Question on IMBRA

[Bobalouie 0]

I joined an IMB that is located completely offshore. It is owned/operated/located in Russia. When I joined (post IMBRA), I did not have to give any background info in order to contact the ladies, and I have even met them in person in Russia. Like I said, never gave any background stuff. Now, I have nothing to hide, so I dont mind doing it, but my questions are:

What difficulty is this going to cause me if I decide to do a K1 with one of these ladies?

When you look at a lot of the "IMBRA Compliant" IMBs out there, they usually have an electronic form that you fill out. How is any of this information accurate? Someone could easily lie on that form, and it would not get caught until the interview. How is this even accomplishing anything?

Should I go out and get a police report / do a sex offender search on myself and take it with me if I were to propose to one of them and then back date it to before we started corresponding or would creating my own form like the ones the "compliant" IMBs use suffice?

Does any of this even matter to the consular officers considering the IMB entity is entirely foriegn based? They would have all that info supplied on the I-129F and would thus know that it is not a US entity.

Am I worrying about this too much?

Thanks for the info fellas (and ladies)

[Turboguy 6]

There is no pat answer for your question. The way the IMBRA laws are being enforced now you don't need to worry about it. Your thought of having the background check at this stage is very resourceful but it would still not bring you into compliance with IMBRA if they do start enforcing things. I would just go do your thing and not worrry. If they ever do start enforcing it I think all they will really accomplish is motivating a lot of people to commit visa fraud and lie about how them met.

[Danno 1,228]

I would worry about it, I just went through the same struggle.

With all these court casses confirming the new law, who knows if they might start denying visas?

On your first question, the agencies which facilitate you with an IMBA elect. form run your info though a data base so lying will not help.

If you give complete false info (name)... how will you prove you complied when it is time to file your K-1?

Everyone advised me to "Be honest" and I think so far that has worked for many people but since this is a new law and how it is implimented could change at any moment, I only advise you to think about it carefully, keep reading the boards here to see if there has been any change in who gets rejected.

[Turboguy 6]

If they ever get strict in the inforcment of that part of IMBRA I don't think the electronic forms are going to hold water. As I remember the wording of the law it is necessary to submit a full criminal backgroud check for everywhere you have lived since age 18 or something like that just like the beneficiary. Just stating you have no record will not hold up if they ever decide to press the issue.

Edited May 27, 2007 by Turboguy

[Bobalouie 0]

On your first question, the agencies which facilitate you with an IMBA elect. form run your info though a data base so lying will not help.

If you give complete false info (name)... how will you prove you complied when it is time to file your K-1?

Apparently you missed the part above where I said I have nothing to hide and dont mind doing it. I am not talking about trying to skirt the system or fly in under the radar here. I am talking about the fact that I joined an IMB (as defined by IMBRA) had communications with ladies and met them without ever submitting one piece of background info. The ladies never signed any "permission slip" for me to contact them. Not because I was trying to avoid it...niether I nor the ladies were ever asked to do it.

If IMBs are running a check based on the info you put in the electronic form, it is only a National sex offender check. That is free. Any other background information that they would need to substantiate what you put on the elec. form would come at a price of at least $30 a pop for every state you have lived in since the age of 13. If you are like me, and have lived in 10 states and 1 different country, that adds up to a lot of dough and I dont see prices going up enough to cover this.

I want to be as compliant with the law as I possibly can be. Which is why I asked about the post dated "permission slip" and supplying the ladies I am communicating with with a pseudo form that I make up myself (with truthful information contained therein), patterned after the questions that are asked on the big IMBs elec. form and give that to them. Then, I would be as compliant as any person who went thru a big IMB, I would have just done it in the later stages. I would have given the ladies the same opportunity to bail out if they saw fit, I just gave them the information to make that decision after we met, instead of before we even wrote to each other.

Edited May 27, 2007 by Bobalouie

[Turboguy 6]

My 2 cents worth are that it is a nice attempt to be as compliant as possible but if they ever decide to get really strict on IMBRA it won't cut it. I don't really think there is a lot you can do on your own to be totally compliant. It is supposed to be done by the agency before you say hello. After all every American male is a sleeze bag, abusive rapist.

[Bobalouie 0]

My 2 cents worth are that it is a nice attempt to be as compliant as possible but if they ever decide to get really strict on IMBRA it won't cut it. I don't really think there is a lot you can do on your own to be totally compliant. It is supposed to be done by the agency before you say hello. After all every American male is a sleeze bag, abusive rapist.

I agree with you Turbo that in it strictest sense as written, no one will be completely compliant, at least not yet. I just want to cover as many bases as I can. None of the info will be presented to the CO's unless they ask for it specifically. It would just be added to the information the lady would take with her to the interview, just in case. Since others who have commented here and on other boards are saying that the CO's are not even asking about it yet, it probably will not be a problem. But, better safe than sorry.

And a correction in my above post, I said any state you have lived in since 13, I meant 18!

Edited May 28, 2007 by Bobalouie

[Danno 1,228]

'Bobalouie'

There are a lot of guys in your same boat, myself included.

This is just a thought but perhaps the burden is on us the American, to know the law concerning Marriage brokers and to only use a business which complies.

For you or me to claim it is not our fault..... because they never asked for a background check, might be akin to using a shoddy (or is that shotty) tax advisor and then acting like we are not responsible that the taxes were not paid.

=================

At this point I don't see them going "big guns" on enforcement, has anyone heard of anyone any where having been rejected yet on these grounds? Has anyone even heard of an agency punished yet>?

Part of me says they will tighten the noose slowly and then part of me say.... ######, these People processing this BS are so busy, at best looking for obvious cases.

The only part that does seem to be in full effect is the Part Turbo-guy is tangled up in.

[Bobalouie 0]

This is just a thought but perhaps the burden is on us the American, to know the law concerning Marriage brokers and to only use a business which complies.

For you or me to claim it is not our fault..... because they never asked for a background check, might be akin to using a shoddy (or is that shotty) tax advisor and then acting like we are not responsible that the taxes were not paid.

I dont think I agree with the first statement here, I find no fault in your logic here, but the US gov't does not have the right or the ability to dictate to a foreign business what they can or cant do, or how to do it. I realize that I should know the law, and take steps to conform, but I started contacting ladies right after the law went into effect, and as such, I was not very well informed on it, so I am sure they were not either. Of course, the government does not like excuses, so this probably does not hold water.

I 100% agree with your second statement here, which is why I am trying to come up with a reasonable work around to avoid any hassles. My thinking is that if I at least show a little bit of due dilligence, even if it is after the fact, that will score more points with the governement than if I had not done it at all. Of course, this probably wont matter either because the gov't is a bit inflexible when it comes to thier "way" of doing things.

Thanks for the input!