CR-1/IR-1 Refused under section 212(a)(4)

[damola_onaf1 0]

39 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

Maybe she could live in and you could support her in Nigeria

She dose not want to live in Nigeria or leave her job, we have talk about that before the petition.

[Crazy Cat 39,193]

5 hours ago, pushbrk said:

They aren't really looking at how likely it is they can COLLECT from the sponsor, but how likely it is there will ever be a need to.

Which, in my mind, means the primary Sponsor financial documents are more important than some people think......

[Nitas_man 3,100]

5 hours ago, damola_onaf1 said:

She dose not want to live in Nigeria or leave her job, we have talk about that before the petition.

They are cracking down on support requirements is seems.  It is not as easy as it used to be.  

 

So her children needed to be sponsored from where?  Also Nigeria?  Are they children from a previous marriage?  Why were they not USC’s?

 

I am trying to understand what they are seeing that made them deny on this basis.

 

Did you, her, and children intend to have or use health insurance?  Did her taxes show that their insurance premiums are being supplemented by the government?

[Karim2018 99]

11 hours ago, pushbrk said:

a good reason to be willing to act as sponsor

Can you cite examples of good reasons "to be willing to act as sponsor"?! To me, sponsoring someone is a responsibility and binding contract, so as long as a sponsor acknowledges that is is fully aware of the consequences, he/she doesn't have to have a "good reason" to sponsor someone. He may only be a friend trying to help the couple start their life together. OR He/she could say I like the color of you hair lol and I want to sponsor you. If I have the means and will to do so, why would anyone care?! I don't get it! If the immigrant ever becomes a public charge, they can go after the sponsor. Simple! If the sponsor is fine with that...what's the issue?! I'm fairly new to visas and immigration so maybe I'm oversimplifying the process, but it really shouldn't be that complicated or subjective.

Edited August 31, 2019 by Karim2018

[geowrian 22,335]

25 minutes ago, Karim2018 said:

Can you cite examples of good reasons "to be willing to act as sponsor"?! To me, sponsoring someone is a responsibility and binding contract, so as long as a sponsor acknowledges that is is fully aware of the consequences, he/she doesn't have to have a "good reason" to sponsor someone. He may only be a friend trying to help the couple start their life together. OR He/she could say I like the color of you hair lol and I want to sponsor you. If I have the means and will to do so, why would anyone care?! I don't get it! If the immigrant ever becomes a public charge, they can go after the sponsor. Simple! If the sponsor is fine with that...what's the issue?! I'm fairly new to visas and immigration so maybe I'm oversimplifying the process, but it really shouldn't be that complicated or subjective.

A spouse is great as a sponsor as they have a reason to support the individual so they never become a public charge. Even in divorce, spousal support and such can come into play as a means to avoid the individual becoming a public charge in the first place.

A close family member of the applicant is also pretty good as - presumably - the family member will not just abandon the individual and has a reason to want to support them before they become a public charge.

A random stranger that says "I like your hair - I'll sponsor you" has no compelling reason to actually support the applicant so they never become a public charge in the first place.

 

Enforcement of the I-864 is not "simple" - it's really a potential long and painful process go through the courts to sue for enforcement. Where you live also will come into play during enforcement.

Either way, the law as written now requires the CO to base their decision on the if the applicant is likely to become a public charge in the first place, not on their ability to sue under the I-864 or the government's ability to collect.

 

What "should" be the case has no role here. That's a separate issue from what "is".

Edited August 31, 2019 by geowrian

[Karim2018 99]

5 minutes ago, geowrian said:

A random stranger that says "I like your hair - I'll sponsor you" has no compelling reason to actually support the applicant so they never become a public charge in the first place.

Thank you for the explanation. To me, compelling or not, if you sign a contract, you better be ready to fulfill it. That said, I agree that isn't always easy to enforce such things. Again thank you for your clarifications and examples.

[Hank_ 9,171]

On 8/30/2019 at 6:44 AM, damola_onaf1 said:

No she sponsor 2 people already, and they are currently in the process to naturalize. 

Once they are naturalized they are off the list.   Drag feet a litte and submit new support evidence .. if the embassy has not returned the case file to USCIS.

[AliSab 0]

Hi Guys i have a quick question. My NVC account showing paid and now i have to upload tax docs. I filed extension on my 2018 Tax. Can i upload tax return of 2015,2016,2017? or do i need to file 2018? 

