When does that 10 years of support start and end? I-864

[SalishSea 17,801]

20 hours ago, Darryl_F said:

Wow. So that fact that I pay her thousands of dollars every month means she will never need to work, and therefore I will pay forever. Great.

Whatever your divorce decree specifies is unrelated to immigration.

[Boiler 45,445]

I will try and find them later but there is one law firm that specializes in using the I 864 to extract money from USCs using the I 864 as leverage 

[African Zealot 1,455]

22 hours ago, Darryl_F said:

Wow. So that fact that I pay her thousands of dollars every month means she will never need to work, and therefore I will pay forever. Great.

That’s one of the realities when you choose to cross the pond and marry a foreigner 

[Ontarkie 14,217]

~~Non conductive/inappropriate post removed.~~

[Jimmyzr1 36]

6 hours ago, SalishSea said:

You are not obligated to support her.   You signed a contract with the US government agreeing to repay any means-tested benefits she used without being eligible.

Many people on here saying you are not obligated to support her are wrong. There are many cases across the US where attorney's have helped sponsored Permanent Residents receive Poverty guidelines support by taking the I-864 to court in support of the PR. The USC ends up paying at least minimum poverty, if not, even more than the minimum.

The attorney's have found a loophole in the system to sue the USC.

[Boiler 45,445]

https://www.soundimmigration.com/

 

No legal fee unless we recover support
We represent I-864 clients on a contingency fee basis. Our clients pay no legal fee to start their case. The law firm is compensated form money recovered from the Affidavit of Support sponsor.

Free video consultations
Do you have a claim for financial support under the Form I-864? We offer free one-on-one lawyer consultations via Zoom. Book your free video consultation here.

Free case assessment
Curious if you might have a claim for support under the Form I-864? We provide individual and confidential case assessments at no cost. Contact us to start this fully online process now.

Nationwide representation of I-864 plaintiffs
We work with clients in all 50 states in lawsuits to enforce the Form I-864. If our attorney is not admitted to the federal court in your jurisdiction, we retain local co-counsel at no additional cost to our client.

[TBoneTX 45,259]

Well, now that this legal firm has been publicized, a bunch of divorcing/divorced immigrants will be licking their chops.

[Redro 4,611]

18 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

Well, now that this legal firm has been publicized, a bunch of divorcing/divorced immigrants will be licking their chops.

No legal fee until they recover support! 

[SalishSea 17,801]

2 hours ago, Jimmyzr1 said:

Many people on here saying you are not obligated to support her are wrong. There are many cases across the US where attorney's have helped sponsored Permanent Residents receive Poverty guidelines support by taking the I-864 to court in support of the PR. The USC ends up paying at least minimum poverty, if not, even more than the minimum.

The attorney's have found a loophole in the system to sue the USC.

Whatever civil attorneys can recover in court is NOT related to the contract between the USC who signed the form and the United States.  You're splitting hairs and comparing apples to oranges.

 

The OP of this thread saying that the I-864 obligated him to pay a specified monthly payment is incorrect and was either gravely misled or failed to do his own homework. 

[Jimmyzr1 36]

24 minutes ago, SalishSea said:

Whatever civil attorneys can recover in court is NOT related to the contract between the USC who signed the form and the United States.  You're splitting hairs and comparing apples to oranges.

 

The OP of this thread saying that the I-864 obligated him to pay a specified monthly payment is incorrect and was either gravely misled or failed to do his own homework. 

Yes, but what I mean is that anyone sponsoring fiancé or wife could be held responsible in civil court by using the I-864, whether or not the Fed's do it. That's the important part is USC's being held responsible, not just through USCIS but also by getting sued locally. It is far worse than what the USCIS responsibilities would be, most likely!

[Cali_D 43]

Update on this issue.

 

Please note, if you are one of the few rude people, please don't bother replying. If you are of helpful type, thank you.  I don't want this to turn into a debate, which some people on these forums can't help but do. I obviously have no understanding of immigration law, nor have I ever pretended to. Please keep your judgments to yourself. Thank you. 

 

I contacted my business lawyer last week, naturally they had no idea about any of this, so they referred me to a immigration lawyer. The immigration lawyer confirmed that what most of you are saying is correct, that the I-864 binds me to pay the government, not my ex (my sponsor). However, where many people were incorrect is, the amount I am obliged to pay (if any) is certainly localized to the area in which they live. This is not important, just thought I would mention it. 

 

The reason I was paying directly to my ex is because she was smart (or tricky?) and added some odd language about the I-864 to the dissolution of marriage and the local court had no idea what an I-864 document was. We think, they assumed it was some sort of spousal support agreement because my divorce agreement does say I will pay for the I-864. The judge in the divorce court, myself and my divorce lawyer didn't realize this meant I pay the government, if they request it and not my sponsor (ex-wife). 

 

So, the issue is now getting my divorce agreement amended. This is my next task and the immigration lawyer didn't know anything about that process. So now I will go back the divorce lawyer and ask them. The immigration lawyer did say I may consider using a contracts lawyer in conjunction with a divorce lawyer. 

 

3 layers for this so far and maybe a 4th! lol, crazy.  🤪

 

[Cali_D 43]

On 7/14/2023 at 8:57 PM, SalishSea said:

was either gravely misled or failed to do his own homework. 

 

Both misled (by mistake), and I certainly didn't do any homework. 😆

Edited July 17, 2023 by Darryl_F

[Boiler 45,445]

I 864 amount does vary but all the lower  48 are the same.

[Redro 4,611]

 

1 hour ago, Darryl_F said:

Update on this issue.

 

Please note, if you are one of the few rude people, please don't bother replying. If you are of helpful type, thank you.  I don't want this to turn into a debate, which some people on these forums can't help but do. I obviously have no understanding of immigration law, nor have I ever pretended to. Please keep your judgments to yourself. Thank you. 

 

I contacted my business lawyer last week, naturally they had no idea about any of this, so they referred me to a immigration lawyer. The immigration lawyer confirmed that what most of you are saying is correct, that the I-864 binds me to pay the government, not my ex (my sponsor). However, where many people were incorrect is, the amount I am obliged to pay (if any) is certainly localized to the area in which they live. This is not important, just thought I would mention it. - https://www.uscis.gov/i-864p- It is important if you think of it as 1.) not paying the correct entity and 2.) overpaying the incorrect person.

 

The reason I was paying directly to my ex is because she was smart (or tricky?) and added some odd language about the I-864 to the dissolution of marriage and the local court had no idea what an I-864 document was. We think, they assumed it was some sort of spousal support agreement because my divorce agreement does say I will pay for the I-864. The judge in the divorce court, myself and my divorce lawyer didn't realize this meant I pay the government, if they request it and not my sponsor (ex-wife). Your wife is smart. And I can still see her effectively arguing that you should be paying her spousal support. And you agreed to pay her spousal support. And the amount is based on the very reasonable amount you agreed to... Good luck with getting the divorce agreement amended. But, if you are already conceding to having to pay more because you're in California. Then ex can argue-  I-864 is just the "jumping off point" and it might be tricker than you to stop these payments... 

 

So, the issue is now getting my divorce agreement amended. This is my next task and the immigration lawyer didn't know anything about that process. So now I will go back the divorce lawyer and ask them. The immigration lawyer did say I may consider using a contracts lawyer in conjunction with a divorce lawyer. 

 

3 layers for this so far and maybe a 4th! lol, crazy.  🤪

 

 

[TBoneTX 45,259]

3 hours ago, Darryl_F said:

Update on this issue.

Darryl, thanks for this.  As you can see, people here are now better informed in order to try to help you.