Unstated Consular Requirements for Fiance Visa

[Shiran 1,134]

3 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

If you had read the long drawn out and convoluted tale that he has spun here you would see that his fiance did in fact have a interview. 

[geowrian 22,338]

1 hour ago, Ahmed&Freda said:

He claims she went and handed paperwork and was turned away.  Most likely more conversation happened to be accused of fraud and the money transfers to be an issue.

In one post he noted she had an interview. It sounds like it was with the PI worker who checks the documents, but she never got to the interview with the CO. USEM does 1 window for documents/verification of visa application/"pre-interview", then biometrics, then another window for the interview with the CO.

It's unusual to be turned away at the "pre-interview" counter as long as you have the mandatory documents on you (medical, cenomar, NBI + any other police certificates, BC, etc.).

Like most refusals, there does seem to be more to the story and some important and requested details have not been provided.

 

3 minutes ago, Shiran said:

12 hours ago, Erol G said:

Also, they never even gave her the expected interview that was to be based on the approved USCIS petition and the documents she submitted, as cenomar, background check, medical screening etc. They took those documents and then turned her away that she needs to present more emails between her and me, and some additional photos.

 

Edited September 4, 2018 by geowrian

[Boiler 45,928]

12 hours ago, Erol G said:

JE57--I'm afraid that was the judgment against my application--that I am getting bribes from my fiancée's relative, which is an unfounded, prejudiced assumption. It is infamously known the Trump administration placed a ban against certain countries from applying. Philippines has not been officially on that list. And a lot of those policies are continuously being legally contested. Also, they never even gave her the expected interview that was to be based on the approved USCIS petition and the documents she submitted, as cenomar, background check, medical screening etc. They took those documents and then turned her away that she needs to present more emails between her and me, and some additional photos. I keep on hearing now from my attorney and also the State Department that the approved USCIS petition is completely separate from the embassy process. In addition to the fact the website at travel.state.gov specifically outlines the intricate degree to which USCIS and the embassy coordinate for the visa, the strong impression then arises why the embassy even requires the USCIS petition if they are now more geared toward disproving its legitimacy. Here and on related sites, I often observe posts that consular officers can and will only reject a visa if a serious issue has been disregarded. I'd insist there was no "serious" issue apart from what they apparently invented just to get it dismissed as fraud. On the Manila embassy website, I found YouTube videos also stating they honor the USCIS process and are interested in granting the visas. This was definitely not the case with my petition. My attorney states those are the current realities due to increased security concerns that I need to hire a legal representative to facilitate the matter. 

I think he is describing the interview.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

3 minutes ago, Shiran said:

 

1 minute ago, geowrian said:

In one post he noted she had an interview. It sounds like it was with the PI worker who checks the documents, but she never got to the interview with the CO. USEM does 1 window for documents/verification of visa application/"pre-interview", then biometrics, then another window for the interview with the CO.

It's unusual to be turned away at the "pre-interview" counter as long as you have the mandatory documents on you (medical, cenomar, NBI + any other police certificates, BC, etc.).

Like most refusals, there does seem to be more to the story and some important and requested details have not been provided.

@Shiran I have to agree with @geowrian on this is that it sounds like she went to the PI worker first and they requested additional documents or something like that. It sounds weird because I have never heard anything like that from the Philippines at all. So something was really wrong in this case and since we are hearing 3rd hand information here we can't tell exactly what happened. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 hour ago, Boiler said:

I think he is describing the interview.

Yeah something is wrong here and they needed more information.

Edited September 4, 2018 by Cyberfx1024

[Shiran 1,134]

1 minute ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

 

@Shiran I have to agree with @geowrian on this is that it sounds like she went to the PI worker first and they requested additional documents or something like that. It sounds weird because I have never heard anything like that from the Philippines at all. So something was really wrong in this case and since we are hearing 3rd hand information here we can't tell exactly what happened. 

I agree as well, I wonder if those documents (photos etc) were not provided is what triggered them classifying the case as "fraud"  Still not clear how they would even know about "travel compensation" unless it was mentioned in chat logs. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

Just now, Shiran said:

I agree as well, I wonder if those documents (photos etc) were not provided is what triggered them classifying the case as "fraud"  Still not clear how they would even know about "travel compensation" unless it was mentioned in chat logs. 

Exactly.... I think this case symbolizes the epitome of "If they did not ask for it then don't supply it". How would they know about "compensation" if they did not mention it sometime in the logs or the interview? 

