Thai spouse tourist visa to US denied.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

Yeah not sure why there is so much confusion. It’s pretty straightforward. 
 

in US non immigrant visa applications you are indeed “guilty until you prove you are innocent” - that is what the effect of the legal presumption of immigrant intent does. Getting a visit visa as the spouse of a USC is harder. Fact. You may not like it, you may not agree with the law and the reasons, but they are what they are.

They don’t print a checklist because people game that (example getting a relative to lend them the correct amount of $ to show in their bank account), and circumstances differ per country. More than three quarters of Thai applicants get approved for tourist visas. Fact. I’m guessing very few of those approved have USC spouses. (Educated guess, not fact.)

 

24 minutes ago, rickbechard@gmail said:

Sorry that made me chuckle. Lots of confusion to go around in this thread. Should really put it to bed before it becomes bigger than Ben Hur.

Yup, it’s indeed going round in circles, when it’s really very simple as described above. I would indeed expect a moderator to put an end to this fairly soon.

 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2020 by SusieQQQ

[SalishSea 17,837]

13 hours ago, Ikhan said:

You're not making sense. An affidavit of support legally binds you to supporting the person you're sponsoring. They can't go on welfare and you're responsible for their financial needs. That isn't between them and and the govt.   Obviously.  The contract is between the sponsor and the government, which is precisely what I said.  I was making the point that all it guarantees is that the beneficiary will not go on welfare.  It does not guarantee anything else about the beneficiary's behavior, hence the reason that a USC 'promising' that someone on a B visa won't overstay is not feasible.

 

If the govt is holding you responsible for their financial needs why can't they hold you financial responsible in the case they 'run away'.  This makes no sense. 

 

Your son does need your consent to drive the car if it's your car. If he gets into an accident, it will be your insurance that pays for it. You pay the fine for his actions. Unless you want to argue that he stole your car.  Incorrect.  My son can be a licensed driver without my consent, without my car, and without my insurance.  You may have missed the reason I was using this example.

 

There is no incentive for a spouse to overstay. They risk causing financial loss to you and they will blocked from entering US. If a petition is already ongoing, they just need to go home and renew their visa again.   Except that spouses overstay all the time, to avoid the long wait.  

 

If people overstay and don't want to leave they wouldn't have introduced the k3. What I'm saying is that there are long wait times and something needs to be done temporarily to reunite immediate family. 

 

 

 

 

 

[rickbechard@gmail 5]

5 hours ago, Paul & Mary said:

The variant that your friends @jamesandor did by filing at the now closed Bangkok USCIS office.

 

She has to overcome the presumption of immigrant intent. Her presentation and demeanor at the interview is critical since you can't provide documentation before the interview and a consulate officer is not required to look at or consider anything brought into an interview.  If there is a large age gap it may be hard to overcome unless you have significant assets in Thailand.  Maybe the 3rd time is the charm.

 

Exceptional circumstances is always allowed for consideration at any consulate.  DCF when filed at an (remaining) USCIS International Field Office is no longer allowed by USCIS policy.  Bangkok USCIS is permanently closed.

"She has to overcome the presumption of immigrant intent. Her presentation and demeanor at the interview is critical since you can't provide documentation before the interview and a consulate officer is not required to look at or consider anything brought into an interview.  If there is a large age gap it may be hard to overcome unless you have significant assets in Thailand".

 

Your comment proves my point. The application process is specious. It implies a very real possibility of approval, when in fact there is little to no chance the interview will make a difference. The application listed business ownership, home registration, previous international travel, American husband, work history with the Narcotics Suppression Bureau in Bangkok. All for which evidence was brought to the interview, along with bank statements to show she receives income from her business. A letter from my self explaining my need/desire to go for an extended visit due to my very long absence. Explaining my wife had been living in Australia and had the choice to stay or not. Explaining that if we wanted to stay in the US, I would just do the immigrant visa and be done, but that a visitor visa is the correct visa for what I needed to do. The official asked only for proof of the business registration, which she gave him. He looked at it and said, sorry denied. I was even in the embassy at the same time getting a new passport. Wouldn't make just the slightest sense to ask the husband in the building about the application? 

[gregcrs2 1,778]

RANT - speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.

"he was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all"

synonyms:  hold forth · go on and on · deliver a tirade · rant and rave · fulminate · sound off · spout · pontificate · trumpet · bluster · declaim · shout · yell · roar · bellow · mouth off · vociferate

 

VENT - give free expression to (a strong emotion).

"he had come to vent his rage and despair"

synonyms: let out · give vent to · give free rein to · release · pour out · emit · discharge · reveal · bring into the open · come out with · express · give expression to · air · communicate · utter · voice · give voice to · verbalize · articulate · broadcast · make public · proclaim · assert · find an outlet for

 

WHINE -  complaining tone of voice.  A feeble or petulant complaint.

"a constant whine about the quality of public services"

synonyms: complaint · complaining · grouse · grousing · moan · moaning · moans and groans · grouch · grouching · grumble · whining · gripe · griping · bellyache ·  · beef · beefing · 

[rickbechard@gmail 5]

Just now, gregcrs2 said:

RANT - speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.

"he was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all"

synonyms:  hold forth · go on and on · deliver a tirade · rant and rave · fulminate · sound off · spout · pontificate · trumpet · bluster · declaim · shout · yell · roar · bellow · mouth off · vociferate

 

VENT - give free expression to (a strong emotion).

"he had come to vent his rage and despair"

synonyms: let out · give vent to · give free rein to · release · pour out · emit · discharge · reveal · bring into the open · come out with · express · give expression to · air · communicate · utter · voice · give voice to · verbalize · articulate · broadcast · make public · proclaim · assert · find an outlet for

 

WHINE -  complaining tone of voice.  A feeble or petulant complaint.

