Is there anyone else out there besides me who thinks that this new policy of retaining the I130 if the petitioner has concurrently filed an I129 is absolutely RIDICULOUS???

It is as if we are getting punished......double punished to be exact.....first round is $180 for the I129f....the second round of punishment is the $200 for filing the I824..............absolutely ridiculous.


And these numbers for these forms are driving me crazy.....I130....I129........I824.........G325........I485.......I864..........



I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh.....and I forgot to add this.........

When you call the ever-so-helpful customer service reps at USCIS to inquire further about this retaining policy...................THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE what on earth you are talking about.............................I actually told the customer service rep today to log onto www.visajourney.com to learn more about the new policy. I asked her about the press release and she was clueless!!

it doesnt stop there either...ull be dishing out more and more money.

You do know that the majority of the $$ that fund the immigration department comes from people like us.. who pay these fees.. the government give little or no money to the immigration department

The policy itself makes sense, since most people who get an approved I129F will enter on the K3 and adjust status.

What really isn't fair is that the new policy was backdated and the I130 form was not edited, so even though the press release says you can opt out of the presumption, it seems very difficult (or impossible for those of us who have already filed).

Would you please post a link to the press release you are refering to? Thanks so much for you help.

Exactly, how are you supposed to opt out of it when the customer service reps don't even know what it is you are choosing to opt out of?!?!

I think it is just a policy to ensure that revenue keeps pouring in.....maybe, since now I130 applications are being processed faster.....people won't even bother petitioning for the K-3.....perhaps they lost money because of this....maybe fewer people filed for K-3's......and so, to recover the money they lost they added the clause of ...... well, if you want your immigrant petition to eventually get to NVC..... just dish out another $200.....unfortuately, those paying.....paying both by money and lost time.....are those that filed for the K-3 and paid it's fee as well......

just a theory.........

Here's the press release: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/PN_i-129f.pdf

And here's a thread with some discussion of the new policy: http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...6&hl=policy




m&n - I know it's hard not to get cynical going through this process - but I'm not sure they're quite that evil And if people don't file the I129F then the I824 won't be needed, as the I130 is only retained if there is an approved I129F petition (from what I've seen)... so basically if they keep doing the I130's faster they won't get money for the I129F or the I824.

Good luck with everything.

m&n,

I think the new policy makes excellent sense. The less travelling the I-130 file does the less chance of it getting misplaced or of something being lost from it.

Explain to me why, with the way that I-130 and I-129f are being processed now, a person who is interested in a K3 visa would want or need to file the I-824?

And in the situation where someone does have a reason, now that the new policy is in place and people know about it, such a person can clearly indicate on their I-130 that they want it sent to the NVC thereby avoiding the need for I-824.

Yodrak

Hi there, the I-130 doesn't go all the time faster, see our case, we didn't apply for K-3...and the waiting time begins to be long now...

And also what you said it's interesing: did I understand well that a Customer Rep at the USCIS refered you to VJ?...

Finally, a little theory that my hubby told me and made sens to me is that if they block the I-130, to let continue with the K-3 for those who chosed the 2 routes, might be because they noticed they spend double energy on somebody's case...

Just some thoughts...and good luck!

m&n,

What customer service reps know or don't know is irrelevant. Customer service reps are not the people who process the petitions.

If there's no I-129f then the I-130 will go to the NVC, as they did before, no I-824 required. So your theory makes no sense at all.

Yodrak

I have stated this before on another matter and feel the same way here. I see no problem. In an effort to make the process as short as possible, you choose to take both paths. Create double the work and burden on a process you continually complain about. I chose to gamble with the I-130 and not take both routes. Just as this choice was mine, you have made yours. Maybe the USCIS should have one visa and only one visa available to married couples. That is what will be next. Then you can complain about that. Life isn't fair. Never has been, never will be. No one is requiring you to file the I-824 and fee with it. You are more than welcome to abandon the I-130 and proceed with the K-3. If not buck up and pay for the processing. It really is quite simple. Am I cynical, maybe so, but guess I get tired of hearing people complain about everything the gov't does wrong. Why do I never see anyone complain they made a mistake and got an RFE. You paid to have both petitions processed at the USCIS, if you want double processing at the NVC then my feeling is you should pay for it.

And by the way, you are not cynical, just realistic!!

Thanks so much for the information!!

