Why I'm not worried about the early visas...

[Guest David]

Folks, first of all, let me say that I have read the infamous email describing how the namechecks expired after 90 days and needed to be resent. No matter how I read it, upside down, backwards, everyother letter... there is nothing in there saying that we have to ask Guangzhou to resubmit!!!

 

 

When people call Guangzhou, they refuse to talk abot this problem. They have told many people that there is "no need" to resubmit their namechecks. They have even said that this would "slow down" the cases. Do you honestly think they would say this if they weren't already doing something about them? Do you think you know more about the bureacratic process of namechecks than the Guangzhou IV officers and employees? Don't be silly!

 

 

The vast majority of evidece seems to be showing that these cases we resubmitted months ago, and are just about due to come up! As for me, I am expecting to hear about more backlogged visas being cleared next week sometime. Yes, we were #$@#ed by the system, but that happened months ago, and we can't change that now. Why else do you think they are only telling people about this now?

 

 

Yes, we should be writing to Guangzhou, and asking them for reliable information. They definitely deserve to answer for the way they have dealt with petitioners, etc. etc. It is NOT a good idea, however, to insist in letters to CA and the DOS that Guangzhou is "ignoring us" or that they haven't done anything about our cases. You simply don't know that this is true, and its almost certain that this is wrong.

 

 

If you're worried about your case not having been resubmitted, calm down, and don't invest all of your emotional energy in the fact that some computer database has no information about your case yet.

[Robert S.]

David, thank you very much. You are The Man! I am grateful for your very clear voice attempting to bring this discussion back within the bounds of calm reason and rationality. We have every reason to believe that Consular Affairs is doing everything within their power to get this situation back to normal.

[Charlotte]

Folks, first of all, let me say that I have read the infamous email describing how the namechecks expired after 90 days and needed to be resent.  No matter how I read it, upside down, backwards, everyother letter... there is nothing in there saying that we have to ask Guangzhou to resubmit!!!

 

 

When people call Guangzhou, they refuse to talk abot this problem.  They have told many people that there is "no need" to resubmit their namechecks.  They have even said that this would "slow down" the cases.  Do you honestly think they would say this if they weren't already doing something about them?  Do you think you know more about the bureacratic process of namechecks than the Guangzhou IV officers and employees?  Don't be silly!

 

 

The vast majority of evidece seems to be showing that these cases we resubmitted months ago, and are just about due to come up!  As for me, I am expecting to hear about more backlogged visas being cleared next week sometime. Yes,  we were #$@#ed by the system, but that happened months ago, and we can't change that now.  Why else do you think they are only telling people about this now? 

 

 

Yes, we should be writing to Guangzhou, and asking them for reliable information.  They definitely deserve to answer for the way they have dealt with petitioners, etc. etc.  It is NOT a good idea, however, to insist in letters to CA and the DOS that Guangzhou is "ignoring us" or that they haven't done anything about our cases.  You simply don't know that this is true, and its almost certain that this is wrong. 

 

 

If you're worried about your case not having been resubmitted, calm down, and don't invest all of your emotional energy in the fact that some computer database has no information about your case yet.

David: I agree with you. Telling them to resubmit your case is a waste of you time. I know for sure and confirmed with both DOS and GZ that several Aug cases resubmitted in early Nov without our request. Besides no government offices will do exactly what you tell them to, otherwise we won't be here talking today. They set their own pace, step up a little if they feel the pressure from all sorts.... We are all disappointed, frustracted, but we still need GZ to work through the piles of cases. All cases have to bring to a conclusion one way or the other. There are at least 10000 names are not cleared, my daughter is one of them, but still we need to give a few weeks for them work on it. If any of us were in their shoes, we would probably be just as avasive as they are -- remember it is their job they are worrying about --- who wants to give unauthorized answer? Keep calling and writing -- our only options we have now!

Good luck in New Year to y'all!

 

Charlotte

[markimwaiting]

Folks, first of all, let me say that I have read the infamous email describing how the namechecks expired after 90 days and needed to be resent.  No matter how I read it, upside down, backwards, everyother letter... there is nothing in there saying that we have to ask Guangzhou to resubmit!!!

