Interview results

[stacato]

I suspect that marks1957 may have a low income ... this could trigger the whole chain of events.

218153[/snapback]

No, I do not believe it is the income. I make way over the minimum, over 6 figures. (but yes I do have bills with that income too) I really think after I saw the VO on Friday and asked him why, that it may have had to do with the fact that my divorce was finalized, after a year of court battles, living apart, in June 05 and I went to China and got engaged in July of 05. This is why I think they want to see proof of residency of my ex and me.

218747[/snapback]

See, this is what I don't understand. A guy makes 6 figure income, and they think he might want to scam the goverment for money??.... and jeopardize everything he has for that?

 

It just doesn't make sense.

[SmilingAsia]

No, I do not believe it is the income. I make way over the minimum, over 6 figures. (but yes I do have bills with that income too) I really think after I saw the VO on Friday and asked him why, that it may have had to do with the fact that my divorce was finalized, after a year of court battles, living apart, in June 05 and I went to China and got engaged in July of 05.  This is why I think they want to see proof of residency of my ex and me.

218747[/snapback]

See, this is what I don't understand. A guy makes 6 figure income, and they think he might want to scam the goverment for money??.... and jeopardize everything he has for that?

It just doesn't make sense.

218751[/snapback]

Two motives of a scam case:

1. Money

2. Help a friend or relative to immigrate.

 

If the petitioner makes good income, it's easier to overcome a denial, but mistakes can happen sometimes. I saw a petitioner who makes an annual income of $570,000 - their case was returned to DHS in May 2005 cuz the wife failed to prove a genuine relationship through docs and she has relatives who entered US illegally. She got passed in Mar 2006 through a 2nd petition.

[SmilingAsia]

The reason for who bought the travel is simple, to justify the means for the petitioners travel. Matching timelines of travel and Chinese visa purchases along with credit card statements and photo evidence timelines. Having all these "ducks in a row" proved very key for us in our overcome.

218262[/snapback]

1. In a scam case, the applicant's relative or "Snake Head" purchased the flight ticket, sent the petitioner on board and the petitioner didn't have to pay for anything.

 

2. In a genuine relationship, the petitioner usually plans his trip, makes budget and there should be records with his credit card or bank account, and there should be information from his travel agency.

 

P.S. I learnt from media some "Snake Head" got caught in China.

[Guest pushbrk]

The reason for who bought the travel is simple, to justify the means for the petitioners travel. Matching timelines of travel and Chinese visa purchases along with credit card statements and photo evidence timelines. Having all these "ducks in a row" proved very key for us in our overcome.

218262[/snapback]

1. In a scam case, the applicant's relative or "Snake Head" purchased the flight ticket, sent the petitioner on board and the petitioner didn't have to pay for anything.

 

2. In a genuine relationship, the petitioner usually plans his trip, makes budget and there should be records with his credit card or bank account, and there should be information from his travel agency.

 

P.S. I learnt from media some "Snake Head" got caught in China.

218756[/snapback]

Instead of thinking like a romantic, it pays to think like a scammer. That way you can help your case not to look like a scam.

 

A low income is one element among several found in one kind of fraud. A high income is one element among several of anther kind of fraud.

 

A recent divorce by the petitioner can be an element of "help the family" fraud or "beneficiary scams the petitioner" fraud.

 

A low income AND a recent divorce can fit two or three fraud scenarios.

 

Maybe Eunice will comment on some more scenarios.

 

It is difficult for many CFL petitioners to look past their own assessment of their relationship and their love. They know they are NOT participants in the fraud scheme, so either no schemes come to mind or only the possibility they are being duped, comes to mind. It's best to make sure you don't LOOK LIKE any of the common fraud scenarios. That way, you have a better chance of avoiding the two or three step approval process.

Edited May 27, 2006 by pushbrk (see edit history)

[jim_julian]

Hmmm ...

 

I filed for the K1 about two and a half weeks after my divorce became final

 

Lao Po bought our tickets from China to the US, because she could get a better price, and that was stated on one of the forms.

 

... neither item was questioned. It's really hard to predict.

[Guest pushbrk]

Hmmm ...

 

I filed for the K1 about two and a half weeks after my divorce became final

 

Lao Po bought our tickets from China to the US, because she could get a better price, and that was stated on one of the forms.

 

... neither item was questioned.?It's really hard to predict.

218807[/snapback]

Yes, it is hard to predict. However, the elements of your case mentioned above are just that, two elements among many. Whether intentionally or coincidently, your case didn't end up looking like a fraud so was not treated as such. That's more testimony that the totality of circumstances is looked at. Didn't your SO also have a pretty detailed 20 minute interview, rather than a two question, one minute interview? The result is the same but the details of the various "scripts" vary widely.

 

Here are some portions of YOUR script that directly relate to ruling out fraud related to the red flag of a recent divorce.

 

5. When was your fiance divorced? Lao Po answered and dug out a copy of my divorce certificate.

 

- Family Pictures (Ten pages of hi res color printouts including lots of family interaction)

- Trips to China (Tickets, boarding passes, passport scans with visas and entry/exit stamps for six trips)

 

The VO went through the entire package commenting on many things, some of the more notable:

 

8. Tell me about his relationship with your family? Lao Po answered at length in Chinese, cross referencing pictures such as me carrying a big basket of rice for mama and baba and me helping Er Mei with English homework.