[pushbrk 12,094]

4 hours ago, Karim2018 said:

Can you cite examples of good reasons "to be willing to act as sponsor"?! To me, sponsoring someone is a responsibility and binding contract, so as long as a sponsor acknowledges that is is fully aware of the consequences, he/she doesn't have to have a "good reason" to sponsor someone. He may only be a friend trying to help the couple start their life together. OR He/she could say I like the color of you hair lol and I want to sponsor you. If I have the means and will to do so, why would anyone care?! I don't get it! If the immigrant ever becomes a public charge, they can go after the sponsor. Simple! If the sponsor is fine with that...what's the issue?! I'm fairly new to visas and immigration so maybe I'm oversimplifying the process, but it really shouldn't be that complicated or subjective.

I can understand why you would think, feel, or wish "it really shouldn't be that complicated or subjective".  It is what it is though.  For a spouse sponsoring a spouse, there's a clear reason to believe the petitioner/sponsor is highly motivated to actually support their spouse.  Unless a joint sponsor is a close family member, or very close friend, the motivation to actually provide support is far less.  Consular Officers are making a judgment call on how likely it is the immigrant will become a public charge, not how likely it is the government will be able to collect from the joint sponsor.  Totality of circumstances can include lots of things, and does.

Anybody can argue what should and should not be, but that gets us nowhere.  It does not "help" the person wanting to understand what to do next.

[JC&BS 75]

22 hours ago, Nitas_man said:

DOS made adjustments in their manuals last year

 

Interesting. So what is the public confusion and/or outrage concerning oct 15 about?

[geowrian 22,335]

2 hours ago, JC&BS said:

Interesting. So what is the public confusion and/or outrage concerning oct 15 about?

The new rule applies to USCIS, which covers AOS, EOS, COS, and some other types of cases with a public charge consideration.

The adjustments DOS made are separate (but they may or may not adopt the same provisions of the new rule as well).

Edited September 1, 2019 by geowrian

[pushbrk 12,094]

34 minutes ago, geowrian said:

The new rule applies to USCIS, which covers AOS, EOS, COS, and some other types of cases with a public charge consideration.

The adjustments DOS made are separate (but they may or may not adopt the same provisions of the new rule as well).

What are the specific "provisions" people are so concerned about?

 

[geowrian 22,335]

17 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

What are the specific "provisions" people are so concerned about?

I can't speak for everybody as to what they're concerned about, but some items I've seen mentioned by several members in the megathread are below:

• Expansion of programs that are considered to make somebody a public charge, including use of certain housing/food/healthcare programs that were not considered previously.
• I-944 being necessary (disclosure of all sorts of information, including various debts, health insurance, etc.). Draft version here (final form not yet released): http://lallegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/I944-FRM-PubCharge-60Day-09262018.pdf
• Use of credit scores of applicants as a factor.
• Certain factors being considered a "heavily negative" factor, although it also establishes a "heavily positive" factor if the income is 250% of the FPL for the household size.
• Additional guidance on the education and skills of the applicant, such as their English proficiency

Edited September 1, 2019 by geowrian

[damola_onaf1 0]

23 hours ago, Paul & Mary said:

Prepare for the NOIR by finding a better qualified joint sponsor.

Okay.. And i also want to ask if i still do need a joint sponsor when the 2 children becomes citizen next month and it will be just both of us left to support each other???

4 hours ago, geowrian said:

I can't speak for everybody as to what they're concerned about, but some items I've seen mentioned by several members in the megathread are below:

• Expansion of programs that are considered to make somebody a public charge, including use of certain housing/food/healthcare programs that were not considered previously.
• I-944 being necessary (disclosure of all sorts of information, including various debts, health insurance, etc.). Draft version here (final form not yet released): http://lallegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/I944-FRM-PubCharge-60Day-09262018.pdf
• Use of credit scores of applicants as a factor.
• Certain factors being considered a "heavily negative" factor, although it also establishes a "heavily positive" factor if the income is 250% of the FPL for the household size.
• Additional guidance on the education and skills of the applicant, such as their English proficiency

Okay.. And i also want to ask if i still do need a joint sponsor when the 2 children becomes citizen next month and it will be just both of us left to support each other???

[damola_onaf1 0]

9 hours ago, pushbrk said:

I can understand why you would think, feel, or wish "it really shouldn't be that complicated or subjective".  It is what it is though.  For a spouse sponsoring a spouse, there's a clear reason to believe the petitioner/sponsor is highly motivated to actually support their spouse.  Unless a joint sponsor is a close family member, or very close friend, the motivation to actually provide support is far less.  Consular Officers are making a judgment call on how likely it is the immigrant will become a public charge, not how likely it is the government will be able to collect from the joint sponsor.  Totality of circumstances can include lots of things, and does.

Anybody can argue what should and should not be, but that gets us nowhere.  It does not "help" the person wanting to understand what to do next.

Okay.. And i also want to ask if i still do need a joint sponsor when the 2 children becomes citizen next month and it will be just both of us left to support each other???