Petitioner/Sponsor (USC) has adequate income still CO wants Joint Sponsor

[maiortum 6]

I am a USC who filed for his wife. I am also a naturalized USC having earned it when I served in the United States Air Force during the Vietnam Conflict. The I-130 was approved, AOS accepted by NVC with no RFE as I get a pension of more than $24,000 from the Veterans Administration. I was originally born in India and have lived in US for 44 years. I was 57 when I married my wife and she was 43. We are both protestant Christians. We have substantial documentation of our married life. I made 5 trips to India during 2207-2011 and now I am on my 6th trip. I will not go in to the baderging and abuse heaped on my poor wife with comments like "you are an attractive woman why did you marry this old cripple?" I am disabled and walk with a cane. There was lot more abuse heaped on her, Finally the CO says you need a joint sponsor even though my guaranteed pension is over $24,000 and I-864p guideline calls for 18,912. Makes no sense to us.

[renecherubs 18]

Just my personal opinion.maybe the co is Considering your age and health situation.(if there's any).just making sure there's someone who'll be there for her not just you. They're making sure your wife would not be a public charge.

[trojam227 18]

I am sorry your wife had a hard time at interview...what they said was very unprofessional and I would put in a formal complaint if I were you.

As far as the AOS, was federal tax withheld from your pension checks? Even though figures are entered from tax return (adjusted gross income) I believe you have to meet the guideline with NET income. If you were cutting it close that could be why...?

I know that NVC verifies that you meet bare minimum, but it is ultimately up to the IO if a joint sponsor is needed.

Does your pension stop if something were to happen to you? If so, maybe that was a concern?

Only US immigration knows the factual answer as to why..your job is to figure out who will be your joint sponsor.

I am sure you will work it out somehow...

[maiortum 6]

Thanks for your comments. My pension is 100% US tax exempt. I am not even required to file a tax return but for her sake I did and also provided the tax transcripts. My social security award letter came after I had already filed her I-864 - this adds another $800/mo or so to my income. My wife would continue to get her widow's benefits even if I passed away. What the co did in her case is plain abuse. Yes the American Legion and VFW are mounting a full scale response to this abuse of discretionary authority on a vulnerable woman. Thanks to all for your prayers and blessings. Please write to the US consulate in Mumbai, India to register your outrage. Let not others suffer at their hands.

Just my personal opinion.maybe the co is Considering your age and health situation.(if there's any).just making sure there's someone who'll be there for her not just you. They're making sure your wife would not be a public charge.

Thank you for your concern and analysis. Please read the response later in this post. Salamat.

[trojam227 18]

Thanks for your comments. My pension is 100% US tax exempt. I am not even required to file a tax return but for her sake I did and also provided the tax transcripts. My social security award letter came after I had already filed her I-864 - this adds another $800/mo or so to my income. My wife would continue to get her widow's benefits even if I passed away. What the co did in her case is plain abuse. Yes the American Legion and VFW are mounting a full scale response to this abuse of discretionary authority on a vulnerable woman. Thanks to all for your prayers and blessings. Please write to the US consulate in Mumbai, India to register your outrage. Let not others suffer at their hands.

Thank you for your concern and analysis. Please read the response later in this post. Salamat.

I am glad you are taking steps to have the situation addressed. You shouldn't need a joint sponsor once the SSI starts. You should re-file with the updated income information and proof that your wife will continue to receive widow's benefits, God forbid. (although the govt. should know that, don't assume the IO does. Some pensions end upon death...I know because my mom is collecting off her ex-husband's pension that will stop when he dies).

[maiortum 6]

I am glad you are taking steps to have the situation addressed. You shouldn't need a joint sponsor once the SSI starts. You should re-file with the updated income information and proof that your wife will continue to receive widow's benefits, God forbid. (although the govt. should know that, don't assume the IO does. Some pensions end upon death...I know because my mom is collecting off her ex-husband's pension that will stop when he dies).

Thanks again. Good points.

