No fingernails left

[cosmiclobster]

Sorry to hear about this delay. I think most of the people here have given you excellent advice. I think the financial requirements were just thrown in there as an extra hurdle to see if you really want to jump for her.

The good news is that if you can go to China again and be in GZ for the interview, you will absolutely show your commitment and she will get the visa.

P.S.

Be sure to go to the consulate in GZ before her interview to register your presence and address with the consulate. The VO will see this and will be hard pressed to deny your commitment!!

[krjchen]

Yep.... Just extra hurdles for you to jump through to prove the seriousness of the relationship. If you are planning your trip, keep in mind that overcome denial are Mon-Weds only. Citizen hours are after 10am everyday though immigration visa related questions can only be asked Friday 3pm.

 

Good luck........

[jimglot]

After talking more with my funny little honey, i have come to the same conclusion as most of you that they want to see me prove myself by going back to china for her. Not a problem. If it wasnt for my job i would have been at the interview

but it crunch time and the job must be complete before i go. I got about 4 weeks untill we turn over the job then it off to china for this boy. Thanks for your word of wisdom and advice, i take them all to heart

 

Jim

[oregonknl]

Sorry Jim,

 

About your troubles.. Yeah, think others have figured this one out.. (as best as anyone can figure out GZ..)

 

The solid thing is that its exactly that: the overcome evidence in your case is black and white... (although I'm still scraching my head why your ample evidence in the financial dept. wasn't accepted in the first place...)

 

---so yeah, I concur.... GZ's way of saying time to take a trip to China..... naturally, it couldn't be less straight forward...

[warpedbored]

Sorry Jim,

 

About your troubles..  Yeah, think others have figured this one out..  (as best as anyone can figure out GZ..)   

 

The solid thing is that its exactly that:  the overcome evidence in your case is black and white...  (although I'm still scraching my head why your ample evidence in the financial dept. wasn't accepted in the first place...)

 

---so yeah, I concur....  GZ's way of saying time to take a trip to China..... naturally, it couldn't be less straight forward...

From his description of the interview it sounds like the VO didn't even look at the financial evidence she brought. Chalk up another one for the decision being made before hand.

[oregonknl]

So true, Carl..

[audelair]

sorry to hear you got denied

 

was wondering if it is standard that they would ask for the W2 forms? I thought it was only necessary if you filed a joint return and only using your own income to qualify? The reason i'm curious, is that i do not have my 2002 W2 form (i have 2003 and 2004, though).

 

good luck getting this all resolved!

[warpedbored]

It is a good example of just how much power the VO has. Technically according to the consulate webpage all you need for a K- visa is one years tax transcripts and a letter from your employer as proof you make 125% of the federal poverty guidelines or documents proving you have enough assets. The three year W-2s aren't required until you file the I-864 along with the AOS. The pay checks is a new one on me. I certainly hope the jerk is pleased with himself. I wonder how some of these people look at themselves in the mirror the way they toy with our lives. I know this is somewhat of a rant but it brings back a lot of memories of how my wife was treated at her interview. A rude VO who refused to consider any of the evidence she brought with her.

[Dan R]

Carl the 3 years of tax returns which must include schedule C is required for the I-129 application if the sponsor is self employed.

[warpedbored]

You are probably right Dan but in this case he has an employer. It was needless and vicious of the VO to demand something technically unneeded.

[david_dawei]

You are probably right Dan but in this case he has an employer.  It was needless and vicious of the VO to demand something technically unneeded.

Frankly, I think the VO bashing is unbecoming... they've got a job to do like most of us...

 

If it is technically unneeded then why is it on the slip?

 

In my opinion, from the year's worth of interviews I researched, this is a typical denial playing out... I don't see anything overtly odd from the VOs POV...

 

He didn't like some things and wasn't going to use the interview time to change his mind.. A VO is not going to search all the "evidence" to resolve this.. the slip given is saying "we need more time".... this is what they say at the American Citizen Hour by the VOs.. this is typical...