[Daisy.Chain 317]

7 hours ago, Erol G said:

Daisy Chain--I heard about that, and that is actually not at all limited to the issuance of visas. Driving is actually a privilege as well, yet millions and millions of people drive successfully, have driver licenses issued to them, and obviously have vehicles registered in their name. That is why I am now stating that you probably should consult with an attorney, just as someone who has driving privileges revoked and wants them reinstated would probably have to do. Obviously the expectation is that if you walk into a car dealership with the necessary funding and authorization to drive that you will be able to purchase a vehicle. That is the impression from which I departed. Most people do get their driving privileges reinstated if they go through the necessary legal process. 

Sorry - you heard about what?

Actually, consulting with an attorney is likely to only lose you money at this stage at the game. The consulate doesn't work the same way as the DMV - it really can boil down to whatever the official felt like that day. However to deny the visa, there should be something that happened in your fiance's interview (or taking of the documents) to spark it. I'm confused - did she have an interview scheduled and go in at that time, or not? If she did, that's an interview. It would be strange that they take the documents without asking any questions - They should be sending you information about it, if they haven't already.

I think your best path forward is to marry and file for a CR1. If the obstacle to the K1 was a lack of believed relationship, that should help!

[Erol G 2]

It is difficult to post adequately here in these emails without any face-to-face interaction. To answer a few questions: I was in the Philippines with fiancé for about a week. And I did already comment on the nature of the relationship and the evidence that was collected so look in my other posts. Her aunt here in LA helped out with some traveling expense. I don't have to divulge the amount here, but it is not an extortionate sum; basically, it is to some extent what you would share for such a trip. The initial interview was more of an apprehension the way I heard it from my fiancée. And they didn't ask the usual questions. She went to a second interview that was more of a fraud hearing. From then to now, we heard absolutely nothing from the embassy, and we are no longer able to schedule any follow-up appointments. So we now had to get an attorney involved. 

[Erol G 2]

Yes, that is our plan now too. Marrying in Philippines soon and then filing for CR1. We also are doing attorney representation. 

[Daisy.Chain 317]

1 hour ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

Yeah something is wrong here and they needed more information. But he is being holier than thou and that's what's wrong right now. 

No need for name calling. ☺️ I bet most of us have been beyond frustrated with the system and our lack of ability to do anything about it. Sounds like he's doing the best he can.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

6 minutes ago, Daisy.Chain said:

No need for name calling. ☺️ I bet most of us have been beyond frustrated with the system and our lack of ability to do anything about it. Sounds like he's doing the best he can.

Sorry I went back and edited my comment. But there are legitimate questions that were asked him and he is dodging them. 

[Shiran 1,134]

22 minutes ago, Erol G said:

It is difficult to post adequately here in these emails without any face-to-face interaction. To answer a few questions: I was in the Philippines with fiancé for about a week. And I did already comment on the nature of the relationship and the evidence that was collected so look in my other posts. Her aunt here in LA helped out with some traveling expense. I don't have to divulge the amount here, but it is not an extortionate sum; basically, it is to some extent what you would share for such a trip. The initial interview was more of an apprehension the way I heard it from my fiancée. And they didn't ask the usual questions. She went to a second interview that was more of a fraud hearing. From then to now, we heard absolutely nothing from the embassy, and we are no longer able to schedule any follow-up appointments. So we now had to get an attorney involved. 

Did your partner provide additional pictures and chat logs that were requests by the Consulate? 

"I'd insist there was no "serious" issue apart from what they apparently invented just to get it dismissed as fraud. " 

What was this issue that they invented? 

What makes you think they knew about monetary compensation, if there was no interview?

Are you sure the lawyer is doing good job representing you, and not just telling you to cancel and start over with CR1 based on circumstantial evidence? 

Do you actually have a statement from consulate denying the visa?

[TBoneTX 45,875]

Thread is moved from the K-1 Case Progress subforum to the Embassy/Consulate forum.

-------

OP, unless you provide clear, precise, specific answers to each of the questions that has been asked repeatedly, no one here can help you.

Edited September 4, 2018 by TBoneTX

[TNJ17 1,329]

8 hours ago, Erol G said:

Well I hope this discussion post can help consumers make informed decision. Possibly, get an attorney right away before filing anything. And you actually need one here in the US and in the other, target country. That is the reality. You cannot expect your visa to be approved through compliance with the stated immigration laws. 

Yes, you can. We did.