"a constant whine about the quality of public services"

synonyms: complaint · complaining · grouse · grousing · moan · moaning · moans and groans · grouch · grouching · grumble · whining · gripe · griping · bellyache ·  · beef · beefing · 

Can I have VENT for 200 please Greg. 

[gregcrs2 1,778]

Just now, rickbechard@gmail said:

Can I have VENT for 200 please Greg. 

Actually, you can have WHINE for 1000.

[rickbechard@gmail 5]

Just now, gregcrs2 said:

Actually, you can have WHINE for 1000.

Well, I came to vent, but sometimes people drag the discussion off in tangents to the original point, then rant on about aspects of something you never wanted to discuss in the first place. Staying on topic would be most helpful in avoiding ranting and from various directions.

[gregcrs2 1,778]

6 minutes ago, rickbechard@gmail said:

Well, I came to vent, but sometimes people drag the discussion off in tangents to the original point, then rant on about aspects of something you never wanted to discuss in the first place. Staying on topic would be most helpful in avoiding ranting and from various directions.

There so no answer for anyone to give you that will suite your narrative.  

Edited November 12, 2020 by gregcrs2
typo

[rickbechard@gmail 5]

Go to Page 1, Comment 1. I was not looking for an answer. Just a discussion of the merits, or lack thereof, in the visitor visa process. I enjoy a good debate on any subject. This hasn't really been one. I try to keep it based on logical points and facts. In this case, the specific facts related to my wife's application, and how facts are not actually a consideration in the process. I say that because no facts were solicited in the interview. When you add in the consulate's own statement, "The official has typically made a decision before the interview", the apparent becomes obvious.

I do appreciate this website. It has a good feel. Well designed and easy to search topics. My friend recommended it highly. I think he might be having second thoughts on that. We are on a forum however. Members start a topic to discuss it. Some members will comment, most it seems, do not. Most who comment don't make one only. I suppose most people don't like to drop commenting until their point is accepted by comment, or accepted by default with no comment. Some will say they are leaving the conversation, then come back. So the length of the thread is akin to that "how long is a piece of string" question. If I could find a "close comments" button I probably would use it though, as all that can be said on this has been.

[gregcrs2 1,778]

3 minutes ago, rickbechard@gmail said:

Go to Page 1, Comment 1. I was not looking for an answer. Just a discussion of the merits, or lack thereof, in the visitor visa process. I enjoy a good debate on any subject. This hasn't really been one. I try to keep it based on logical points and facts. In this case, the specific facts related to my wife's application, and how facts are not actually a consideration in the process. I say that because no facts were solicited in the interview. When you add in the consulate's own statement, "The official has typically made a decision before the interview", the apparent becomes obvious.

I do appreciate this website. It has a good feel. Well designed and easy to search topics. My friend recommended it highly. I think he might be having second thoughts on that. We are on a forum however. Members start a topic to discuss it. Some members will comment, most it seems, do not. Most who comment don't make one only. I suppose most people don't like to drop commenting until their point is accepted by comment, or accepted by default with no comment. Some will say they are leaving the conversation, then come back. So the length of the thread is akin to that "how long is a piece of string" question. If I could find a "close comments" button I probably would use it though, as all that can be said on this has been.

You can hit the report post button on the upper right hand corner of your post to request a moderator to close the thread.  

[Boiler 45,527]

What do you propose?

[rickbechard@gmail 5]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

What do you propose?

A most succinct and pertinent question.  A proposal has to first develop a consensus of a need for change. That hasn't happened in this thread. The point of my original comment was to point out what I see as a flaw as the process applies only to the spouses of US citizens who permanently live abroad, and who don't desire to take up US citizenship or live there, but wish to make a trip to visit family. One first has to get agreement that the flaw exists. From there, I suppose a plan might be contacts with senators and representatives. That is in fact the only way to effect change.

[Boiler 45,527]

11 minutes ago, rickbechard@gmail said:

A most succinct and pertinent question.  A proposal has to first develop a consensus of a need for change. That hasn't happened in this thread. The point of my original comment was to point out what I see as a flaw as the process applies only to the spouses of US citizens who permanently live abroad, and who don't desire to take up US citizenship or live there, but wish to make a trip to visit family. One first has to get agreement that the flaw exists. From there, I suppose a plan might be contacts with senators and representatives. That is in fact the only way to effect change.

Why just spouses? Lots of others have family on the US or just want to visit.

[SalishSea 17,837]

36 minutes ago, rickbechard@gmail said:

A most succinct and pertinent question.  A proposal has to first develop a consensus of a need for change. That hasn't happened in this thread. The point of my original comment was to point out what I see as a flaw as the process applies only to the spouses of US citizens who permanently live abroad, and who don't desire to take up US citizenship or live there, but wish to make a trip to visit family. One first has to get agreement that the flaw exists. From there, I suppose a plan might be contacts with senators and representatives. That is in fact the only way to effect change.

How would contacting senators and representatives at all effect change to the INA?

[rickbechard@gmail 5]

3 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Why just spouses? Lots of others have family on the US or just want to visit.

For just a typical foreign citizen travelling alone, with no other reason than, "I want to see America", the current process is not necessarily inappropriate. Depends on home circumstances that the official is interested in verifying. I suppose the same has to apply to someone who wants to visit their long lost 2nd cousin twice removed, who they just discovered lives there.

 

There are millions of Americans living permanently abroad. The list of countries is vast no doubt. Perfectly happy with their own citizenship, the spouse isn't interested in getting a US one as well. When the preponderance of evidence, if examined, indicates a settled domestic situation in the home country with an American citizen, and both wish to travel, it is deserving of a more generous consideration.