K1 Confusion

[Meadows2301 0]

Hello,

 

So I am not sure I know what the correct answer is.

 

Fiancee' had a visa denial in the past with a 214b after her trying to renew her tourist visa.

 

She had a one time entry visa that said one week. However her stamp said she can stay 6 months. 

 

She got ill and stayed a little longer (6-7weeks), and remembered the customs agent told her she can stay 6 months. So she didn't think it would be a big deal. (stupid we know)

 

She explained it but the C/Officer but the lady got really mad and said she had lied originally because she said one week but stayed longer. She explained that she was ill, and had documents but she didn't bother to even look. She didn't lie! But the C/O seemed to type away regardless.

 

My question is, does this really affect the  K1 now? She only had one rejection and hasn't applied again since. Only came to the US once to see Disney.

 

Worried as I keep reading conflicting things. 

 

Thank you.

 

 

[geowrian 22,335]

The 214b refusal won't impact a K-1 visa.

The I-94 stamp dictates her period of stay, not the visa validity period. As long as she didn't overstay that, there's no unlawful presence and therefore no bar. But yeah, the CO thinking it was abused pretty much makes getting a new tourist visa anytime soon virtually impossible.

 

If they feel she actually lied and that lie was material, they could impose a permanent (but waivable) bar for willing material misrepresentation. That said, I really don't think this is likely...the CO was probably just upset that she didn't stay as long as she originally stated.

 

Question...if she was so ill that she needed to spend an extra 6-7 weeks, how did she obtain medical care? Was it all paid out of pocket?

Edited January 29, 2019 by geowrian

[Just Paul 4,591]

The 214b won't effect the K1.  You do need to disclose it on the forms. 

[Meadows2301 0]

4 minutes ago, geowrian said:

The 214b refusal won't impact a K-1 visa.

The I-94 stamp dictates her period of stay, not the visa validity period. As long as she didn't overstay that, there's no unlawful presence and therefore no bar. But yeah, the CO thinking it was abused pretty much makes getting a new tourist visa anytime soon virtually impossible.

 

If they feel she actually lied and that lie was material, they could impose a permanent (but waivable) bar for willing material misrepresentation. That said, I really don't think this is likely...the CO was probably just upset that she didn't stay as long as she originally stated.

 

Question...if she was so ill that she needed to spend an extra 6-7 weeks, how did she obtain medical care? Was it all paid out of pocket?

 

It was a combination of being ill and finding an affordable last minute ticket back home. She had travel health insurance. Plus she didn't see the hurry as she thought the customs agent gave her longer. (again she didn't know, but definitely didn't lie)

 

Quoting you here - "If they feel she actually lied and that lie was material, they could impose a permanent (but waivable) bar for willing material misrepresentation. That said, I really don't think this is likely...the CO was probably just upset that she didn't stay as long as she originally stated."

 

How can you find out if they imposed that? Doesn't the 214b show they didn't do that? Or is it something only seen on their side?

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Frank19869

[Meadows2301 0]

3 minutes ago, Paul & Mary said:

The 214b won't effect the K1.  You do need to disclose it on the forms. 

Will do, but was just worried about her (CO ) calling her liar. As I am sure she probably wrote something in her file. It's crazy she refused to even look at her medical paperwork. 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Frank19869

[Lil bear 3,831]

2 minutes ago, Frank19869 said:

 

It was a combination of being ill and finding an affordable last minute ticket back home. She had travel health insurance. Plus she didn't see the hurry as she thought the customs agent gave her longer. (again she didn't know, but definitely didn't lie)

 

Quoting you here - "If they feel she actually lied and that lie was material, they could impose a permanent (but waivable) bar for willing material misrepresentation. That said, I really don't think this is likely...the CO was probably just upset that she didn't stay as long as she originally stated."

 

How can you find out if they imposed that? Doesn't the 214b show they didn't do that? Or is it something only seen on their side?

 

Only seen on their side 

apply... declaring the denial etc and see what happens. As said a waiver can be applied for, but only after the visa processing has indicated it is needed 

[geowrian 22,335]

1 minute ago, Frank19869 said:

It was a combination of being ill and finding an affordable last minute ticket back home. She had travel health insurance. Plus she didn't see the hurry as she thought the customs agent gave her longer. (again she didn't know, but definitely didn't lie)

As long as no public funds were used and she paid her bills, then that's not an issue. I just wanted to confirm those because either of those could be an issue.

 

1 minute ago, Frank19869 said:

How can you find out if they imposed that? Doesn't the 214b show they didn't do that? Or is it something only seen on their side?

