"Co-Sponsors not allowed for K-1" (Really?? NO!)

[marrs 0]

Ok,

So I called the USEM yesterday to ask questions.

I asked if the CoSponsor has to be my(Petitioner) relative...?

Answer: CoSponsors are not allowed with I-134!

Now, in previous threads it was said that USEM in Manila does not allow cosponsors with K1....

This is not really clear. I think the USEM chose the wrong words to describe the issue.

They explained to me that a CoSponsor is NOT REQUIRED with the I-134.

They also used the words "Not allowed", which is confusing...

Aaaanyway.....

The reason why a CS is not allowed/required is because:

""125% above the Poverty Line is required for the I-864! Not I-134!!!""

So she asked me what my household size will be. I told her THREE! She said the Income Requirement would be $17.600!

I replied: "Wait a minute, I thought thats for members of the Military....."

She said Yes, but only with the I-864.

As far as the I-134, 100% is required. Not 125%. If you are in the military or not does not matter on I-134.

________________________________________________________________________________

______

_______

___

___

So, in other words. If you look up the Poverty GuideLines here:

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-864P.pdf

125% is meant for the I-864 non-military. And the 100% is meant for I-134.

If all this checks out to be correct...I do not need a CS after all.

I dont make $22.000/125%. But I make more than $17.600/100% !

I will call them again 2nite and hopefully talk to another person and see if he/she will confirm this.

If any of you can confirm this here, please do so.

I think there are a loooot of people who think they need CS, but really dont according to Grace, USEM Manila, 28 July 2008.

Hope this will be good news to others. If its true it is great news 4 us!!!

[Thai family 0]

Yes, you are right about only 100% required for the I-134. Others on this board have said that some embassies treat K

visa applicants more like they need the I-184, but the law doesn't say that.

Thai Mom

[YuAndDan 153]

Some have said that they used a co-sponsor and it was fine, were as others have indicated PI sometimes wont accept an I-134 co sponsor.

I-134 is designed for just one sponsor, and has no provision for a "Co-Sponsor"

Embassy has this:

k. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT. You should be able to demonstrate that you will not become a public charge or be a burden on the U.S. taxpayers for financial support. A completed I-134 Affidavit of Support Form will be useful to the consular officer to evaluate your petitioner’s ability to be financially responsible for you. You should also submit your petitioner’s most recent U.S. Federal income tax return (Form 1040) and wage statements (Form W-2). Employment letters stating salaries and bank statements may be included to substantiate the I-134.

http://manila.usembassy.gov/wwwfk1en.pdf (NOTE: it only says petitioner's ability to be financially responsible.) The counselor officer can in cases interpret this to JUST the petitioner providing an I-134.

And yes technicaly I-134 only needs to be at 100% povertyline, though many counselor officers knowing the a K-Visa has immigrant intent and will adjust status in the USA which at wich point requires 125% so sometimes hold the petitioner to that standard.

Do the same income requirements apply to all immigrant visa applicants even if they use the I-134?

No. The 125 percent minimum income requirement, the most recent year's tax return and other requirements only apply when an I-864 is needed. Applicants using the I-134 will need to show that their sponsor's income is 100 percent of federal poverty guidelines as required under Section 212(a)(4) of the INA.

http://travel.state.gov/pdf/I-864GenInfo-FAQ-Final.pdf

Many factors are used when the counselor officer considers the intending immigrant may be a risk of becoming a charge of the states, petitioner's I-134 is just one of them.

[m0306 0]

The year was 2006 when I had my interview for K1 visa at the US Embassy in Manila.

My parents-in-law served as the co-sponsors. And the consular officer who interviewed me, accepted it.

I even was APPROVED automatically. Got my visa within 3 days after my interview!

[pushbrk 12,892]

Many factors are used when the counselor officer considers the intending immigrant may be a risk of becoming a charge of the states, petitioner's I-134 is just one of them.

That's it in a nutshell. The issue is a personal judgment about the public charge issue, not meeting some requirement. The I-134 itself is actually not required. It's just the most common and usually easiest way to demonstrate the applicant is unlikely to become a public charge.

If you're recent college grad in a marketable field who started a new job three months ago, it's much more likely USEM will accept a co-sponsor than if you're a 40 year old burger flipper earning minimum wage for 30 hours a week, with a co-sponsor who barely meets the minimum guidelines.

It's about a judgment, not about meeting some published minimum requirement.

I've seen numerous people get fiance visas in Guangzhou, (one of the toughest in the world) who were never even asked to show an I-134 or any other financial evidence. So, what do you suppose they based the judgment on? Think about it and some answers are likely to come to mind.