Here's the press release: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/PN_i-129f.pdf

And here's a thread with some discussion of the new policy: http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...6&hl=policy this link is no longer available.

That is right....I made a choice and I do not regret the choice I made because, at the time I filed (in August), you were allowed to pursue both routes.....knowing that both petitions, upon approval, would be forwarded to the NVC. That was what I was informed with in August and September, when I filed my I-130 & I-129f respectively.

However, this new policy came about in October and I, as well as many other petitioners, were not aware that the rules had changed...... is that fair? Had I not accidentally stumbled upon the press release on the internet, I would have had no idea about the new policy, having filed back in August.

You say that "it really is quite simple." Actually, it really isn't because on my I-797 notice of action it says that my I-130 was forwarded to the NVC. I called NVC and they said that it wasn't and perhaps that it was retained. I called the USCIS and spoke to 3 different customer service reps that had no idea where the petition was and gave me 3 different responses. And you're right, I "paid to have both petitions processed at the USCIS" and part of that processing for August filers included it being forwarded to the NVC....and it was not. If they decided to change the policy....fine.....but those who filed prior should have been informed.

I fortunately did not receive an RFE because I completed my petitions meticulously and did what I was told. If I had receieved one, of course it would have been my fault. When I received my NOA2 it stated that, if I should have any further questions, I should contact the USCIS at the 1-800 number. That's what I did, however, they were not able to be of any help because the people representing the USCIS were never informed of the new policy.

m&n,



If both I-130 and I-129f are approved on the same day, or close to it, then while wait time for the petition approval may have been pretty much the same wait time for the visa will not be the same. The approved I-129f petition is going to spend typically a week or so at the NVC while the approved I-130 petition will be at the NVC for several months before being sent off to the consulate. So, if time is of the essence - as it seems to be for most VJers - the K3 is still going to be what they want.

And if a K3 wants to adjust status rather than return overseas for an immigrant visa, as the history of the K3 visa shows most do, then there is a real benefit to the USCIS holding on to the approved I-130 petition. My wife's adjustment was held up in part because the I-130 was floating around somewhere between the NVC and the USCIS at the time of her interview and had to be retrieved before the approval could be granted.



Agreed, the people who want the immigrant visa in preference to adjustment of status, and who filed before the change was made, are stuck making an additional payment if they continue to want the immigrant visa.

Yodrak

m&n,

The National Customer [Dis]service center are not able to be of any help on a lot things, because there is a lot that they are not informed about and there is a lot of case-specific information that they do not have access to.

The uselessness of the NCSC is a whole other issue, going far beyond this one.

Yodrak

I am not quite sure what you mean.....that is my point.....because of the way that I-130's and I-129f's are being processed....meaning quickly.....many people having them approved on the same day.....then. if you can get a greencard rather than a non-immigrant visa.....wouldn't you want the greencard......if the wait time was pretty much the same????

In the past the I-130 was being processed in double the amount of time....that is why people would file for both visas.....but you were allowed to follow either route because, upon approval, both petitions were sent to the NVC.

"now that the new policy is in place and people know about it"

Yodrak, that is also my point.....I didn't know about it until I stumbled upon the press release by accident on the internet. How was I supposed to know about it if the policy was put into effect after I filed both the I-129f and the I-130? Many people don't know about it....including the people who work for the USCIS. And, by the way, I did indicate clearly on my I-130 petition and on the cover letter that my spouse wanted to interview for the greencard abroad....even if he had decided to come here first with the K-3.....he would prefer to fly back and interview for the greencard overseas rather than file for AOS here.

m&n you ask how you are supposed to know? It is your job ot know. We again chose to do this ourselves or hire attorneys. Either way it is our responsibility to know of law changes. No one is going to tell you. Sorry, but this is the way it is. My point on the RFE was not whether you made one, just a general comment on what I see. The law changed in mid stream for you and many other petitioners. They chose not to grandfather in any of the already filed petitions. Bad break , definitely, but, that is what happened. As Yodrak said, you filed two petitions to see which was fastest. Even if approved the same day the K-3 will be faster, logically. So you got the intended result. As to your comment the immigrant visa is better, I agree, pay the fee and get it moving. Maybe they should have notified you but fact is they don't. We can hash this over forever, we both have our opinions and doubt either will be swayed. Good luck.