No way to really know unless they told her, or until after otherwise being deemed eligible for another visa (i.e. a K-1 visa). At that point they would formally inform her of the inadmissibility.

The 214b refusal wouldn't show anything - she wasn't deemed eligible for the visa so they didn't need to make any such determination.

[Meadows2301 0]

3 minutes ago, geowrian said:

As long as no public funds were used and she paid her bills, then that's not an issue. I just wanted to confirm those because either of those could be an issue.

 

No way to really know unless they told her, or until after otherwise being deemed eligible for another visa (i.e. a K-1 visa). At that point they would formally inform her of the inadmissibility.

The 214b refusal wouldn't show anything - she wasn't deemed eligible for the visa so they didn't need to make any such determination.

My fiancee' does remember the CO saying that she didn't break the rules but claims she lied to them about the length of her first visit. She seemed very offended and angry. There was no interview, she already decided it was rejected as she walked up to the CO. "I can't give you the visa." 

 

 

No public funds were used. All bills paid.

 

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Frank19869

[Meadows2301 0]

Would the waiver work with the K1 or CR1?

[geowrian 22,335]

Just now, Frank19869 said:

Would the waiver work with the K1 or CR1?

The I-601 applies to either.

[Meadows2301 0]

16 minutes ago, geowrian said:

The I-601 applies to either.

This might be a stupid question, but should i submit the I-601 with the K1 packet or wait until they ask for one? Just want to save as much time as possible as it may take a year.

 

Thank you

[geowrian 22,335]

7 minutes ago, Frank19869 said:

This might be a stupid question, but should i submit the I-601 with the K1 packet or wait until they ask for one? Just want to save as much time as possible as it may take a year.

 

Thank you

The I-601 can only be submitted after the visa is refused due to an inadmissibility. There's no way to send it beforehand (and have it do anything other than burn a whole in your pocket).

Edited January 29, 2019 by geowrian

[carmel34 3,530]

1 hour ago, Frank19869 said:

It was a combination of being ill and finding an affordable last minute ticket back home. She had travel health insurance. Plus she didn't see the hurry as she thought the customs agent gave her longer. (again she didn't know, but definitely didn't lie)

 

Quoting you here - "If they feel she actually lied and that lie was material, they could impose a permanent (but waivable) bar for willing material misrepresentation. That said, I really don't think this is likely...the CO was probably just upset that she didn't stay as long as she originally stated."

Sorry to be blunt, but she flat out lied.  She entered and said she would stay only one week, then she stayed six or seven weeks?  That's lying about her intent, it sounds like misrepresentation to me--saying one thing, then doing another is misrepresentation.  Why would she say one week and then stay six or seven?  You admitted that she stayed to "find an affordable last minute ticket back home," it was not just "being ill."  Obviously the CO did not buy her story.  It sounds shady to me from what you have posted.  All of her lying is on record.  How long did she actually stay?  What hospital documents did she submit to prove that she was seriously ill and could not travel?  Fishy story here... 

[Meadows2301 0]

10 minutes ago, carmel34 said:

Sorry to be blunt, but she flat out lied.  She entered and said she would stay only one week, then she stayed six or seven weeks?  That's lying about her intent, it sounds like misrepresentation to me--saying one thing, then doing another is misrepresentation.  Why would she say one week and then stay six or seven?  You admitted that she stayed to "find an affordable last minute ticket back home," it was not just "being ill."  Obviously the CO did not buy her story.  It sounds shady to me from what you have posted.  All of her lying is on record.  How long did she actually stay?  What hospital documents did she submit to prove that she was seriously ill and could not travel?  Fishy story here... 

 

She did not lie, nor did the CO person even bother to look at her documents. Her ticket and intent was to stay a week, and when she arrived the border agent told her, "hey, you can stay longer if you want." She was surprised by this, but still planned to leave after a week.

 

Then she got ill, the doctor told her to take it easy (she does have a legitimate medical condition that does cause her times to be dizzy). The only reason I mentioned the ticket thing is because she really thought it wouldn't be a big deal. As she had already stayed longer than a week and thought that her medical reason would give her a little flexibility as she was not feeling well. She really did not intend to stay longer, but the ticket sales (in the summer) were really higher than expected.

 

It's one thing for the CO to deny it after looking the docs, but another to not even look. 

 

(for the record, she would've said that she would stay longer if it was her intent and got her visa regardless, she has a rich travel history - also she never mentioned the ticket part to the CO. Just that she was ill)

Edited January 29, 2019 by Frank19869

[Boiler 43,432]

Not sure about the Misrep but she had a one off visa and with what happened unlikely to be trusted again.