Edited July 30, 2008 by pushbrk

[marrs 0]

Many factors are used when the counselor officer considers the intending immigrant may be a risk of becoming a charge of the states, petitioner's I-134 is just one of them.

That's it in a nutshell. The issue is a personal judgment about the public charge issue, not meeting some requirement. The I-134 itself is actually not required. It's just the most common and usually easiest way to demonstrate the applicant is unlikely to become a public charge.

If you're recent college grad in a marketable field who started a new job three months ago, it's much more likely USEM will accept a co-sponsor than if you're a 40 year old burger flipper earning minimum wage for 30 hours a week, with a co-sponsor who barely meets the minimum guidelines.

It's about a judgment, not about meeting some published minimum requirement.

I've seen numerous people get fiance visas in Guangzhou, (one of the toughest in the world) who were never even asked to show an I-134 or any other financial evidence. So, what do you suppose they based the judgment on? Think about it and some answers are likely to come to mind.

Yes,

My point was to encourage people to go ahead with their petition even if the petitioner does not meet the 125% or the 100% for that matter....!

That does not mean you dont have any chance of getting the visa!

I know from reading other posts here and from my own experience that this is a common misconception and should be clarified. There is enough to worry about with filing anything with immigration as it is!!!

UPDATE:

I called USEM again and everything was confirmed. Unfortunately it was the same person on the phone, but as you can see from the replies here in this thread...it checks out after all.

So, to sum it up:

If the petitioners overall history looks shaky to a CO (Bouncing from job to job every other month, Unemployment benefits,etc.........) a decent CS would be a great thing to have in your back pocket! But not having a CS does not mean you cannot get your Visa approved!

============================================================

============================================================

My income and history should be just fine. We will have a CS (" hand carried and separate from other documents!"), just in case. I doubt they will ask for it!

Hope this helps someone!

[marrs 0]

Ok,

So I called the USEM yesterday to ask questions.

I asked if the CoSponsor has to be my(Petitioner) relative...?

Answer: CoSponsors are not allowed with I-134!

Now, in previous threads it was said that USEM in Manila does not allow cosponsors with K1....

This is not really clear. I think the USEM chose the wrong words to describe the issue. headbonk.gif

They explained to me that a CoSponsor is NOT REQUIRED with the I-134.

They also used the words "Not allowed", which is confusing... blink.gif

Aaaanyway..... mad.gif

The reason why a CS is not allowed/required is because:

""125% above the Poverty Line is required for the I-864! Not I-134!!!""

So she asked me what my household size will be. I told her THREE! She said the Income Requirement would be $17.600!

I replied: "Wait a minute, I thought thats for members of the Military....."

She said Yes, but only with the I-864.

As far as the I-134, 100% is required. Not 125%. If you are in the military or not does not matter on I-134.

________________________________________________________________________________

______

_______

___

___

So, in other words. If you look up the Poverty GuideLines here:

CODE

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-864P.pdf

125% is meant for the I-864 non-military. And the 100% is meant for I-134. wow.gif

If all this checks out to be correct...I do not no0pb.gif need a CS after all. tongue_ss.gif tongue_ss.gif

I dont make $22.000/125%. But I make more than $17.600/100% !

good.gif good.gif yes.gif yes.gif biggrin.gif

I will call them again 2nite and hopefully talk to another person and see if he/she will confirm this.

If any of you can confirm this here, please do so.

I think there are a loooot of people who think they need CS, but really dont according to Grace, USEM Manila, 28 July 2008.

Hope this will be good news to others. If its true it is great news 4 us!!! wink.gif

[envy_me 18]

i know some peeps here at VJ who used co-sponsor..

they're in k1 too and dint have probs..

so i dnt know why they told u that..

[Chica Yeyé 41]

double post --- http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=141665

[Thai family 0]

i know some peeps here at VJ who used co-sponsor..

they're in k1 too and dint have probs..

so i dnt know why they told u that..

Perhaps the phrase "willing and able to be a financial safety net if the need arises" ought to be used rather than co-sponsor. That's what my hubby put on the I-134 that our DIL took to the interview. That was in in addition to our son's I-134 and supporting documents. They want to see some indication that a K-3 visa applicant will have adequate financial provision in this country.

[indigo3m 0]

Yes, you are right about only 100% required for the I-134. Others on this board have said that some embassies treat K

visa applicants more like they need the I-184, but the law doesn't say that.

