Divorce decree Manila consulate (Merged)

[IWander 589]

3 hours ago, top_secret said:

I would allow that there may, or may not be differences in original document requirements between K1 and IR1 (?????) The embassy sends out the same generic checklist for both.  For CR1/IR1, in just the month of July alone, I personally know of at least 6 persons who actually received 221g's from US Embassy Manila to send in an original certified copy of a petitioner’s divorce decree because a photocopy brought to the interview was not accepted. I know of no one who said they successfully made it through US Embassy Manila with a photocopy of a divorce decree.  I haven't heard any recent K1 accounts so I couldn't argue one way or another if they apply a looser standard to the same documents for K1's.  But for CR-1/IR-1 an interviewee has about zero chance of making it through US Embassy Manila with a photocopied divorce decree.

There are differences between k1 docs and ir1 docs.  No original civil documents from the petitioner are needed or even asked for.

[W199 333]

12 hours ago, IWander said:

No original civil documents from the petitioner are needed or even asked for.

 

Exactly, correct! The Manila embassy does request them in their requirements  for the interview, only a copy, , and the Department of State does not require them to do so. Its only a formality that the embassy even looks at them. The State deparment in the USA are the ones that have the resources to verify them, and the embassy doesn't need to double check them.  The only exception are some rogue embassies like Montreal and Dubai who feel they know better than USCIS.

 

I also verified with my K1/CR1 agency, that they have done nearly 20 thousand K1/CR1 in 20 years, and the Manila embassy has NEVER asked them for originals, including upto last week.

 

I don't know why another member says they know 6 couples in the month of July that all got 221g for their CR1/IR1 at the Manila embassy.  Really? They know 6 couples all being interviewed in the Month of July, all having divorced usc petitioner at the Manila embassy and all being 221G due to not having an original divorce decree.? This seems very hard to believe ..    Especially since there is not one member on this website that reported it first hand themselves and on the contrary many members saying the exact opposite (embassy has never asked for original). I don't know whats going on with these people saying its needed .. one even said ALL civiil documents must be original .. .. but at this point I would definately call this just a social media rumor and ignore it.  No originals are needed and everyone needs to stop panicking and worrying about it.  This goes for all documents, incuding your tax returns, I-134 etc... 

 

The other possibility, and thekey is to provide the correct divorce document, as specified in the reciprocity details on the DOS web page.   Some people present the wrong document .. such as a Divorce NISI certificate instead fof the Divorce Absolute certificate.  But the correct divorce document varies by State and by Country if it is a foreign country divorce (and you need it to be translated as well).      If the USCIS approved it, you'd think that would be the correct document and a photocopy of the same document are at most needed.

 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by W199

[top_secret 2,417]

5 hours ago, W199 said:

don't know why another member says they know 6 couples in the month of July that all got 221g for their CR1/IR1 at the Manila embassy.  Really? They know 6 couples all being interviewed in the Month of July, all having divorced usc petitioner at the Manila embassy and all being 221G due to not having an original divorce decree.? This seems very hard to believe ..    Especially since there is not one member on this website that reported it first hand themselves and on the contrary many members saying the exact opposite (embassy has never asked for original). I don't know whats going on with these people saying its needed .. one even said ALL civiil documents must be original .. .. but at this point I would definately call this just a social media rumor and ignore it.  No originals are needed and everyone needs to stop panicking and worrying about it.  This goes for all documents, incuding your tax returns, I-134 etc... 

 

Quote

*  Marriage termination documents.  They wanted to see the original / certified copy of my marriage termination documents.

 

I did not bring those to the Philippines with me.  They are in a filling cabinet at our home in the US.

 

In the absence of those documents, they refused the visa.

 

Although we were sad at first, we realized that, based on the instructions they provided, we don't need to make another trip to Manila.  We just need to send the requested documents.

 

I can have those documents sent via DHL to our address in the Philippines, then send them via LBC to Manila along with her passport.  They will be returned via LBC just as a regularly-approved visa, attached to the passport.

 

 

Rejected what look to be very high quality photocopies.  I find this account 100% credible.

 

 Not in English but very much got a 221g for not wet ink copy of a divorce decree.

 

 

Rejected a photocopy

 

 

Another one where at least she got it resolved quickly.

 

 

Those are just a sample from only like the last 2 or 3 weeks at US Embassy Manila.  There's more.

 

 

[W199 333]

4 hours ago, top_secret said:

Rejected a photocopy

 

 

 

 

Those are just a sample from only like the last 2 or 3 weeks at US Embassy Manila.  There's more

 

 

Thanks for posting the cases proving that people got 221g in Manila.

