Will we need a waiver?

[garyandkris 0]

Delco, I really could have used those links last night--couldn't get to sleep to save my life. This morning I awoke with a horrid sore throat and a water softener with a burst pipe. This day can't get worse, can it?

Kitkat, I had that link bookmarked from some preliminary searching I did into this subject weeks ago. I'd forgotten about it, though, so thanks for the reminder. I decided to have an email consultation with Laurel Scott because I am horrible on the phone. Er, I'm probably not that much better in emails. I included a link to this thread, so everybody say "hi" to Ms Scott in case she stops by to read it. I don't expect to hear from her until after the 14th, though, as she goes on vacation to Disney World tomorrow. (Take me with you, please! )

Zyygy, I didn't realise that it was the maximum US sentence. I've asked about that in my email. I think his offence would be considered misdemeanor vandalism in the States, but who knows.

Thanks again for your help, everyone. I'll post updates when I hear something or feel like rattling on again.

[garyandkris 0]

I heard back from Laurel Scott within half an hour of sending her an email. She gave me permission to post what she told me (I have omitted a few personal details).

Its always about the maximum possible sentence under the law of the country where the crime was committed, not the maximum sentence in the US. But regardless of what the statute says the maximum possible sentence is for that conviction, if he was tried in Magistrates Court, the maximum possible sentence is six months for ANY offense. In Britain you can only get the maximum possible sentence under the statute if you are tried in Crown Court. As his maximum possible sentence was six months, he qualifies for the petty offense exception in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Your husband should not need a waiver. In the past I have been hired to write DS-230 amendments along these lines. Effectively it would be a two-page brief arguing that your husband is not inadmissible, citing the law to prove what I just stated above

.

Because I am a paranoid lunatic, I'm fairly certain at this point that I will ask her to prepare a DS-230 amendment. I know that having one prepared is no guarantee of an approval, but it would give me peace of mind.

I like the fact that she didn't write something like, "OMG!!! U absolutely MUST GET A DS-230!!! And pay me like a brazillian dollars to have it done!!" That is how you lawyers talk usually, isn't it?

[garyandkris 0]

I'm updating this old thread because my husband's interview was today. I hate it when people don't come back and report what the outcome was, because I think it helps the people who come after you.

Gary was approved! His interview took about five minutes. The ConOff looked at his police report and asked him about the two incidents. He doesn't think she more than glanced at the court record for his conviction/fine, a letter we'd gotten from the Freedom of Information records office concerning the circumstances of his caution, or the addendum Laurel Scott had prepared for us.

It still hasn't sunk it yet that he doesn't need a waiver. I'm in denial over an approval.

[kitkat1 5]

I'm updating this old thread because my husband's interview was today. I hate it when people don't come back and report what the outcome was, because I think it helps the people who come after you.

Gary was approved! His interview took about five minutes. The ConOff looked at his police report and asked him about the two incidents. He doesn't think she more than glanced at the court record for his conviction/fine, a letter we'd gotten from the Freedom of Information records office concerning the circumstances of his caution, or the addendum Laurel Scott had prepared for us.

It still hasn't sunk it yet that he doesn't need a waiver. I'm in denial over an approval.

WOW - HUGE CONGRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ambientgirl 0]

Congrats to both of you!

Thank you for taking the time to let us know.

Edited April 30, 2007 by ambientgirl

[garyandkris 0]

Thanks, guys. It's finally sunk in now, and I'm feeling excited and happy for the first time in a while. I won't relax completely until he actually steps foot on US soil, though, because I'm insane.

Kitkat, I hate that you have another six months wait on your hands. Our process from start to finish only took a little longer than that. It seemed like ages at the time, but it was a drop in the bucket compared to what so many other VJers have to go through. I know that my husband and I are very lucky. I can only wish everyone going through the waiver process the best of luck, and I hope you are all reunited with your loved ones as soon as possible.

[NealandCari 0]

I am still a little confused about this waiver stuff. My fiance also has an incident on his record involving damage to private property. He wasn't fully charged, only cautioned, and he never had to pay a fine. And this was almost 5 years ago. Should we do the waiver or will the police record and an explanation be enough?

[rebeccajo 14]

Congratulations, kris! Thanks for coming back and filling us in. I hadn't seen your original posts at all and the discussion was enlightening!

[TracyTN 237]

I am still a little confused about this waiver stuff. My fiance also has an incident on his record involving damage to private property. He wasn't fully charged, only cautioned, and he never had to pay a fine. And this was almost 5 years ago. Should we do the waiver or will the police record and an explanation be enough?

There's no way to 'do' a waiver - unless you mean prepare the waiver documents in advance?

[garyandkris 0]

I am still a little confused about this waiver stuff. My fiance also has an incident on his record involving damage to private property. He wasn't fully charged, only cautioned, and he never had to pay a fine. And this was almost 5 years ago. Should we do the waiver or will the police record and an explanation be enough?

As Tracy said, you don't really "do" a waiver; they inform you if you need one at the interview. Some people who are certain they'll be found ineligible and be required to file a waiver have one prepared before their interviews. This is so they don't waste any time filing, as waivers can take a long time to process.

Is your fiance the one who accidentally fell onto a window, breaking it? I can't give you a guarantee, but I'll tell you it's extremely unlikely that he'll be found ineligible during his interview and be required to file a waiver. Your fiance wasn't even convicted or fined/sentenced, as Gary was, and he didn't need a waiver.

The police record and your husband's explanation will be enough to satisfy the CO. If you want, you can try to track down the Evidence and Actions Book (EAB) which should give a few more details about the offense, but it's really not necessary.

[Caladan 19]

Congrats! And really, thanks for reporting back with the update!

[NealandCari 0]

Yeah, I didn't think it would be necessary since it was damage to private property and thus exempt from being a CIMT. I think I am just finding things to worry about while waiting. Not a good thing for sure.

[together2love 0]

Congrats on this. Enjoy your life together in the USA now!!

[Bobbie 1]

I'm updating this old thread because my husband's interview was today. I hate it when people don't come back and report what the outcome was, because I think it helps the people who come after you.

Gary was approved! His interview took about five minutes. The ConOff looked at his police report and asked him about the two incidents. He doesn't think she more than glanced at the court record for his conviction/fine, a letter we'd gotten from the Freedom of Information records office concerning the circumstances of his caution, or the addendum Laurel Scott had prepared for us.

It still hasn't sunk it yet that he doesn't need a waiver. I'm in denial over an approval.

:dance: Big Congrats@@@