Thai Mom

indigo3m [ The Bangkok Embassy told me today For K-1 visa application, the petitioner has to fill our the form I-134 Affidavit of Support and the consular officer will not accept joint sponsors. The I-134 is different from the I-864 Affidavit of Support for immigrant visa applicants that the I-864 is legally binding. Since it is legally binding, you can have a joint sponsor for I-864. However, the I-134 Affidavit of Support is not legally binding as you and the visa beneficiary have not yet been married. So, you cannot have a joint sponsor for this form.

Regards,

So I guess I go back to the lawyer tomorrow to ask why she did not know this.]

Edited August 14, 2008 by indigo3m

[Devkpaik 1]

Yes, you are right about only 100% required for the I-134. Others on this board have said that some embassies treat K

visa applicants more like they need the I-184, but the law doesn't say that.

Thai Mom

indigo3m [ The Bangkok Embassy told me today For K-1 visa application, the petitioner has to fill our the form I-134 Affidavit of Support and the consular officer will not accept joint sponsors. The I-134 is different from the I-864 Affidavit of Support for immigrant visa applicants that the I-864 is legally binding. Since it is legally binding, you can have a joint sponsor for I-864. However, the I-134 Affidavit of Support is not legally binding as you and the visa beneficiary have not yet been married. So, you cannot have a joint sponsor for this form.

Regards,

So I guess I go back to the lawyer tomorrow to ask why she did not know this.]

indigo,

The rule must have been changed VERY recently, because my fiance just had her interview one month ago and she got her visa when I used a co-sponsor.

It's still not 100% for certain whether or not they have totally abolished the use of co-sponsors. Back when my fiance had her interview I emailed the embassy and they told me that they don't accept co-sponsors and never had, but in reality they did at that time and had prior to all this talk about them not.

Basically, all this talk started with lotuspearl's claim that the embassy denied his fiance's visa because they didn't allow co-sponsors, however then he followed that up with a post claiming that the CO had lied to him and that his fiance's visa WAS NOT denied because of a co-sponsor, but rather for some other reason.

I asked him what this reason was and he never replied.

[Thai family 0]

indigo3m [ The Bangkok Embassy told me today For K-1 visa application, the petitioner has to fill our the form I-134 Affidavit of Support and the consular officer will not accept joint sponsors. The I-134 is different from the I-864 Affidavit of Support for immigrant visa applicants that the I-864 is legally binding. Since it is legally binding, you can have a joint sponsor for I-864. However, the I-134 Affidavit of Support is not legally binding as you and the visa beneficiary have not yet been married. So, you cannot have a joint sponsor for this form.

Regards,

So I guess I go back to the lawyer tomorrow to ask why she did not know this.]

Indigo,

In your I-134 package, include any evidence you have that will indicate you can support your finance here and that your career prospects are promising. Other than the notarized letter of explanation recommended by the visa information office, we included his cumulative SS earnings statement, the last tax transcript from when he did file (2005), letters from his banks, employment letter, this years pay stubs showing more than adequate income, a copy of his college diploma and transcripts, evidence of having received his VA education benefits, plus a note indicating that he has nine more months of those benefits should he wish to pursue more education in the future. He also included a letter of reference for employment for his dream job, which noted his professionalism and work ethic. We sent a copy of his student visa stamp showing he was in Thailand for two years and not permitted to work per the terms of the visa. Since he was lacking taxable income for 2007, we felt this overkill was necessary. We will never know if they opened the I-134 his Dad filled out or not, but I assume that they did. Good luck.

Thai Mom

Edited August 14, 2008 by Thai family

[indigo3m 0]

Indigo:

I'm a little miffed because this process has taken me a year and a half to get to this point and now they change the rules.

1. When I lived in Chonburi I asked the first lawyer I got if it was better or faster to marry her there in Thailand or to do k1 visa.

She said I don't know and not to marry there. I come back she made so many mistakes I got a new lawyer to finish this case.

2. When my fiance got her medical she had been exposed to TB, so I got checked and so had I. Maybe on our trip to Laos or maybe in Thailand.

The Embassy made us cancel her interview and wait 9 months for the treatment to be done. Keep in mind neither of us was contagious we was only exposed and showed positive to the skin test.

3. I try to contact the Embassy to find out how to make a new interview, they did not answer for 2 weeks. After they take a month to set the appointment

4. to complicate things my Niece come to live with me, and she had her second heart transplant, and my mother asked me to stay home with her because she is a nurse and can make more an hour then me. The house we own in FL is paid for, the house in AL is paid for. We have almost a million in a money market, and I've spent almost 4 thousand on this whole thing to be denied at the end when I entered the process there was diffrent rules. Now if she is denied I have to spend maybe another 6 grand maybe to fly over and marry her to come back and pay for a new visa case... I don't think it is right to change the rules at the last minute. Change it for new applicants not the ones in a year and a half in to this.