The nature of prejudice is without rationale and even simple logic. This is an American CO in Mumbai Consulate. One would assume she has proper training to deal with these issues given the fact there are millions of disabled US veterans and more are coming in. I am a phd in US constitutional law and I take great pride in the fact that ours is a nation of laws and not given to government functionaries making ad hoc decisions without proper legislative review. So the CO's position is per se illegal and unsupported. She stated "she believes my wife will need more income?" What is the basis for this comment? In the documentation that I furnished to NVC, I included VA guidelines on what happens to my pension in case of untimely demise. My wife would continue to receive it and of course now the ss will go to her as window's benefits. She is a qualified teacher. Additionally my income of 24,288 without ss is more than 18,912 so we are not talking about a close call. I have a feeling that even if I filed a revised I-864 with income of $33,924, this US consulate in Mumbai will find yet another reason to deny her. Now they will try to justify their previous wrongful conduct.

[Darnell 8,478]

well, they did give her an opportunity to submit more stuff, so that's a plus - the visa isn't denied, the casefile isn't headed back to the USA with a note to deny it back at USCIS.

So, what can you do? Would you like to submit a new I-864 on you, showing the new SSI stuff and other things?

Do you have assets? do you own a home? do you have cash in the bank? stocks? bonds? (no no, don't answer me - just study the I-864 instructions on how to include them, count them)

In the end, if you redo an I-864 to show more things and more money, will it be enough? I pray that it will.

Good luck, however it turns out.

[maiortum 6]

well, they did give her an opportunity to submit more stuff, so that's a plus - the visa isn't denied, the casefile isn't headed back to the USA with a note to deny it back at USCIS.

So, what can you do? Would you like to submit a new I-864 on you, showing the new SSI stuff and other things?

Do you have assets? do you own a home? do you have cash in the bank? stocks? bonds? (no no, don't answer me - just study the I-864 instructions on how to include them, count them)

In the end, if you redo an I-864 to show more things and more money, will it be enough? I pray that it will.

Good luck, however it turns out.

Thanks. Yes you are right. It is not denied yet. I have written to my United States Senator giving full details. That office is working through their Washington DC liasion to ascertain what is the proper course of action. My reason for seeking Congressional oversight is simple: I do not trust Mumbai Consulate given their conduct towards the wife of a disabled United States Veteran. If they say file the revised I-864 and include the Social Security income then I have already got it ready to file. If they say file with a joint sponsor then that is also in the works and would take about a week to get the full package here in Mumbai as I am with my wife here. I had bought a small adequate condo for cash for the reason I did not want her to be without shelter in case of my early demise. Ownership documents showing her as joint owner were furnished to them. The condo dues are only 275 per month and includes water, garbage, outside maintenance and snow removal and insurance for the larger complex. So let us see what new tricks they come up with. I am really pissed because there was no legal basis for issuing the frivolous 221g. Thanks for your goodwill.

[peter.chou 3]

Thanks. Yes you are right. It is not denied yet. I have written to my United States Senator giving full details. That office is working through their Washington DC liasion to ascertain what is the proper course of action. My reason for seeking Congressional oversight is simple: I do not trust Mumbai Consulate given their conduct towards the wife of a disabled United States Veteran. If they say file the revised I-864 and include the Social Security income then I have already got it ready to file. If they say file with a joint sponsor then that is also in the works and would take about a week to get the full package here in Mumbai as I am with my wife here. I had bought a small adequate condo for cash for the reason I did not want her to be without shelter in case of my early demise. Ownership documents showing her as joint owner were furnished to them. The condo dues are only 275 per month and includes water, garbage, outside maintenance and snow removal and insurance for the larger complex. So let us see what new tricks they come up with. I am really pissed because there was no legal basis for issuing the frivolous 221g. Thanks for your goodwill.

I really think petitioner should be allowed to be with beneficiary in interview such that the citizen got a chance directly to address the issues a VO may raise and understand the issues. The USA laws very much different from the laws in other countries, beneficiary may have hard time to understand what VO talking about, VO thus gets execuse making bad judgement.

[pushbrk 12,114]

I am sorry your wife had a hard time at interview...what they said was very unprofessional and I would put in a formal complaint if I were you.

As far as the AOS, was federal tax withheld from your pension checks? Even though figures are entered from tax return (adjusted gross income) I believe you have to meet the guideline with NET income. If you were cutting it close that could be why...?

I know that NVC verifies that you meet bare minimum, but it is ultimately up to the IO if a joint sponsor is needed.

Does your pension stop if something were to happen to you? If so, maybe that was a concern?

