Misconduct by USCIS officer

[theendcomesquick 4]

Hello,

 

I went on a USCIS field office interview and feel I was wronged by the officer -- can anyone advise what to do?

 

Background:

The interview notice says you are allowed to bring an interpreter and lawyer. I went with my wife to have her as my interpreter but when the officer called our name and we both went up he looked at my wife and said "Who are you" I responded she was my wife and came as interpreter. He then said that since I spoke English I didn't need an interpreter. We pushed back saying that the paper says you can have an interpreter. He said if you can't understand then you can come back out and get her. So I went in alone and did the interview. I did request my wife once during the interview but was too nervous to argue with him. 

Then after the interview was over my wife came up to make sure I understood everything. Another person passed us in the hall and their lawyer said within our earshot "We brought our interviewer with us." Presumably she heard us arguing with him from the beginning. Then my wife started arguing with the guy "You refused us an interpreter, etc" He said "but you speak English so you don't need one". And she replied "on the paper it doesn't say anything about your level of English" So he said "fine you can redo the interview but it won't make a difference" Then he let us redo the interview and results are a RFE.

 

But after thinking it through, how can I trust this officer will fairly handle our case when he refused our basic right to bring an interpreter? It seems he saw that we did not have a lawyer with us and did not know our right to bring an interpreter. What should I do? Should I call the USCIS office and speak with the manager to make a complaint and request a different officer. This officer did not follow protocol. 

[gregcrs2 1,778]

Having your wife as your interpreter creates a conflict of interest because you can be told in your language how to respond to the questions without the interviewer knowing what was said to you.  If you felt you needed an interpreter for the interview, you should have gotten someone other than your wife.

[theendcomesquick 4]

Actually you are not prohibited from using a relative as a interpreter. And at no time did he cite that as the reason to refuse us an interpreter. His reason to refuse us was "You already speak English" 
 

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-2449/0-0-0-2798.html#0-0-0-361

[gregcrs2 1,778]

See part 3 of the link you quoted.  3.  Impartial and Unbiased Individual

 

Do you really think a spouse can be impartial and unbiased as an interpreter?  It's also up to the interviewer if they are willing to accept a family member as an interpreter.

 

Does the RFE correlate to anything with interpretation?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Boiler 45,499]

Seems a reasonable reason.

[mcdull 474]

Seems like a super legitimate reason to deny you the interpreter. 

 

People need to understand the difference between needs and wants. 

[gregcrs2 1,778]

 

It is mandatory for both the interpreter and the interviewee to sign the "Declaration of Interpreted USCIS Interview" form ("Declaration"). See attached Form G-1256. There are no exceptions to this requirement. See also Section (d), The Interview, and, Section (e), Disqualifying an Interpreter.

 

Do you provide this form prior to interview?

[theendcomesquick 4]

It says directly in the manual that an interpreter cannot be refused just because they are a relative. Also the petition is for my mother and me or my spouse is not a beneficiary.

 

From the manual:
"However, the officer must not predetermine that a derivative beneficiary is disqualified from serving as an interpreter, due to a conflict of interest, solely because he or she is a derivative beneficiary.  "

 

[theendcomesquick 4]

An yes we provided the form. And not the RFE doesn't have to do with an interpreter. But my issue is with a USCIS officer abusing the system and denying people their rights to an interpreter. How can we assume this officer will follow the law in other areas if they break one area of the law?

[gregcrs2 1,778]

You were given a second interview in which you used your interpreter.  Therefore, you were not denied use of your interpreter.  Maybe you misunderstood something the interviewer said, after all you are pretty much claiming you needed an interpreter.  Anyway, you asked for an opinion so here it is.  Better to put it behind you.  Respond to the RFE and just move forward and forget about it.  It's not worth the hassle and you are not going to win any battle with them.  In fact, the more attention your draw to it, the more likely everything will be looked at more intensely.  

[theendcomesquick 4]

OK thanks for your opinion an replying. The whole experience just makes me doubt going on another interview without a lawyer present since it seems that some USCIS officers will use the opportunity to take advantage.

[gregcrs2 1,778]

Here's some interesting news on the new policy if your interested.  The way I read it, using family members as an interpreter is disfavored.  

https://www.hoppocklawfirm.com/new-rule-interpreters-uscis-interviews/

[theendcomesquick 4]

OK interesting. But a third party could also have a conflict of interest, for example bribing the translator with money or other things.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

1 hour ago, theendcomesquick said:

OK thanks for your opinion an replying. The whole experience just makes me doubt going on another interview without a lawyer present since it seems that some USCIS officers will use the opportunity to take advantage.

What advantage do you think he gained?

 

the form you signed does say that the interpreter recognizes at any point that the officer may use their discretion in disallowing the interpreter. 

 

2 hours ago, theendcomesquick said:

It says directly in the manual that an interpreter cannot be refused just because they are a relative. Also the petition is for my mother and me or my spouse is not a beneficiary.

 

From the manual:
"However, the officer must not predetermine that a derivative beneficiary is disqualified from serving as an interpreter, due to a conflict of interest, solely because he or she is a derivative beneficiary.  "

 

I’m not sure why you are quoting this as you stated this was not the reason given?

 

also unless I’m missing something - if you’re bringing your mother you are a citizen, and if you’re a citizen (I presume naturalized) you must have passed the English proficiency test? 

Edited December 2, 2017 by SusieQQQ

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

56 minutes ago, theendcomesquick said:

OK interesting. But a third party could also have a conflict of interest, for example bribing the translator with money or other things.

That’s not a conflict of interest, that’s a criminal action.