A Tricky Question... I need some 'exert' advice

[gobdogman 0]

I met my fiancee at filipinaheart.com and i told them we met at that web site and answerd no to meeting at an international marriage brokerage and we are approved.

From what i was told by a CSC staff unless you pay for a company to secifically match you with a contact then it doesnt fall under the marriage brokerage.

I think too many people try to over analize this question and they get confused.

The site your talking about charges both male and female the same price too have access to the gold membership or whatever the upgraded membership is called and that is what makes the differance.

[Bruce n Jen 0]

(4) INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘international marriage broker’’ means a corporation, partnership, business, individual, or other legal entity, whether or not organized under any law of the United States, that charges fees for providing dating, matrimonial, matchmaking services, or social referrals between United States citizens or nationals or aliens lawfully admitted to the United States as permanent residents and foreign national clients by providing personal contact information or otherwise facilitating communication between individuals.

EXCEPTIONS.—Such term does not include—

(i) a traditional matchmaking organization of a cultural or religious nature that operates on a nonprofit

basis and otherwise operates in compliance with the laws of the countries in which it operates, including

the laws of the United States; or

(ii) an entity that provides dating services if its principal business is not to provide international dating

services between United States citizens or United States residents and foreign nationals and it charges

comparable rates and offers comparable services to all individuals it serves regardless of the individual’s

gender or country of citizenship

Bill - I had the same questions that I'm sure everyone has had on this. But until I found the legal wording above, I wasn'tn sure. Part B (ii) answered it for me. It specifically is excluding from IMB all freely accessible dating services. The target of IMB is those entities that solely target US residents and foreign nationals and charge based upon that target, ie the US male pays to find a foreign female and she paid nothing. There's a lopsided arrangement, not a free and open one. So your meeting place is covered by the exception.

[Caladan 19]

Bill,

I am not a lawyer, but I have read a lot of the IMBRA information. (I'd check out the forum here, too; someone might be able to recommend a lawyer.)

4) INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘international marriage broker’’ means a corporation, partnership, business, individual, or other legal entity, whether or not organized under any law of the United States, that charges fees for providing dating, matrimonial, matchmaking services, or social referrals between United States citizens or nationals or aliens lawfully admitted to the United States as permanent residents and foreign national clients by providing personal contact information or otherwise facilitating communication between individuals.

EXCEPTIONS.—Such term does not include—

(i) a traditional matchmaking organization of a cultural or religious nature that operates on a nonprofit

basis and otherwise operates in compliance with the laws of the countries in which it operates, including

the laws of the United States; or

(ii) an entity that provides dating services if its principal business is not to provide international dating

services between United States citizens or United States residents and foreign nationals and it charges

comparable rates and offers comparable services to all individuals it serves regardless of the individual’s

gender or country of citizenship

So the question is whether your dating site falls under the exemption in 4B(ii). To answer that we'd need to know:

Did you have to pay a fee to obtain your fiancé's contact information? (Do all Americans have to pay?)

Did she have to pay a fee in order to be contacted by you?

Are the fee relationships asymmetrical? (Is it that all of the foreign women pay fees to meet Americans, while Americans pay nothing, or the other way around, or is it not biased towards nationality?)

Is the point of the site to link up foreigners with Americans? (Could your wife have used the service to find a Thai man?)

From what you're saying here, it sounds as though the initial service is free, and both genders have to pay a fee to upgrade, and it doesn't matter whether the man or the woman has a paid profile as long as one of them does, and that leads me to think that your service falls under the exemption.

Again, not a lawyer. As for the RFE, I'd just explain it the situation with emphasis on why you think it doesn't fall under the exemption.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Bill,

I am not a lawyer, but I have read a lot of the IMBRA information. (I'd check out the forum here, too; someone might be able to recommend a lawyer.)

4) INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘international marriage broker’’ means a corporation, partnership, business, individual, or other legal entity, whether or not organized under any law of the United States, that charges fees for providing dating, matrimonial, matchmaking services, or social referrals between United States citizens or nationals or aliens lawfully admitted to the United States as permanent residents and foreign national clients by providing personal contact information or otherwise facilitating communication between individuals.