 

On one we hand, we know from multiple agencies that year after year, thousands of clients, they have never an issue with copes of the civil documents, and the Manila embassy does not specify they are required in their instructions.  

 

On the other hand you provided some real life examples of people getting rejected.  But I bet is similar to USCIS rejecting hundreds of cases every month due to errors, and not due to a requirement.   To investidate, I contacted one of the references you listed above.  He confirmed that his photocopy got rejected not because of needing to be an original, but because it was such a poor copy, the margins were messed up, etc...  He went on to explain as I did that many printshops just print the documents poorly or wrong, often on the wrong size paper, A4. 

 

I imagine once you submit a poor copy, they at that point want the original to verify rather than deal with another poor copy.

 

For the Dimitri example, he first says he needed a wet ink, then he says the certification was wrong ...  .. so which was it?  The documents were direct from the court house he said, so agreed, the copy had no printing errors, allegedly just a certification error.  But the certification looks perfect.  And he had 2 divorce decrees from 2 different States. Its impossible that both of them were not certified properly.  Basied on the ceritification, it looks to me like he submitted a copy of the divorce decree or similar document that was on file at the court.  For my State, if I submitted that it would be rejected.  The divorce decree is the wrong document for my State. It doesn't prove the divorce is final. A decree is the divorce agreement and approval from the judge.  It does not become final for 3 months (in my State) .  Then you need to go back and request the divorce absolute certificate. That certified is is only embossed by the court, not certified as a "copy on file".   So my guess is that he gave the wrong divorce document, and usually when you go back to the court house requesting a dicorce certificate they know to give the certificate of absolate or final divorce and not the decree.   But ok, this is only a guess, but based on the data from the agencies and thousands of clients, I am confident that there was an issue with the document or photocopy that prompted the request for a new certified copy.

 

After seeing the low quality and wrong size printing from the best printshop in my finacee's barangay, I am not going to let her print any documents ... I'm just going to print them from high quality scans on premium paper. 

 

 

 

 

 

[W199 333]

4 hours ago, top_secret said:

Rejected a photocopy

 

 

 

 

Those are just a sample from only like the last 2 or 3 weeks at US Embassy Manila.  There's more

 

 

 

 

Actually, here is a quote from the first guy who got 221g in one of your examples that I contacted

"It was a poor copy.  The print margin very conspicuously cropped off something.  My wife said the interviewing officer pointed right at the giveaway. "

 

Edited August 3, 2023 by W199

[aaroncv3 106]

On 8/3/2023 at 11:22 AM, W199 said:

He confirmed that his photocopy got rejected not because of needing to be an original, but because it was such a poor copy, the margins were messed up, etc...  He went on to explain as I did that many printshops just print the documents poorly or wrong, often on the wrong size paper, A4. 

I take issue with this representation of my statement to you.  The framing may imply that I support the argument that a original or certified copy is not necessary.  I am not making that claim.  Further, I would strongly discourage presenting a photocopy as a sworn certified copy.

 

I would entertain (and have) that there is a degree of absurdity to sending original or certified personal documents, which could (in some cases) even contain PII data of minor children, half-way around the globe--to a 3rd world country where postal items regularly go missing--just so the immigration officer can glance at it.

 

Were it not so plainly absurd, I might not have hesitated to rush those documents sooner, rather than later.

 

I do claim that it may be possible to deceive the interviewer with a high-quality, but not certified copy, but I  would also say, "do so at your own peril."

 

On 8/3/2023 at 11:28 AM, W199 said:

Actually, here is a quote from the first guy who got 221g in one of your examples that I contacted

"It was a poor copy.  The print margin very conspicuously cropped off something.  My wife said the interviewing officer pointed right at the giveaway. "

 

I asked my wife about exactly what the immigration officer did.  She said the immigration officer went directly to the last page, made a comment, "There should be wet ink, this is a photocopy.  I need the original."

 

[W199 333]

15 hours ago, aaroncv3 said:

I take issue with this representation of my statement to you.  The framing may imply that I support the argument that a original or certified copy is not necessary.  I am not making that claim. 

Ahh, sorry, I misunderstood. My bad. I thought you were saying they immediately said the copy was cropped so they rejected it and asked for a certified copy due to the bad copy.

 

15 hours ago, aaroncv3 said:

 

I would entertain (and have) that there is a degree of absurdity to sending original or certified personal documents, which could (in some cases) even contain PII data of minor children, half-way around the globe--to a 3rd world country where postal items regularly go missing--just so the immigration officer can glance at it.

Plus its the USCIS on USA soil who is much better equipped and has the resources to verify the civil documents.  And not even they require an original. 

 

15 hours ago, aaroncv3 said:

 

 

 

 

 

I asked my wife about exactly what the immigration officer did.  She said the immigration officer went directly to the last page, made a comment, "There should be wet ink, this is a photocopy.  I need the original."