Only US immigration knows the factual answer as to why..your job is to figure out who will be your joint sponsor.

I am sure you will work it out somehow...

You meet the requirement with gross income, not net income.

The situation stinks but the Consulate has the last say on the public charge issue, not NVC. If you have a joint sponsor available, just go ahead and submit their affidavit. If not, I would contact the Senior US Senator representing your State, for assistance in this matter. Sounds like they are just making you jump through extra hoops because the doubt the relationship.

[maiortum 6]

d

I really think petitioner should be allowed to be with beneficiary in interview such that the citizen got a chance directly to address the issues a VO may raise and understand the issues. The USA laws very much different from the laws in other countries, beneficiary may have hard time to understand what VO talking about, VO thus gets execuse making bad judgement.

Thank you Mr. Chou. I have studied US laws and earned a PHD. My wife has 17 years experience as a qualified teacher. But comments made to her by the Mumbai Consulate staff on May 17, 2012 (hope the Mumbai Consulate read this site) are patently uncalled for and are abusive. No one has the right to abuse a person in a vulnerable position by saying things like this and I quote "Why did you marry this disabled cripple?" and "your husband's Veteran Pension of $24,000+ is inadequate for your needs?". Further, paying or demanding dowry is against the law in India even though it is widely practised, therefore, the Consular Officer also known as Vice Consul had no right to tell my wife this: "Why are you against paying dowry and you could have married earlier than your 43 years of age?" Come to a United States Federal Court Miss Vice Consul and explain to a United States Federal Judge why you as a employee of the United States State Department working under Mrs. Clinton who is the secretary of the Department of State - you would advocate breaking the laws of a sovereign nation? I assure you Miss Vice Consul you would find yourself unemployed very soon. But at that moment on May 17th, 2012, you were full of your power and you exercised it in the worst possible manner thus making us wonder why are you in this role? This Vice consul also stated to my wife "you know you cannot have children now since you married late? I hope people reading this site are outraged and will write to Mrs. Clinton so she can stop this abuse.

[Boiler 43,438]

I think you may have misunderstood their concern.

From a practical perspective would you not have a more comfortable life style in India?

[pushbrk 12,114]

I think you may have misunderstood their concern.

From a practical perspective would you not have a more comfortable life style in India?

That's one way of putting it. Still, the real concern is the bona fides of the relationship. What might seem crass or abusive (and may well be) are simply tactics to root out fraud. With a full report of the interview including all questions asked and the answers, along with an understanding of the totality of circumstances portrayed on the form and evidence, one might have a better understanding of the concerns.

The significance of Boiler's question goes to the bona fides. The more direct question is, "Why would you marry this man except to obtain an immigration benefit?" It's a legitimate question, in Consular Officer's eyes but decisions are based on the answers, not just the questions. The OP says they asked some why questions but does not indicate the answers given. Answers are the key.

[maiortum 6]

I think you may have misunderstood their concern.

From a practical perspective would you not have a more comfortable life style in India?

I am a disabled United States Veteran who receives no cost vital care at my local VA hospital - so no we did not misunderstand their concern. I have lived in US for 44 years and I receive vital group therapy for my PTSD in USA. I would not have those venues in India. I go through Agent Orange screenings on a regular interval. I have visited India to support my wife. The Consular staff could care less about how much personal tragedy my wife has gone thru with the untimely death of her father and other issues. So there is very little doubt in our minds that this was a case of prejudice and I am sure once the matter is fully aired - many will have to explain their unlawful conduct. Thanks for your concern. Many blessings to all.

[Boiler 43,438]

That's one way of putting it. Still, the real concern is the bona fides of the relationship. What might seem crass or abusive (and may well be) are simply tactics to root out fraud. With a full report of the interview including all questions asked and the answers, along with an understanding of the totality of circumstances portrayed on the form and evidence, one might have a better understanding of the concerns.

The significance of Boiler's question goes to the bona fides. The more direct question is, "Why would you marry this man except to obtain an immigration benefit?" It's a legitimate question, in Consular Officer's eyes but decisions are based on the answers, not just the questions. The OP says they asked some why questions but does not indicate the answers given. Answers are the key.

Questions, no answers, just a mega chip on the shoulder that will get him nowhere.