EXCEPTIONS.—Such term does not include—

(i) a traditional matchmaking organization of a cultural or religious nature that operates on a nonprofit

basis and otherwise operates in compliance with the laws of the countries in which it operates, including

the laws of the United States; or

(ii) an entity that provides dating services if its principal business is not to provide international dating

services between United States citizens or United States residents and foreign nationals and it charges

comparable rates and offers comparable services to all individuals it serves regardless of the individual’s

gender or country of citizenship

So the question is whether your dating site falls under the exemption in 4B(ii). To answer that we'd need to know:

Did you have to pay a fee to obtain your fiancé's contact information? (Do all Americans have to pay?)

Did she have to pay a fee in order to be contacted by you?

Are the fee relationships asymmetrical? (Is it that all of the foreign women pay fees to meet Americans, while Americans pay nothing, or the other way around, or is it not biased towards nationality?)

Is the point of the site to link up foreigners with Americans? (Could your wife have used the service to find a Thai man?)

From what you're saying here, it sounds as though the initial service is free, and both genders have to pay a fee to upgrade, and it doesn't matter whether the man or the woman has a paid profile as long as one of them does, and that leads me to think that your service falls under the exemption.

Again, not a lawyer. As for the RFE, I'd just explain it the situation with emphasis on why you think it doesn't fall under the exemption.

As I look at this element, this is how I read it:

(ii) an entity that provides dating services (a. ) if its principal business is not to provide international dating services between United States citizens or United States residents and foreign nationals

(b. )and it charges comparable rates and offers comparable services to all individuals it serves regardless of the individual’s gender or country of citizenship

(a. ) If the business entity has any involvement in facilitating social networking, it does not focus its efforts on the matching of US citizens or Permanent Residents with members from overseas. This does not preclude an entity from providing those services, but that it should not be it's 'prime purpose'

(b. ) The fees charged and services provided to all clients of the business entity, regardless of their location or interest are comparable. In other words, the entity does not have a specific and distinct level of service and corresponding distinct fee that it offers to members of specific genders and/or nationalities.

Edited October 6, 2006 by diadromous mermaid

[TucsonBill 0]

Tuscon Bill,

for some reason, it won't post what I have written - there is a more complete answer that should help you (maybe) with the RFE question. I will PM it to you.

mo

Thanks alot mo, I just wote a letter explaining the details, and told them I still dont believe our meeting falls under IMBRA but if the adjudicator thinks otherwise, I provided the contact details.

Fotunately, my fiiance, Pao, saved very first letter I sent her introducing myself by email and it referenced our actual meeting on Yahoo - so that was great. At the time, I did not have my email set up to save outgoing messages.

All I did was send her my yahoo messenger / email address on the website and it was weeks later that we actually met on yahoo.

Bill

Thanks to everyone for thier input on this. I think (hope) I have the matter settled. I believe I have supplied enough information to show that I was not trying to misrepresent anything. We'll see.

Bill

[aussiewench 9]

Bill,

This type of RFE asking for further details of how one established the relationship is not just because of the added questions relating to MB as it is an RFE that has popped its head up prior to IMBRA. How did you answer Q18? What details did you include of how the relationship was established? Did it include such things as, why you first visited, the things you did together on your visits, what made you fall in love, meeting of family members, how you stayed in contact, your future plans etc etc.......in other words.......how the relationship was established. Q18 can be very important in how it is answered and what details are included. Perhaps even more so now because of the IMBRA if one met via a dating site or MB. Yes others have gotten approvals with only one line answers on the form, but many others don't.

