Who logs in to the ceac website

[RABBITDANCE 0]

We received an initial email from NVC.  It states, "Please log onto the Department of State's Consular Electronic Application Center (CEAC) at https://ceac.state.gov/IV to check your case status, pay any necessary fees, upload and submit documents, and read messages from NVC."  We are unclear who is to log on and what logging on entails. The email was addressed to the beneficiary but emailed to both of us.  Do we both log on, or only one of us, and which one?  What is involved in logging on?  Is this creating an account and only one of our emails will be used?  

[Yareth 161]

The beneficiary deals with CEAC. 

Edited Wednesday at 06:06 PM by Yareth

[OldUser 8,805]

~ The thread was moved to IR-1 / CR-1 Spouse Visa Process & Procedures as it better fits this question related to general process ~

Edited Wednesday at 06:41 PM by OldUser

[pushbrk 13,365]

2 hours ago, Yareth said:

The beneficiary deals with CEAC. 

Incorrect.  Both deal with NVC.  It's also ok, if it is only the petitioner who ever logs in.  Petitioner must provide the affidavit of support and supporting documents, and the beneficiary must provide additional documents and an actual visa application.  But, it does not matter who logs in.  Either or both, is ok.  See what needs to be done and make your own plan.  It's almost always the petitioner who pays the fees.

Edited Wednesday at 08:40 PM by pushbrk

[KMG 194]

19 hours ago, Yareth said:

The beneficiary deals with CEAC. 

There are options for all parties to log in. I, the petitioner, have been doing most of the work, as my husband does not understand US paperwork. His job was to find the Joint Sponsor.

Edited Thursday at 01:20 PM by KMG

[Yareth 161]

Yes, I did not pay attention, and assumed it would be similar for K1 and CR1, as in my experience with K1 only I as the beneficiary dealt with it. That was a mistake :). 

My previous statement is indeed incorrect. 

[pushbrk 13,365]

7 hours ago, Yareth said:

Yes, I did not pay attention, and assumed it would be similar for K1 and CR1, as in my experience with K1 only I as the beneficiary dealt with it. That was a mistake :). 

My previous statement is indeed incorrect. 

Neither the Petitioner or Beneficiary has any dealings with NVC for a K visa.  There's no need to assume.  Somebody who knows will be along shortly to provide the correct answers.

[Yareth 161]

I used CEAC to follow the transfer of my case, that's what I referred to.
But yes, I shouldn't have assumed. 

Edited Thursday at 08:47 PM by Yareth

[pushbrk 13,365]

15 minutes ago, Yareth said:

I used CEAC to follow the transfer of my case, that's what I referred to.
But yes, I shouldn't have assumed. 

OK.  Either of you could have done that, or both.

[Yareth 161]

22 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

OK.  Either of you could have done that, or both.

Yes, I am now keenly aware of that fact. I shouldn’t have posted a response as my statement made absolutely zero sense as it was wrong. I apologize. 

[P3ACHY 27]

I (the petitioner) did all of the paperwork for NVC. I had it all organized on my computer so it was the best choice. So when I uploaded the financial documents, I logged in as the "petitioner". When I uploaded the civil documents, I logged in as the "applicant". And we sat down together to do the DS-260, and we logged in as the applicant for that.

 

I think I logged in as the petitioner to pay the fees.

Honestly it didn't seem like it mattered that much, but we were DQ'ed in any case.

[pushbrk 13,365]

15 hours ago, P3ACHY said:

I (the petitioner) did all of the paperwork for NVC. I had it all organized on my computer so it was the best choice. So when I uploaded the financial documents, I logged in as the "petitioner". When I uploaded the civil documents, I logged in as the "applicant". And we sat down together to do the DS-260, and we logged in as the applicant for that.

 

I think I logged in as the petitioner to pay the fees.

Honestly it didn't seem like it mattered that much, but we were DQ'ed in any case.

It didn't matter. You could have logged in as the petitioner each time, with no issues.