Do they want to know exactly how you met on facebook?

[baron555 934]

Like, whether it was through a mutual friend, or a random add, or are we right to just say met on facebook?

We met online through an online agency. Tell the truth.

[Cardinal6669 10]

We met online through an online agency. Tell the truth.

What?

[baron555 934]

What?

You met through Facebook...don't contrive a different story. Lots of folks meet online these days.

[Pheebs1201 269]

I don't anyone was implying that a different story should be contrived, the question is in relation to how much detail should be provided.

[baron555 934]

I don't anyone was implying that a different story should be contrived, the question is in relation to how much detail should be provided.

For the 129f form, the size of the box is indicative of the length of the statement of how you met in person within the last two years.

Two sentences should do it.

There is NO need to mention the relationship, that's for the interview.....that being said much of the evidence of the meeting in person will also be useable for the relationship evidence.

[Cardinal6669 10]

Yeah I was just wondering how much detail in the interview.

I wasn't going to contrive a different story.

& I was only worried because that other thread they were asking about mutual friends, which we had none when I added her.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Cardinal6669

[Pheebs1201 269]

For the 129f form, the size of the box is indicative of the length of the statement of how you met in person within the last two years.

Two sentences should do it.

There is NO need to mention the relationship, that's for the interview.....that being said much of the evidence of the meeting in person will also be useable for the relationship evidence.

But I think the OP simply wanted to know if "met on facebook" was sufficient or if they should explain further and say "met on facebook, we had no mutual friends but I was searching for someone with a similar name and she popped up. I added her because she was cute"

I wasn't implying details of the relationship needed to be provided, I was simply suggesting the longer version may be more helpful.

[baron555 934]

But I think the OP simply wanted to know if "met on facebook" was sufficient or if they should explain further and say "met on facebook, we had no mutual friends but I was searching for someone with a similar name and she popped up. I added her because she was cute"

I wasn't implying details of the relationship needed to be provided, I was simply suggesting the longer version may be more helpful.

OK, but met on Facebook does not satisfy the met in person requirement part of the 129f.

They can say "We met on Facebook and then met in person from date to date in City, Country."

[Pheebs1201 269]

OK, but met on Facebook does not satisfy the met in person requirement part of the 129f.

They can say "We met on Facebook and then met in person from date to date in City, Country."

Sounds like good advice to me

[YouAndMeForever 1,022]

Read "interview from hell" they wanted SPECIFICS!

True, but don't forget that the "interview from hell" happened at a high fraud country (Pakistan) and the couple had multiple red flags:

1. huge cultural differences

2. huge age difference (30 years)

3. USC sending money to beneficiary on a regular basis

4. having met through a mutual friend

5. beneficiary not wanting to speak English at first

6. beneficiary not knowing the person's full name she is gonna stay with until they get married

The OP's case is totally different, the beneficiary is from a low fraud VWP country (Australia) and I'm very sure they don't have red flags like that.

[Cardinal6669 10]

OK, but met on Facebook does not satisfy the met in person requirement part of the 129f.

They can say "We met on Facebook and then met in person from date to date in City, Country."

I already wrote that on the petition lol

We're past that stage.

[Cardinal6669 10]

True, but don't forget that the "interview from hell" happened at a high fraud country (Pakistan) and the couple had multiple red flags:

1. huge cultural differences

2. huge age difference (30 years)

3. USC sending money to beneficiary on a regular basis

4. having met through a mutual friend

5. beneficiary not wanting to speak English at first

6. beneficiary not knowing the person's full name she is gonna stay with until they get married

The OP's case is totally different, the beneficiary is from a low fraud VWP country (Australia) and I'm very sure they don't have red flags like that.

Nope

We met on facebook, fell in love, 5 months later I flew over and met her (I am the beneficiary), it was the best 3 months of our lives, I proposed to her while I was there, she accepted, I left, been waiting since, she is scheduled to fly over here and see me and meet my family in January, interview should be around that time, maybe feb, or march at latest.

[YouAndMeForever 1,022]

Nope

We met on facebook, fell in love, 5 months later I flew over and met her (I am the beneficiary), it was the best 3 months of our lives, I proposed to her while I was there, she accepted, I left, been waiting since, she is scheduled to fly over here and see me and meet my family in January, interview should be around that time, maybe feb, or march at latest.

That's great! I don't know why he compared your case with a totally different one in a hight fraud consulate with extreme red flags.

[HafsaJawwad 39]

So it's okay if I say it was a random add if they ask?

I was actually searching for a friend with a similar name, she popped up in the search results and I added her because she was cute.

that's actually really cute story lol

[d3adc0d3 186]

I think you'll be fine, the interview from hell, as was stated was done with a couple who had a lot of red flags in a high fraud country. You're in OZ, things will be much easier. I met my husband online (K1 success here) and I didn't provide a ton of detail. He's from AR, and they're a low fraud country... we had no issues.