Met only once , is this a red flag?

[JoBri 545]

Met once in person, and married on that trip. Now my wife is a U.S. Citizen, in the military, and we have a 3 year old son and will be celebrating our 6th anniversary in January! What great, beautiful, life changing things happen from one little visit...

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

My fiance and I met only once and then decided to apply for K1 visa after..please check my timeline below, my concern is how much percentage do applicants for K1 have when they have only met their fiances once yet within the 2 year requirement? Any couples out there that were approved with this kind of situation?

ZERO CONCERN

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Met once in person, and married on that trip. Now my wife is a U.S. Citizen, in the military, and we have a 3 year old son and will be celebrating our 6th anniversary in January! What great, beautiful, life changing things happen from one little visit...

Congrats to the new citizen!

[JoBri 545]

Congrats to the new citizen!

Thank you, Patriot, on her behalf.... (never could get her to get on here other than to ask her to read this or that which I saw posted on here). You know, I always had as the ultimate goal her becoming a US Citizen. I mean, that was so important to me. I wanted to be sure that no matter what happened regarding me in life, such as injury or death or whatever, if she was just a US citizen she would be secure... safe, somehow... But the thing I ended up being most proud of her about was what she accomplished and sacrificed in becoming an American Airman. That meant more to me than citizenship even, I realized.

The whole journey for any of us is quite extraordinary though, and nothing short of being a miracle. And to think this whole unexpected life begins with a simple innocent conversation followed by a huge leap of faith and a simple visit.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

And lucky for her, being in the military is one good shortcut to citizenship! She could actually be naturalized before becoming a LPR!!

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

Meeting just 1 time could draw extra scrutiny re; bona fide relationship. The solve = Build a good evidence of ongoing relationship packet & have it ready for interview.

Other than (some possible) questions proving beneficiary's knowledge of petitioner. & time spent reviewing relationship evidence ...should be no problem.

So load up (evidence) for interview & be prepared.

(after thought - don't cut corners on your paper work so you don't find yourself in the fraud unit)

But seriously - as others have stated - Should be no problem.

[Hank_ 9,173]

(could draw extra scrutiny) Doubt that.

My wife and I only met once before I started the petition.

Zero issue.

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

(could draw extra scrutiny) Doubt that.

My wife and I only met once before I started the petition.

Zero issue.

Not every1 is you Hank. & IMO - not wise to assume every VJs process will mirror yours. Better to give full & fair disclosure than take a chance.

It's easy to say - Zero issue - what if ..after reading your Zero issue...OP gets lax on building relationship evidence. (& then) Walks in without sufficient evidence supporting ongoing relationship. Would it still be a Zero Issue? Newbies now & in the future lean heavy on a visa veteran's advice. Why not do it right the first time than have to do it again? I'm not a fan of RFE...

So let me ask you 2 Q's - Did you provide any evidence of ongoing relationship during your process? & Do you think it is important to be ready for possible scrutiny?

(btw...you noted I used the word - could...right? ...You retyped it so you must have)

Edited August 26, 2013 by Crashed~N2~Me

[Hank_ 9,173]

I'm lazy, I copy/pasted

I seriously do not believe it to be an issue only meeting once before the visa application, and I would venture to bet the majority here on VJ only met their fiancée one time before applying. And none had issues because of having only met in person once.

- someone could do a poll , with choices to click on; Met only once, met more than once.

Oops... two questions.

1) Yup we provided evidence of an ongoing relationship; chat logs, emails, screen shots from Skype.

2) Yup I think its good to be ready for possible scrutiny. (Not sure what you are asking with this one- being that is the goal of the interview)

Edited August 26, 2013 by Hank_

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

I'm lazy, I copy/pasted

I seriously do not believe it to be an issue only meeting once before the visa application, and I would venture to bet the majority here on VJ only met their fiancée one time before applying. And none had issues because of having only met in person once.

- someone could do a poll , with choices to click on; Met only once, met more than once.

Gonna dodge my Q's huh?

I'm not doubting you are serious. I'm taking issue with - inferring meeting only once will unequivocally be "Zero Issue". That = Doo-Doo. Reckless begging for a RFE doo - doo.

