Suicide note? (Update)

[USAMorocco 143]

20 hours ago, Going through said:

You're still on the hook for supporting her.

He does not have to support her. The I864 does not state he has to support her by paying for things. It is only so she or any spouse or family member doesn't become a public charge. Not saying OP is right but saying he has to support her financially is incorrect.  He just will be on the hook to pay if she goes on any government assistance that is considered means tested benefits. 

Edited August 19, 2017 by USAMorocco

[Igsy 15]

29 minutes ago, Tahoma said:

It doesn't matter whether the bank will close your joint account.  Don't risk leaving your money there, because she may withdraw it at any time.   If the bank won't close your account, withdraw all the money in your joint account (except for one dollar), and put it in another account.  Chances are good that she won't be hiring an attorney to contest the divorce, and she likely won't even respond to your divorce petition.  That being the case, you'll keep your money.  

 

And since you've been married for only two years, she'll likely get nothing in the divorce, contested or not.

 

Also, your chances of ending up on the wrong side of your I-864 is nearly zero, so don't worry about that.  

 

Get a divorce and move on.

Thanks for your advice. I will change my direct deposit for now and make those changes to my account. I agree that she has a small chance of hiring an attorney. I'm relieved about the I-864, and I just wanted to be sure because supporting someone that you aren't married to for 10 years sounds like a nightmare.

 

Will divorce and try to move on. Thank you, Tahoma. Appreciate your non-biased response.

[Boiler 45,575]

I 864 has been enforced between spouses, not common.

[Going through 5,671]

13 hours ago, USAMorocco said:

He does not have to support her. The I864 does not state he has to support her by paying for things. It is only so she or any spouse or family member doesn't become a public charge. Not saying OP is right but saying he has to support her financially is incorrect.  He just will be on the hook to pay if she goes on any government assistance that is considered means tested benefits. 

I wasn't referring to him paying for her things..and I never meant he has to support her financially throughout (unless she is awarded any alimony, of course, which is unlikely given their short marriage).

I should have been more clear in my one-line response, however I was referring to the i-864 only, my bad.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Going through

[USAMorocco 143]

1 hour ago, Going through said:

I wasn't referring to him paying for her things..and I never meant he has to support her financially throughout (unless she is awarded any alimony, of course, which is unlikely given their short marriage).

I should have been more clear in my one-line response, however I was referring to the i-864 only, my bad.

My bad.  I just don't want him to think he has to support her like that. Though, anyone who brings a spouse here should understand unless they are very wealthy...they will need to be supported or help with money until they get a job and on their feet.

[Villanelle 4,122]

19 hours ago, USAMorocco said:

He does not have to support her. The I864 does not state he has to support her by paying for things. It is only so she or any spouse or family member doesn't become a public charge. Not saying OP is right but saying he has to support her financially is incorrect.  He just will be on the hook to pay if she goes on any government assistance that is considered means tested benefits. 

Actually the 864 can be used in court for that exact purpose. There is a whole thread about it on VJ. Suing under 864. In fact someone just posted recently how they were on the losing end of such a lawsuit. They werent very wealthy either. They were ordered to pay around 1100 a month to the spouse because of the 864. Nothing to do with alimony it was solely based on the 864, 

[USAMorocco 143]

3 hours ago, Damara said:

Actually the 864 can be used in court for that exact purpose. There is a whole thread about it on VJ. Suing under 864. In fact someone just posted recently how they were on the losing end of such a lawsuit. They werent very wealthy either. They were ordered to pay around 1100 a month to the spouse because of the 864. Nothing to do with alimony it was solely based on the 864, 

Okay, that's not what the form says or is used for per the form instructions.  It specifically says the I864 is to show that the family member or spouse will not rely on the government for support. That's all I was saying.  When my co-sponsor called uscis and asked what it entails and asked if that meant she had to give my husband money to live she was told "no it is to keep the immigrant from becoming a public charge. Until they have their quarters in or become a citizen."  If the court uses it on other ways I was not aware of that.  

Edited August 19, 2017 by USAMorocco

[Villanelle 4,122]

Many people feel that way, however the courts have determined that the wording of the 864 (as it currently is) means that the sponsor will keep the immigrant at at least he poverty line. Specifically if they are unemployed or under employed the sponsor is to "make up" the dollar amount difference of where they are to the poverty line. Its not surprising USCIS does not advise of this with the forms. They have a policy to not provide any legal advice. The 864 is a legal contract and any attny should be able to explain all the possible ramifications of signing such. 

[lysander 14]

On 8/18/2017 at 7:59 PM, Igsy said:

sidenote- Yes! she's and adult and she can do whatever she wants without my consent, but good luck to you if that's how your two-dimensional, black and white ways of viewing relationships/marriage is.

There's a certain crowd of VJ users that likes to weigh in on every marital breakdown they hear about, by blaming men for everything that goes wrong in relationships and saying that women are entitled to treat men however they please. I'm glad you're not letting it demoralize you.

 

Joint bank accounts, I've found, are pretty overrated. It sounds like a cute idea, because it's something you share together as husband and wife, the same way you share your home and whatnot. You put money into an account and then your wife draws it out as needed, so you can feel like you're being the manly provider. The problem is, not only can she grab all the money in the event the relationship goes south (and then you might have trouble getting that money back, because she could spend all of it and then move on to the next guy who's going to support her, rather than earning any income you could try to garnish), but sometimes spouses simply aren't aware of each other's transactions.

 

For about a year, I kept seeing in my bank statements that there were recurring payments for iTunes, FreedomPop, Safecart EVerify, ABCMouse.com, etc. and thought that was stuff my wife was actually using. But it turned out she had signed up to get some kind of free gift or other benefit, and then canceled during the trial period; but as ripoff artists are wont to do, they kept charging the account. She had not been even aware the account was still getting hit for that stuff, and my bank wouldn't let me dispute the charges, so I just had to chalk it up as a loss. I would call up the companies and tell them to cancel the service, and they would say only my wife could do that, since she had signed up for the service. So she called and they assured her it was canceled, but they kept charging the account anyway, which she didn't know about because she wasn't the one reviewing the bank statements. So finally I had to tell the bank to cancel her bank card altogether.

 

After that experience, I will never get a joint bank account with anyone ever again. There's a lot of downside without any real upside.

[TBoneTX 45,361]

Old thread is now closed to further comment.