Thought you guys might have special, brit-only insight:

So, here's the sitch: my fiance got denied entry back in Jan of 06 because he had overstayed his I-94 (NOT his visa, though it's still called a visa overstay). The charming airport blokes told him he should feel "luck" since "all he had to do was just get a visa" to come back. So he isn't banned, but he lost his VWP privileges. Major bummer, to put it mildly.

So we're in the midst of the K1 process right now. He tried for a tourist visa once (April, 2006) but was denied for lack of proof of ties to his native UK. In short: he had left his job to move here for the time he was here on his first tourist visa and didn't get new full time work since he had plans and plane tickets to come back to hang out with me for 2 months before we returned to the UK together to travel. He also finalized his divorce in 2006 (after a 2+ year separation). And the ex bought him out of his house. VJ-ers see all the problems here . . . .

Here are my questions then:

1.) Do you think it might be worth a go to apply for a tourist visa again, this time presenting all the K1 paperwork and saying, look, he'll have to come back for the interview, clearly we aren't going to jeopardize this much more important process by mucking about. Also, the evidence from the first attempt at a visa in 2006 is consistent with the facts of the situation now (he said he was visiting his girlfriend, look, now I'm his fiance, etc etc). Forgetting the in-the-grand-scheme-of-things-nominal application fee, worth a go?

2.) Would it have any negative bearing on the K1 process? Slow it down? Distract from the important focus?

I would think - probably because I want to rationalize this into being a plausible idea - that it shows we follow everything to the letter after learning a very, very unfortunate lesson from a good-faith error.

He still doesn't have a full time job - but I do and I simply can't fly to freakin' England often enough, you know?

Thoughts?