 

9. Does your boyfriend have children? Lao Po answered at length switching back to English. She gave names, ages, where they live etc.

 

10. What does he do for a living? Lao Po answered in English having mastered a reasonable English pronunciation of my company name in the last 48 hours.

 

OK, you and your daughter have visas! Lao Po said thank you and started to leave. The VO said no no ... I want to talk with your daughter.

 

The relationship was heavily scrutinized due in great part (I suspect) because of your recent divorce. Your SO was successful due to your mutual preparation, her competence and attitude among other things.

Edited May 27, 2006 by pushbrk (see edit history)

[SmilingAsia]

I remeber GUZ said: A middle-aged woman with 2 kids, recently divorced, married someone from New York who doesn't have a good job. Red flag.

 

I'm sorry I have to be blunt.

If SO is well-educated and good at communication, she doesn't tend to get denied.

If SO always looks happy and has bright smiles, she doesn't tend to get denied.

 

Per my observation: VO tend to deny the applicants who look like a domestic helper or who looks like a woman from a distant area of Fujian.

(A middle-aged woman from Fujian usually dye their hair into a funny color and wears expensive-but-poor-quality clothes)

[Randy W]

I think we're finding that red flags don't necessarily mean that the VO will want to deny the visa, but if they get a favorable impression, they will spend more time looking for Green flags to justify awarding the visa.

 

That, coupled with USCONGUZ's assertion that the VO does NOT review the case in advance, says that it's all about the 5 minute impression made at the interview. Thus, increasingly, I like Ken and Jie's idea of the 5 foot tall, 3 part, hinged backdrop of their life together, to set the mood at the interview (only a slight exaggeration - she actually had photos and passports to set out on the counter where they might catch the VO's eyes).

 

Seriously, though, GO FOR THE IMPRESSION that you will make on the VO. Here's a case where a photo says a lot more than 1000 words (he won't have the TIME to read 1000 words) - Jiaying wasn't shy at all about passing my camera around to whoever happened to be handy.

[Guest pushbrk]

I think we're finding that red flags don't necessarily mean that the VO will want to deny the visa, but if they get a favorable impression, they will spend more time looking for Green flags to justify awarding the visa.

 

That, coupled with USCONGUZ's assertion that the VO does NOT review the case in advance, says that it's all about the 5 minute impression made at the interview. Thus, increasingly, I like Ken and Jie's idea of the 5 foot tall, 3 part, hinged backdrop of their life together, to set the mood at the interview (only a slight exaggeration - she actually had photos and passports to set out on the counter where they might catch the VO's eyes).

 

Seriously, though, GO FOR THE IMPRESSION that you will make on the VO. Here's a case where a photo says a lot more than 1000 words (he won't have the TIME to read 1000 words) - Jiaying wasn't shy at all about passing my camera around to whoever happened to be handy.

218861[/snapback]

While I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say above, we must also understand that although the VO only just received our SO's file, others have seen it over a period of months and have likely added notes.

[stacato]

I remeber GUZ said: A middle-aged woman with 2 kids, recently divorced, married someone from New York who doesn't have a good job. Red flag.

 

I'm sorry I have to be blunt.

If SO is well-educated and good at communication, she doesn't tend to get denied.

If SO always looks happy and has bright smiles, she doesn't tend to get denied.

 

Per my observation: VO tend to deny the applicants who look like a domestic helper or who looks like a woman from a distant area of Fujian.

(A middle-aged woman from Fujian usually dye their hair into a funny color and wears expensive-but-poor-quality clothes)

218837[/snapback]

Good points. This is also true when it comes to job interviews. An applicant who is well groomed,positive, and communicates well, stands a better chance of getting the job. A lot of psychology at work here.

Edited May 27, 2006 by stacato (see edit history)

[david_dawei]

I think we're finding that red flags don't necessarily mean that the VO will want to deny the visa, but if they get a favorable impression, they will spend more time looking for Green flags to justify awarding the visa.

 

That, coupled with USCONGUZ's assertion that the VO does NOT review the case in advance, says that it's all about the 5 minute impression made at the interview. Thus, increasingly, I like Ken and Jie's idea of the 5 foot tall, 3 part, hinged backdrop of their life together, to set the mood at the interview (only a slight exaggeration - she actually had photos and passports to set out on the counter where they might catch the VO's eyes).

 

Seriously, though, GO FOR THE IMPRESSION that you will make on the VO. Here's a case where a photo says a lot more than 1000 words (he won't have the TIME to read 1000 words) - Jiaying wasn't shy at all about passing my camera around to whoever happened to be handy.

218861[/snapback]

good points !

 

The VOs, as similar to interrogators, need to 'sniff out' the issues from the paperwork and the interrogated.. in five minutes...

 

Preparing the SO to display/demonstrate the validity of the relationship is a very useful approach... In the past we've drawn up lists of what they could and should do... That's the VOs first and last impression...