That sure does seem to be strong proof they want the original. But I don't know how to reconciliate that with that they also immediately noticed the copy was obviously cropped off. 

 

This is also in contrast to what my agency (exclusively filipino k1/cr1 visas) said (see my previous posts).

 

There has to be something else going on.  The consul is not going to reveal their "secrets", so I don't think we'll ever find out why they requested the wet ink for some people, yet the Manila consulates official policy is accept a photocopy and per my agency, as of last week, has never had an issue with a photocopy of ALL civil documents for the petitioner at the Manila embassy. The embassy has not yet announced they have changed their policy to require original.

 

I guess until this mystery is officially resolved by the embassy, to play it safe just send  a certified copy. I probably will at this point, maybe there a rogue temp consul there, but I don't like it  since one of them is very fragile, on this paper,  from Thailand and not easily replaceable if lost. But USA ones are very easy to replace. You can use LBC (they have branches in USA) which is very cheap and reliable or just spend the $80 and use fedex all the way. When I use LBC, I just send to a local LBC office to be picked up by my fiancee since her Barangay is out of the delivery area and takes an extra 1-2 weeks to arrive. Fedex (a credit card) to her was no issues. 

[GinoNiña 182]

Lets put this debate about having a wet  signature on divorce decree to rest..just a  few weeks away my fiance will be having an interview for K1 visa.   Because I turned in my original divorce decree with my K1 application, all she has is a copy of it. I already have requested a certified copy of my  divorce but its coming  from State of Hawaii. I  dont know how long it will take to  get here. 

 

To be continued......Stay tune!!!!

[aaroncv3 106]

12 hours ago, GinoNiña said:

Lets put this debate about having a wet  signature on divorce decree to rest..

To be continued......Stay tune!!!!

🤣 I'm here for it, but I doubt either outcome would settle the matter. 🤣

[IWander 589]

6 hours ago, aaroncv3 said:

🤣 I'm here for it, but I doubt either outcome would settle the matter. 🤣

OP is a K 1 and it certainly won't settle the wet signature issue for an IR visa

[W199 333]

20 hours ago, GinoNiña said:

Lets put this debate about having a wet  signature on divorce decree to rest..just a  few weeks away my fiance will be having an interview for K1 visa.   Because I turned in my original divorce decree with my K1 application, all she has is a copy of it. I already have requested a certified copy of my  divorce but its coming  from State of Hawaii. I  dont know how long it will take to  get here. 

 

To be continued......Stay tune!!!!

Just be sure that you give them the correct document for your State.  For example, in my State, the first document we get is the divorce decree signed by the judge. This basically is the approval of the divorce agreement, many pages long, that spells out the terms of the divorce.. The next document is the registrar/clerk will issue a divorce NISI certificate. This 1 page certificate certifies your divorce is approved and that it will become final in 3 months.  Then 3 months later, if you go to the court house, they will give you a divorce Absolute certificate, saying your divorce is final. The latter is the correct document (for my State).

 

 

Edited August 8, 2023 by W199

[RO_AH 1,659]

On 8/6/2023 at 6:01 PM, GinoNiña said:

Lets put this debate about having a wet  signature on divorce decree to rest..just a  few weeks away my fiance will be having an interview for K1 visa.   Because I turned in my original divorce decree with my K1 application, all she has is a copy of it. I already have requested a certified copy of my  divorce but its coming  from State of Hawaii. I  dont know how long it will take to  get here. 

 

To be continued......Stay tune!!!!

I just looked at what my wife brought. It was also a divorce decree from Hawaii. It had the full terms of the divorce. No wet ink. The scan was in color as well as the print that she had done on PH. The judge and clerks stamps are in color. It was good quality print on good quality paper. No problem. This was 2 years ago though.

[GinoNiña 182]

5 hours ago, RO_AH said:

I just looked at what my wife brought. It was also a divorce decree from Hawaii. It had the full terms of the divorce. No wet ink. The scan was in color as well as the print that she had done on PH. The judge and clerks stamps are in color. It was good quality print on good quality paper. No problem. This was 2 years ago though.

Yours is one page but front and back? I remembered my original the seal is not in color but it was in this thicker paper not a cheap copy paper. 

[RO_AH 1,659]

18 hours ago, GinoNiña said:

Yours is one page but front and back? I remembered my original the seal is not in color but it was in this thicker paper not a cheap copy paper. 

8 page single sided

[GinoNiña 182]

On 7/31/2023 at 6:52 PM, IWander said:

the petitioner decree isn't even listed only the beneficiary's is required 

Hello, do you have the source for this?