Thanks to all that respond.

indigo3m [ The Bangkok Embassy told me today For K-1 visa application, the petitioner has to fill our the form I-134 Affidavit of Support and the consular officer will not accept joint sponsors. The I-134 is different from the I-864 Affidavit of Support for immigrant visa applicants that the I-864 is legally binding. Since it is legally binding, you can have a joint sponsor for I-864. However, the I-134 Affidavit of Support is not legally binding as you and the visa beneficiary have not yet been married. So, you cannot have a joint sponsor for this form.

Regards,

So I guess I go back to the lawyer tomorrow to ask why she did not know this.]

Indigo,

In your I-134 package, include any evidence you have that will indicate you can support your finance here and that your career prospects are promising. Other than the notarized letter of explanation recommended by the visa information office, we included his cumulative SS earnings statement, the last tax transcript from when he did file (2005), letters from his banks, employment letter, this years pay stubs showing more than adequate income, a copy of his college diploma and transcripts, evidence of having received his VA education benefits, plus a note indicating that he has nine more months of those benefits should he wish to pursue more education in the future. He also included a letter of reference for employment for his dream job, which noted his professionalism and work ethic. We sent a copy of his student visa stamp showing he was in Thailand for two years and not permitted to work per the terms of the visa. Since he was lacking taxable income for 2007, we felt this overkill was necessary. We will never know if they opened the I-134 his Dad filled out or not, but I assume that they did. Good luck.

Thai Mom

[pushbrk 12,892]

The workaroiund I see for you is to use assets. If you don't personally have $52,000 in a cash account, have your mother transfer it to you for the time being. (I take it "we" refers to your family, not you personally.) Anything over three times the income requirement will be sufficient to qualify based on assets. Some extra for good measure would be good too.

Indigo:

I'm a little miffed because this process has taken me a year and a half to get to this point and now they change the rules.

1. When I lived in Chonburi I asked the first lawyer I got if it was better or faster to marry her there in Thailand or to do k1 visa.

She said I don't know and not to marry there. I come back she made so many mistakes I got a new lawyer to finish this case.

2. When my fiance got her medical she had been exposed to TB, so I got checked and so had I. Maybe on our trip to Laos or maybe in Thailand.

The Embassy made us cancel her interview and wait 9 months for the treatment to be done. Keep in mind neither of us was contagious we was only exposed and showed positive to the skin test.

3. I try to contact the Embassy to find out how to make a new interview, they did not answer for 2 weeks. After they take a month to set the appointment

4. to complicate things my Niece come to live with me, and she had her second heart transplant, and my mother asked me to stay home with her because she is a nurse and can make more an hour then me. The house we own in FL is paid for, the house in AL is paid for. We have almost a million in a money market, and I've spent almost 4 thousand on this whole thing to be denied at the end when I entered the process there was diffrent rules. Now if she is denied I have to spend maybe another 6 grand maybe to fly over and marry her to come back and pay for a new visa case... I don't think it is right to change the rules at the last minute. Change it for new applicants not the ones in a year and a half in to this.

Thanks to all that respond.

indigo3m [ The Bangkok Embassy told me today For K-1 visa application, the petitioner has to fill our the form I-134 Affidavit of Support and the consular officer will not accept joint sponsors. The I-134 is different from the I-864 Affidavit of Support for immigrant visa applicants that the I-864 is legally binding. Since it is legally binding, you can have a joint sponsor for I-864. However, the I-134 Affidavit of Support is not legally binding as you and the visa beneficiary have not yet been married. So, you cannot have a joint sponsor for this form.

Regards,

So I guess I go back to the lawyer tomorrow to ask why she did not know this.]

Indigo,

In your I-134 package, include any evidence you have that will indicate you can support your finance here and that your career prospects are promising. Other than the notarized letter of explanation recommended by the visa information office, we included his cumulative SS earnings statement, the last tax transcript from when he did file (2005), letters from his banks, employment letter, this years pay stubs showing more than adequate income, a copy of his college diploma and transcripts, evidence of having received his VA education benefits, plus a note indicating that he has nine more months of those benefits should he wish to pursue more education in the future. He also included a letter of reference for employment for his dream job, which noted his professionalism and work ethic. We sent a copy of his student visa stamp showing he was in Thailand for two years and not permitted to work per the terms of the visa. Since he was lacking taxable income for 2007, we felt this overkill was necessary. We will never know if they opened the I-134 his Dad filled out or not, but I assume that they did. Good luck.

Thai Mom