Lorelle

Edited October 6, 2006 by aussiewench

[TucsonBill 0]

Bill,

This type of RFE asking for further details of how one established the relationship is not just because of the added questions relating to MB as it is an RFE that has popped its head up prior to IMBRA. How did you answer Q18? What details did you include of how the relationship was established? Did it include such things as, why you first visited, the things you did together on your visits, what made you fall in love, meeting of family members, how you stayed in contact, your future plans etc etc.......in other words.......how the relationship was established. Q18 can be very important in how it is answered and what details are included. Perhaps even more so now because of the IMBRA if one met via a dating site or MB. Yes others have gotten approvals with only one line answers on the form, but many others don't.

Lorelle

This quote was taken from my orginal continuation sheet regarding question 18 and is the only reference to or intial meeting:

I am a regular participant on Christian online chat, and the story of Pao’s conversion from Buddhism to Christianity was what first attracted me to her. I honestly never expected in the beginning that we would ever be more than friends. She is a beautiful lady, with a good career, and about 15 years younger than me, (I am 46 and she is just turning 32). Much to my surprise, a friendship, and then a close friendship turned into much more.

Most of our communication has been via Yahoo Messenger and using a webcam, which allows us to type messages back and forth, while at the same time, being able to see each other. Yahoo Messenger does permit logging of all conversations, and I have all the logs of our conversations going back to October 15th.

[Dwarf_Ogress 0]

I am so glad someone brought up this question but I am sorry to hear of the RFE. I met my finace on www.flirtbox.com but we ended up using MSN messenger. I have no proof of the website but I am assuming it is safe to say that we met on MSN messenger? Good luck TucsonBill!

[TucsonBill 0]

I am so glad someone brought up this question but I am sorry to hear of the RFE. I met my finace on www.flirtbox.com but we ended up using MSN messenger. I have no proof of the website but I am assuming it is safe to say that we met on MSN messenger? Good luck TucsonBill!

If I had it to do over again, just to be on the safe side, I would have answered yes to the IMBRA question, and put the explanation that I was not sure on a continuation sheet. Considering that we had both signed up on this site for free, and that neithier one of us put or real names on that site, and that we did not actually meet there, I put what I beleive to be the correct answer wich is 'no'.

As an isnurance agent for 21 years, I know a bit about law and misrepresentation, and in order for there to be misrepresentation there has to be motive and intent - and in my case there was no motove or intent to answer the question incorrectly, I put the answer that I thought was the correct answer at the time.

Again, after visiting here, and knowing what I know now, I would have said 'yes' with a continuation sheet, and then I might not have not gotten the RFE, (actually I probably still would have for my credit card and bank statements form the time I was in Thailand but not for more detials on how we met).

Bill

[japau 1]

Of course I wold get a lawyers advice. However, I am thinking that stating that the primary purpose of the website is not to solicit international marriages. It is a website to meet people, not for the express purpose of arranging marriages between Americans and foreign nationals. I haven't even read the statute, so definitely don't count on what I am saying here, but to me, it has to be the sace they are trying to reach these internet sites that arrange marriages, not "dating" or "meeting" websites like "match.com" where anything could happen (including nothing at all). Further, how you "established" the relationship is they want evidence of that you met in person, why you met, what you did, how many times, how you talked about your developing relationship and all that stuff. They are looking to weed out the "we didn't meet, but decided to get married over the internet" people...Just my opinion...J

Edited October 6, 2006 by japau

[Yodrak 7]

FutureMrs,

I haven't used MSN messenger, but if it's like some other 'message' services don't you have to know who you're sending a message to in order to communicate with them? How would you meet someone there if you didn't already know of their existance - make up names to send to, and if you hit on a name that exists the message goes through?

I would not assume that anything is "safe", meaning that it will be accepted without question. Anticipate that any information you provide may be questioned and don't put yourself in what could become an awkward position if the questions should come and get tough.

Yodrak

.... I met my finace on www.flirtbox.com but we ended up using MSN messenger. I have no proof of the website but I am assuming it is safe to say that we met on MSN messenger? ....

[Dwarf_Ogress 0]

I am so glad someone brought up this question but I am sorry to hear of the RFE. I met my finace on www.flirtbox.com but we ended up using MSN messenger. I have no proof of the website but I am assuming it is safe to say that we met on MSN messenger? Good luck TucsonBill!