 

 

When people call Guangzhou, they refuse to talk abot this problem.  They have told many people that there is "no need" to resubmit their namechecks.  They have even said that this would "slow down" the cases.  Do you honestly think they would say this if they weren't already doing something about them?  Do you think you know more about the bureacratic process of namechecks than the Guangzhou IV officers and employees?  Don't be silly!

 

 

The vast majority of evidece seems to be showing that these cases we resubmitted months ago, and are just about due to come up!  As for me, I am expecting to hear about more backlogged visas being cleared next week sometime.   Yes,  we were #$@#ed by the system, but that happened months ago, and we can't change that now.  Why else do you think they are only telling people about this now?  

 

 

Yes, we should be writing to Guangzhou, and asking them for reliable information.  They definitely deserve to answer for the way they have dealt with petitioners, etc. etc.  It is NOT a good idea, however, to insist in letters to CA and the DOS that Guangzhou is "ignoring us" or that they haven't done anything about our cases.  You simply don't know that this is true, and its almost certain that this is wrong.  

 

 

If you're worried about your case not having been resubmitted, calm down, and don't invest all of your emotional energy in the fact that some computer database has no information about your case yet.

David: I agree with you. Telling them to resubmit your case is a waste of you time. I know for sure and confirmed with both DOS and GZ that several Aug cases resubmitted in early Nov without our request. Besides no government offices will do exactly what you tell them to, otherwise we won't be here talking today. They set their own pace, step up a little if they feel the pressure from all sorts.... We are all disappointed, frustracted, but we still need GZ to work through the piles of cases. All cases have to bring to a conclusion one way or the other. There are at least 10000 names are not cleared, my daughter is one of them, but still we need to give a few weeks for them work on it. If any of us were in their shoes, we would probably be just as avasive as they are -- remember it is their job they are worrying about --- who wants to give unauthorized answer? Keep calling and writing -- our only options we have now!

Good luck in New Year to y'all!

 

Charlotte

The system will not allow double entries. I have this from good word.

If a double entry is made, the computer kickes it out.

In short, the August batch was caught in the first bunch in the new policy and procedure. So, it was concidered as not a good entry because it didnt meet the guild lines.

All those who did not have a visa, as of August 1 was and is required to have the new name check.

If you fall into this group after the the new policy and before the system was changed, then the second entry was more than likely entered wrong and in error not conforming to the new entry format.

Durring which time, the batch of good entries (5100) was sent to GZ and made a priority to finish. Folks, no time for the lost or errored batch to be reentered a 3rd time.

the problem here is 4 fold:

1) GZ has little or no time or cant re-enter the lost bunch. (no double entry)

2) CA is the guilding office for all consulates around the world.

They dont make the policies just make sure things are done correctly.

3) DOS is in charge of CA and the name checks. DOS controls the name

check policy to make sure it is done correctly.

4) If the name checks were entered wrong or not exactly per the new

format change, then the offices (FBI, CIA, and more)

doing the name checks will and is having problems with the name checks.

 

This is the situation we have.

I have this from a good source and I do trust the person that told me this.

It makes more sense than all the other things going around.

It is not just one thing, all of these things tie together.

 

Now saying all this, the department to ask questions to is all three, GZ, CA, DOS.

 

From now on, when we do a group letter, it does need to be cc to all three.

it is time to ask questions and have answers. Not to badger or anoy anyone. not to complain, get mad or advise the people how to do their jobs.

What we do need to ask is very simple questions,

examples:

1) Where is my name check right now.

2) Is there a problem with it.

and more like this.

 

And we need to ask often, not every day.

I personally think a reasonable amount of time is 3-5 working days.

A group letter is good, but individual letter will get more noticed (Quantity)

as to recognizing there is a problem that needs attention.

 

The people we ask these questions to do not hate us or are they going to lose you file, heck, they problaby feel sorry for us right about now and want to help in this situation. Dont give them a reason not to. Yelling and calling them name wont help.

