 - "I own real estate valued at ..." The example form lists no amount for the 'valued at' or the 'mortgage/encumbrance' - it only has the person's address in the line 'which is located at'. So why list the address if you disclose nothing else about the property? It tells the adjudicator nothing except that you own a house. That makes no sense to me at all.

It looks like the example form is in the same situation I am in - where the income is clearly enough for the support, but they also happen to own a home. So why even list it at all if you don't need to use it for support (or are not prepared to document the assessment and mortgage)?

What did you all do (anyone in the same situation)?

Thanks!

*edited to use correct punctuation *

Edited April 4, 2007 by TracyTN

[Otto 83]

I asked this in the UK forum, but am getting no joy on an answer so I thought I'd try here.

Using due dilligence, I downloaded VJ's example form of the I 134. The part that has me confused is question 7 - "I own real estate valued at ..." The example form lists no amount for the 'valued at' or the 'mortgage/encumbrance' - it only has the person's address in the line 'which is located at'. So why list the address if you disclose nothing else about the property? It tells the adjudicator nothing except that you own a house. That makes no sense to me at all.

It looks like the example form is in the same situation I am in - where the income is clearly enough for the support, but they also happen to own a home. So why even list it at all if you don't need to use it for support (or are not prepared to document the assessment and mortgage)?

What did you all do (anyone in the same situation)?

Thanks!

*edited to use correct punctuation *

My thoughts were; I didn't think the example wanted to 'commit' to a $ value (for lack of better description) - I'm not certain why, if I have sufficient income I'd really want to put anything there - and can't really come up with a reason not to either, other than 'it's none of their business'...

I know - the answer is - put the numbers in that match your Value and Encumbrance (and the address) but I just didn't want to...

The one that actually made me chuckle (besides Cash Surrender Value) was the Personal Property Valued At: my car, TV, clothes, furniture..uhm..what else? lol

I know - I probably didn't answer or ad value to the post...sounds more like a venting.. lol

Edited April 4, 2007 by Karin und Otto

[rebeccajo 14]

Well, my understanding goes like this....

First of all, isn't it weird that neither the I134 nor the I864 ask any information about the sponsors debt load? As Americans, we all know the amount of debt one carries impacts how much money you have left over for the light bill, groceries, gasoline and the like. And those expenses are the very thing which change when another person is added to the household.

The practice continues with government forms when one files the FAFSA for a student going off to college. Other debt doesn't enter the picture - the government is only interested in your gross income and the number of people in the household. So I guess we can just figure that 'common sense' doesn't enter these equations - maybe we should be grateful. If we had to take our debts into account when we filed for our immigrant spouse, it would just be another hurdle to jump through.

The I134 is not a clear-cut document with specific pigeon holes one has to fit into - at least as it compares to the I864 (the next financial document in the process). It's purpose it to give consulates a document on which to 'hang their hat' as to whether or not the sponsor has 'sufficient means' to sponsor the intending immigrant. Each consulate tends to either have a different interpretation of financial sufficieny, or places a different weight on the financial picture of the sponsor as it relates to any possible marriage fraud.

Soooooooo......when one speaks of whether or not it's necessary to disclose financial details when the wages of the sponsor meet sufficiency, that disclosure may be partially consulate specific, or it may be relationship specific. It's always been my perspective that while too much information may be unnecessary, it can never hurt to show your financial situation in its best light. Homeownership, in American culture, is a sign of financial stability. And it is Americans at the consulate who see the I134 and adjudicate it.

[TracyTN 237]

Excellent answer, becca!

So if one does decide to list their house, then it appears you would have to have an assessment done to show the value of the property - I would assume that a 'guess' (or in my case, what I was told a few years back during a refinance) wouldn't be good enough. I think it would be easy enough to get a copy of the title deed, but to my knowledge, those do not show the estimated value of the property.

[rebeccajo 14]

Here's the way I personally handled it.

I took the value my insurance company had given my home from my current homeowners policy, and subtracted my mortgage balance from that figure.

It was the easiest and cheapest way to show my equity.

Or.....as we often say in our office when we are trying to simplify a procedure....."good enough for government work".

Seems like an appropriate commentary, eh?

Edited April 5, 2007 by rebeccajo

[dionesiamn 0]

In regards to the example form where the value and the encumbrances aren't completed -- my best guess is that whoever completed this for a sample didn't do it right.

I agree with the last poster, that homeownership shows stability so it may be important to someone trying to "judge" sponsor worthiness. If you own a home, you have at least demonstrated financial responsibility and/or stability at some point. If you own a home, I'd complete the information they are asking for.

[dionesiamn 0]

Having been a government eligibility worker for many years, the best way to determine equity in a home, is to take your estimated value on your property tax statement minus your mortgage balance. This evaluation will be low but if you feel better add an additional 20% to that amount. That's how we were taught to do it.

[TracyTN 237]

Here's the way I personally handled it.

I took the value my insurance company had given my home from my current homeowners policy, and subtracted my mortgage balance from that figure.