If I had it to do over again, just to be on the safe side, I would have answered yes to the IMBRA question, and put the explanation that I was not sure on a continuation sheet. Considering that we had both signed up on this site for free, and that neithier one of us put or real names on that site, and that we did not actually meet there, I put what I beleive to be the correct answer wich is 'no'.

As an isnurance agent for 21 years, I know a bit about law and misrepresentation, and in order for there to be misrepresentation there has to be motive and intent - and in my case there was no motove or intent to answer the question incorrectly, I put the answer that I thought was the correct answer at the time.

Again, after visiting here, and knowing what I know now, I would have said 'yes' with a continuation sheet, and then I might not have not gotten the RFE, (actually I probably still would have for my credit card and bank statements form the time I was in Thailand but not for more detials on how we met).

Bill

Ok, so perhaps I should answer yes and explain my online meeting but then go on to say that we utilized other media for conversation etc.

I am hoping that I don't get an RFE asking for receipts as I did not use my debit card for anything when I went to Jamaica, my finace paid for everything. I have many photos of him and I, his family and I, and also his best friend and I. Other than that, the only proof I have is airline ticket stubs and stuff relating to that portion of my trip.

Yikes! Seems like a long journey with much stress, but we both know they are worth it!

[japau 1]

Finally, looking at part of the staute - you have to parse out the intent - the language is "charge a fee" for the "service of matchmaking, dating, marriage, etc." - not "charge a fee" for "access to the site." You see the difference there is to make there? Match.com charges you a fee to access the site - they promise nothing - anything could happen and it depends on the contact you make with the other person - they may not answer you at all (and laugh at you too...ha). Some of these others (the ones I believe at which IMBR is directed) charge you a fee and guarantee you will meet others interested in dating/marriage, and you pay the fee to meet the people (or perhaps after you have a fiance or wife)...these are just my opinions, but I bet I am closer to the truth than further away; again, I would consult a good attorney (I can refer you to one if you like)...J

Edited October 6, 2006 by japau

[Yodrak 7]

Bill,

I agree - if in doubt, I would answer 'yes'.

As I understand it, it's not a question that leads to approval or denial of the petition, it's a question that leads to ensuring full disclosure, to the beneficiary, of anything that should be disclosed, by the petitioner, under the Act. If there's nothing to disclose, or disclosure has been made, no further issue. If it turns out at the visa interview that full disclosure has not been made, the consular officer is supposed to disclose and what happens next is up to the visa applicant.

If I were facing the issue I would have a consultation with an immigration attorney before submitting my I-129f. Not that attornies have all the answers yet - the dust is still settling - but attornies are in a better position to make educated guesses.

Yodrak

I am so glad someone brought up this question but I am sorry to hear of the RFE. I met my finace on www.flirtbox.com but we ended up using MSN messenger. I have no proof of the website but I am assuming it is safe to say that we met on MSN messenger? Good luck TucsonBill!

If I had it to do over again, just to be on the safe side, I would have answered yes to the IMBRA question....

Again, after visiting here, and knowing what I know now, I would have said 'yes' with a continuation sheet, and then I might not have not gotten the RFE.....

Bill

Edited October 6, 2006 by Yodrak

[Caladan 19]

It should probably be pointed out even if you used a marriage broker, it isn't an automatic denial -- in fact it seems the point of the law is to crack down on corrupt brokers, not people.

FutureMrs, there's no reason to leave out where you met and pretend it was just MSN. My fiancé and I met through the IRC channel attached to an online text game, and while neither of us have even played the game in over a year and we mostly talk on the telephone these days, we don't say that we met on the telephone, y'know? For Q18, I mentioned we met through the game and said that our relationship developed via chat & telephone until we met in person two+ years ago and have continued regular trips to see each other till the present.

Bill, from your original answer to Q18, it sounds as though maybe they wanted specifics: when you met, what chat service, etc, a rough timeline.