 

If we dont write to ask the question and point out there is a problem, well, out of sight, out of mind.

[Myles]

Aloha from Hawaii

The problem is the people in GZ are afraid to make decisions. So what we have here is

monkey see and monkey do. Rarely will anything outside od a safe routine will be done.

Changes are made from the top down not the bottom up. Decisions are made at higher

level. That is where the heat must be applied to. In other words, the people in GZ are

paid to say no unless instructed to do otherwise.

Annakuen'GG

[Mick]

As I sat down this morning (its morning over here in China), I read through several threads and was dismayed at the warfare that seems to broken out overnight. I must say, however, that I found this thread refreshing and informative. I do have a question for Mark. Can you reveal this reliable source? I understand if you are reluctant to post a name here but it seems to be very useful information. The explanation you give is a most reasonable one and seems to jive with bits and pieces I have picked up over the months. If you can't reveal the name, that's ok or if you can, could you do so in a PM?

 

Another question is, if the namechecks cannot be submitted due to the double entry problem, then what is the possible solution? I would send you a PM but I am still fairly new at all this and don't quite understand how all the bells and whistles work on this board.

 

Again, I appreciate the reasonable voices in this thread and hope all goes well. This is a New Year and let's hope it brings new and better results. That's not to say we should sit back and not take action. Action is essential I think. But constructive action will serve the greater number for the greater good.

[markimwaiting]

As I sat down this morning (its morning over here in China), I read through several threads and was dismayed at the warfare that seems to broken out overnight. I must say, however, that I found this thread refreshing and informative. I do have a question for Mark. Can you reveal this reliable source? I understand if you are reluctant to post a name here but it seems to be very useful information. The explanation you give is a most reasonable one and seems to jive with bits and pieces I have picked up over the months. If you can't reveal the name, that's ok or if you can, could you do so in a PM?

 

Another question is, if the namechecks cannot be submitted due to the double entry problem, then what is the possible solution? I would send you a PM but I am still fairly new at all this and don't quite understand how all the bells and whistles work on this board.

 

Again, I appreciate the reasonable voices in this thread and hope all goes well. This is a New Year and let's hope it brings new and better results. That's not to say we should sit back and not take action. Action is essential I think. But constructive action will serve the greater number for the greater good.

I will not give the name of my friend private or public, Im sorry but I believe in trust, if not with the system, the person.

The only thing I can say, is the letters and communication with DOS, CA and GZ is working.

 

The problem has been identified.

The issue now is what will be done and when.

 

The more your name is in front of them, the more they will be obligated to fix your personal case.

No, dont write every day, remember, we only need to inquire about the case. We have the right to know where it is and when it could be finished.

[Mick]

Mark:

 

Thanks for your quick response. I respect your decision and need to protect your source. Lets all keep working together to get to the bottom of this mess. Again, thanks for your response. I don't intend to write everyday. My usual rate of correspondence with GZ is about one request for info every three to four weeks. Interview date August 20th.

[markimwaiting]

Mark:

 

Thanks for your quick response. I respect your decision and need to protect your source. Lets all keep working together to get to the bottom of this mess. Again, thanks for your response. I don't intend to write everyday. My usual rate of correspondence with GZ is about one request for info every three to four weeks. Interview date August 20th.

May i suggest at least once a week, that is plenty time for a reply from them, and also cc to CA and DOS.

they all need to know there IS a problem.

[Joseph-1]

Mark:

 

Thanks for your quick response. I respect your decision and need to protect your source. Lets all keep working together to get to the bottom of this mess. Again, thanks for your response. I don't intend to write everyday. My usual rate of correspondence with GZ is about one request for info every three to four weeks. Interview date August 20th.

Mark,

I presume that your reasoning has to do with why you asked folks to call DOS last week. In theory whenever you call DOS and have to give your case number a record of your call is made. This identifies both you and your case inside the system. Your source probably directed you as to when the optimal time to get the August interviewees to call would be.

 

One Possible Theory.