Perhaps we need to skin the cat a different way = A 1 time meeting & no other ongoing relationship evidence will increase probability of additional scrutiny & possible fraud unit review & worse case = denial. Multiple trips to PI for the purpose of visiting fiancée decreases potential for increased scrutiny.

Does that phrasing suit you better? Stated differently but = the same.

Your idea = you build the poll.

_______________________________________

ETA: Ah..you edited & answered. I need a moment to review.

Answering #2 - My op = Meeting just 1 time could draw extra scrutiny re; bona fide relationship. The solve = Build a good evidence of ongoing relationship packet & have it ready for interview.

Notice the word - COULD..? Any1 Any1..? (Ferris Buehler)

Edited August 26, 2013 by Crashed~N2~Me

[Hank_ 9,173]

OK... IF you are going attend the interview with ZERO other evidence of an ongoing relationship would in my mind bring a denial. Not sure what point you are trying to reach with that one... heck having met more than once and bring ZERO other evidence to the interview will still lean things toward a denial.

I will still stand fast with only having met once will not be an issue at the interview. The MAJORITY doing the process only meet once in person...

Watch out your cheese is slipping off the cracker...

Edited August 26, 2013 by Hank_

[JoBri 545]

And lucky for her, being in the military is one good shortcut to citizenship! She could actually be naturalized before becoming a LPR!!

Well, there were only 2 things we benefited by in applying for naturalization as a member of the military. One is that the $600 filing fee was waived and the other is that it was expedited once we applied. We were more than eligible to apply on the basis of marriage, since she adjusted status a year and a half ago, but we really needed to save that money since we had the option, and we really wanted it to get put through fast too since she will be leaving with the Air Force for a couple months in mid September. We were glad they could expedite it for her to get it done before her leaving again.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Brijo

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

OK... IF you are going attend the interview with ZERO other evidence of an ongoing relationship would in my mind bring a denial. Not sure what point you are trying to reach with that one... heck having met more than once and bring ZERO other evidence to the interview will still lean things toward a denial.

I will still stand fast with only having met once will not be an issue at the interview. The MAJORITY doing the process only meet once in person...

Watch out your cheese is slipping off the cracker...

You certainly realize you are arguing semantics.

Let me restate with words containing fewer syllables.

1 time meet is fine but 1 time meet MAY cause CO to ask for more stuff as proof you and she are real love. So be sure to bring more proof when she meet CO to prove you and she are real love so all is good and she get visa.

So tell me Hank...am I correct? Answer = Yes. Correct.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Crashed~N2~Me

[Hank_ 9,173]

You certainly realize you are arguing semantics.

Let me restate with words containing fewer syllables.

1 time meet is fine but 1 time meet MAY cause CO to ask for more stuff as proof you and she are real love. So be sure to bring more proof when she meet CO to prove you and she are real love so all is good and she get visa.

So tell me Hank...am I correct? Answer = Yes. Correct.

".. 1 time meet MAY cause CO to ask for more stuff as proof you and she are real love"

Sorry won't answer yes to that, if the applicant brings evidence as listed in the embassy instructions letter, having met only once will NOT cause the CO to ask for more proof over and above. Like said twice before; the MAJORITY doing the K-1 process have only met once... and they get approved without issue. If there is a denial it for sure is NOT because of only having met once in person.

Here is an excerpt from the embassy website regarding K-1 denials, you will notice only meeting once is not listed or even hinted at:

What are the main reasons a K-1 visa is denied? (copy/past typos are not mine for the picky-wits)

K-1 applications are subject to the same review standards as immigrant visa applications. The main reasons for visa refusal are: lacking documentation; need to review or verify evidence of the relationship; lack of a petitionable relationship; misrepresentation of the facts; medical concerns; criminal grounds and potential public charge.

A common basis for refusal is a prior marriage for the beneficiary or the petitioner that has not been legally terminated. There is no divorce in the Philippines. A consular officer will only accept a death certificate or a court ruling of annulment or of presumptive death as evidence that a Filipino marriage has been terminated. A U.S. citizen may terminate a Filipino marriage through a U.S. divorce.

[Matt & Bing 56]

I would agree with the "zero issue" sentiment. Although I did attend my then fiancees interview, they did not ask for ANY proof of an ongoing relationship (only one prior in person meeting). Of course we had a lot with us and everyone should, but one meeting in itself is not an issue and doesn't mean more scrutiny.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Matt & Bing