It was the easiest and cheapest way to show my equity.

Or.....as we often say in our office when we are trying to simplify a procedure....."good enough for government work".

Seems like an appropriate commentary, eh?

Ok - I get that (and can probably get it easily). What I don't understand is how that is listed on the form. There is a space for the assessment (figure from homeowner's policy), a space for the mortgage balance, and then the lines for the physical address of the home. Where exactly are you supposed to put the equity? Or are you saying that you're putting it in front of them with the two figures, and its up to them to do the math?

[rebeccajo 14]

Here's the way I personally handled it.

I took the value my insurance company had given my home from my current homeowners policy, and subtracted my mortgage balance from that figure.

It was the easiest and cheapest way to show my equity.

Or.....as we often say in our office when we are trying to simplify a procedure....."good enough for government work".

Seems like an appropriate commentary, eh?

Ok - I get that (and can probably get it easily). What I don't understand is how that is listed on the form. There is a space for the assessment (figure from homeowner's policy), a space for the mortgage balance, and then the lines for the physical address of the home. Where exactly are you supposed to put the equity? Or are you saying that you're putting it in front of them with the two figures, and its up to them to do the math?

Just fill in the blanks. It's their form. I reckon they better know how to use it.

[dionesiamn 0]

Yes, they can do the math. But again, the value is better gotten from your property tax statement. The insurance policy won't reflect the value as well, since you can insure your home at more than true value. (The insurance company is happy to take your premiums for a higher value - collecting that amount should somthing happen to your home is another matter.)

[Otto 83]

Excellent answer, becca!

So if one does decide to list their house, then it appears you would have to have an assessment done to show the value of the property - I would assume that a 'guess' (or in my case, what I was told a few years back during a refinance) wouldn't be good enough. I think it would be easy enough to get a copy of the title deed, but to my knowledge, those do not show the estimated value of the property.

Best guess probably works for the form - or you can use property tax assessment value also (if you don't have a recent assessment/tax-bill, you can access it on-line in most cities/counties).

[rebeccajo 14]

I agree with the property tax valuation method BUT....

Where I live, that would have never worked. Our assessed valuations here are 60% of what the assessor values a home to be (always a lower figure than what the market will bear to begin with). It's the arcane manner in which homes are assessed here and is one reason our real estate taxes are so low.

Had I used my assessed valuation, it would have not even covered my mortgage balance.

My suggestion would be to use whichever method works for you and is easiest. This isn't a mortgage application - its the I134. You don't have to hit the bullseye - just get close.

Incidentally, I don't believe most insurance companies will insure your home for more than it's worth. While they might be happy to accept the higher premium, they won't be happy to pay out the inflated home value should disaster strike.

[Otto 83]

I agree with the property tax valuation method BUT....

Where I live, that would have never worked. Our assessed valuations here are 60% of what the assessor values a home to be (always a lower figure than what the market will bear to begin with). It's the arcane manner in which homes are assessed here and is one reason our real estate taxes are so low.

Had I used my assessed valuation, it would have not even covered my mortgage balance.

My suggestion would be to use whichever method works for you and is easiest. This isn't a mortgage application - its the I134. You don't have to hit the bullseye - just get close.

Incidentally, I don't believe most insurance companies will insure your home for more than it's worth. While they might be happy to accept the higher premium, they won't be happy to pay out the inflated home value should disaster strike.

Lucky You...don't tell the Tax Man...

[rebeccajo 14]

I agree with the property tax valuation method BUT....

Where I live, that would have never worked. Our assessed valuations here are 60% of what the assessor values a home to be (always a lower figure than what the market will bear to begin with). It's the arcane manner in which homes are assessed here and is one reason our real estate taxes are so low.

Had I used my assessed valuation, it would have not even covered my mortgage balance.

My suggestion would be to use whichever method works for you and is easiest. This isn't a mortgage application - its the I134. You don't have to hit the bullseye - just get close.

Incidentally, I don't believe most insurance companies will insure your home for more than it's worth. While they might be happy to accept the higher premium, they won't be happy to pay out the inflated home value should disaster strike.

Lucky You...don't tell the Tax Man...

Don't tell the tax man what? That the way the legislature tells him to calculate a value is wrong?

[Otto 83]

I agree with the property tax valuation method BUT....

Where I live, that would have never worked. Our assessed valuations here are 60% of what the assessor values a home to be (always a lower figure than what the market will bear to begin with). It's the arcane manner in which homes are assessed here and is one reason our real estate taxes are so low.

Had I used my assessed valuation, it would have not even covered my mortgage balance.

My suggestion would be to use whichever method works for you and is easiest. This isn't a mortgage application - its the I134. You don't have to hit the bullseye - just get close.

Incidentally, I don't believe most insurance companies will insure your home for more than it's worth. While they might be happy to accept the higher premium, they won't be happy to pay out the inflated home value should disaster strike.

Lucky You...don't tell the Tax Man...

Don't tell the tax man what? That the way the legislature tells him to calculate a value is wrong?

Uhm... yes