 

old wounds must heal.. don't pick the scab and it will heal...

[ptcrusier333rph]

You are probably right Dan but in this case he has an employer.  It was needless and vicious of the VO to demand something technically unneeded.

Frankly, I think the VO bashing is unbecoming... they've got a job to do like most of us...

 

If it is technically unneeded then why is it on the slip?

 

In my opinion, from the year's worth of interviews I researched, this is a typical denial playing out... I don't see anything overtly odd from the VOs POV...

 

He didn't like some things and wasn't going to use the interview time to change his mind.. A VO is not going to search all the "evidence" to resolve this.. the slip given is saying "we need more time".... this is what they say at the American Citizen Hour by the VOs.. this is typical...

 

old wounds must heal.. don't pick the scab and it will heal...

just curious what your opinion be if your SO got denial?

[warpedbored]

You are probably right Dan but in this case he has an employer.  It was needless and vicious of the VO to demand something technically unneeded.

Frankly, I think the VO bashing is unbecoming... they've got a job to do like most of us...

 

If it is technically unneeded then why is it on the slip?

 

In my opinion, from the year's worth of interviews I researched, this is a typical denial playing out... I don't see anything overtly odd from the VOs POV...

 

He didn't like some things and wasn't going to use the interview time to change his mind.. A VO is not going to search all the "evidence" to resolve this.. the slip given is saying "we need more time".... this is what they say at the American Citizen Hour by the VOs.. this is typical...

 

old wounds must heal.. don't pick the scab and it will heal...

I strongly dissagree David. VO's should use the guidelines set before them. It is inappropriate for a VO to ask for evidence they had before them and refused to look at. If they need more time they should say they need more time not cloak it in another guise. You have not been through the hell of overcoming a denial. I hope to hell you don't have to but until you have walked in our shoes you don't have a clue. My wounds have healed fine but cases like this still make me angry.

[Dan R]

I think this issue goes back to earlier threads about the burden of proof. It would be different if the VOs and other government employees did not look at us as guilty until proven guilty. I deal daily with government on a variety of issues and it mostly boils down to the mind bent of the officer or inspector. The quickest way to have cooperation from them is to grovel and jump through hoops but you will be made to suffer by time and money doing it for their gratification. The easiest way, which I have been known for for 25 years in my industry, is to know the regulations better than they do and call in a supervisor who isn't looking at it as a personal showdown.

[Guest DragonFlower]

Sorry to hear about your problems,Jim.I was at the smoke and mirrors session on the 20th in GZ.The VO stated that K-3's needed 864's.I spoke up and said I thought K's only needed 134's,when did the rules change.He quickly back pedalled.and said he was wrong.But would no longer answer any of my questions, although he answered a dozen from some other guy.Oddly enough this is the same VO that did the session I was at last September,search for it and read the thread,he said some very interestig things that day.The point is,the VO's are not accountable for their actions and you can't know the rules better than they do.Because there are no RULES!!You can only hope to play the game as best you can.The VO said to be prepared for anything.He said they look at the totallity of the case.What matters in one case is of little consequence in another case ,with another VO.I think you will OK,they want to see you respond.

 

On another note,we were informed the move to Tianhe had been postponed until August 8.But could still move,as this is our approximate timeframe ,it all makes me nervous.

 

Also an interesting note.When I did my call to DOS today,the agent mentioned that she had seen on the file,that I had been at the meeting on the 20th.No more guessing how important those little sidetrips have been!!!!

 

I returned from China yesterday,my 4th trip.All this is wrecking my finances,but I enjoy China and I love my wife.So I do it.I have kept a low paying job because my boss does not seem to mind the 8 weeks I have been in China in the last 18 months.

 

By the way,a pick-pocket finally got me at the Shenzhen train station.More of a nuisance than anything,since it was close to the end of the trip.BUT-do not let down your guard,boy's and girl's.

 

Good luck and naixin

long