RapidVisa filing services. Is the company legitimate and worth the effort?

[Electrichead64 29]

and rights are not granted by law.  they are either protected by law, or they are not protected by law, but rights are inherent to our nature.  this is America, remember?

[geowrian 22,335]

14 minutes ago, Electrichead64 said:

and rights are not granted by law.  they are either protected by law, or they are not protected by law, but rights are inherent to our nature.  this is America, remember?

Interesting theory. But it's just as practical as claiming a right to open borders, to shoot anybody that steps on my yard, etc.

[Electrichead64 29]

1 minute ago, geowrian said:

Interesting theory. But it's just as practical as claiming a right to open borders, to shoot anybody that steps on my yard, etc.

Wrong.  Its completely different.  As a citizen I have a right to be with my spouse.  It is a natural right, that the Federal government only has the Constitutional authority to REGULATE.  Theres a difference.  What that means is, they set up the framework and say, as long as this person isnt a criminal, and follows the proper procedure set forth by law, which is 100% administrative guidelines, that spouse has a right to enter the united states to be with the citizen.  There is no limit on family based immigration.  Why?  Because its a right protected by government but regulated by process and procedure.  Thats why there is a limit on Visa Lottery immigration, H1-B related conversion, etc.  Family based AOS goes to THE front of the line, without limit.

Its like Texas issuing license to carries.  Right to keep and bear arms is a natural right, the federal government is forbidden from interfering, even though they do.  That doesnt mean that the right to keep and bear arms is all willy-nilly people get to do whatever the heck they want.  Texas State Constitution is very clear about that, but the difference is where California is a "may issue" state when it comes to license to carry permits, Texas is  a "shall issue" state.  That means you follow the adminsitrative law, arent a criminal, you get to have a permit.

Same thing with family based immigration and visa.  Its shall issue.  Not may issue.  We are a nation of laws, not opinions, remember?  Equal protection under the law and all that?  What that means is, in regards of a K-1 Visa, sure, the embassy officer has to verify the relationship is real.  Thats the ONLY opinion he is afforded to make, everyhing else is paperwork.  In the case of a CR or IR based visa, there IS NO opinion to make.  The relationship is IN FACT by nature of the legal marriage.  The only thing that remains then is paperwork and assuring there is no criminal activity involved.

Please tell me you  are a lawyer now.  

[geowrian 22,335]

46 minutes ago, Electrichead64 said:

Wrong.  Its completely different.  As a citizen I have a right to be with my spouse.  It is a natural right, that the Federal government only has the Constitutional authority to REGULATE.  Theres a difference.  What that means is, they set up the framework and say, as long as this person isnt a criminal, and follows the proper procedure set forth by law, which is 100% administrative guidelines, that spouse has a right to enter the united states to be with the citizen.  There is no limit on family based immigration.  Why?  Because its a right protected by government but regulated by process and procedure.  Thats why there is a limit on Visa Lottery immigration, H1-B related conversion, etc.  Family based AOS goes to THE front of the line, without limit.

To avoid going off topic, I will limit my responses. If you want to take the conversation into another forum or PM, that is fine.

 

You have a right - supported and regulated by law - to petition an eligible family member.

A visa applicant has no right (IMO) and certainly has no legal foundation that they are entitled to a visa because they meet x/y/z requirements. They are entitled to a decision on their case, which has been upheld by law. They are not entitled to the visa - that is a discretionary decision by the CO that they meet the requirements for eligibility (of which there are several major discretionary factors) and that they are not inadmissible. This is not a regulation - this is in the INA directly as law, and has been upheld by courts.

 

"There is no limit on family based immigration"

You might want to check the several million relatives waiting for their PD to become current due to annual quotas. No limit exists on immediate relatives of a USC (and note that IRs are limited to a spouse, an unmarried child under 21, or a parent). Limits certainly exist for other forms of family based immigration. Ask the people waiting >20 years.

 

Family-based AOS does not have any inherit priority over other types of AOS. Last I checked, the majority of employment-based AOS applications were being processed a couple months faster than family-based AOS applications at most local field offices. See https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/.

Either that, or you are misunderstanding what AOS actually refers to.

 

Quote

Same thing with family based immigration and visa.  Its shall issue.  Not may issue.  We are a nation of laws, not opinions, remember?  Equal protection under the law and all that?  What that means is, in regards of a K-1 Visa, sure, the embassy officer has to verify the relationship is real.  Thats the ONLY opinion he is afforded to make, everyhing else is paperwork.  In the case of a CR or IR based visa, there IS NO opinion to make.  The relationship is IN FACT by nature of the legal marriage.  The only thing that remains then is paperwork and assuring there is no criminal activity involved.

The bold is very far from accurate. There are numerous discretionary decisions by the CO. Many people are denied a CR/IR visa due to not having a bona fide relationship just like a K-1 for a fiance/fiancee. It's seen on this site almost daily. Please research as that misunderstanding can lead to some very bad and dangerous advice.

The CO also determines, as just one other very, very common example, if the applicant is likely to become a public charge. A common misconception is that one just needs to earn the minimums to qualify. under the minimum = no visa. Over the minimum = judgement call. I once saw somebody refused with a $200,000/year job and provided the proper paperwork. They needed to find a joint sponsor. That kind of extreme is very uncommon, though...usually it's if the income is borderline or there are high costs associated with the immigrant (i.e. petitioning parents due to health issues and insurance coverage).

 

The law provides for other discretionary decisions. Heck, even the president is granted the ability to deny entry to any alien or class of alien. See INA 212(f): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

"Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. "

 

Quote

Please tell me you  are a lawyer now.  

I have more sense than to go into that professional (nothing against the helpful ones on VJ!).

 

 

Edited October 3, 2019 by geowrian

[Ed&Midori1031 330]

18 hours ago, LilyJ said:

“Experts” in quotations is certainly fitting since none of them actually know anything about the process besides what they got from outdated company training 

True.  IF they were "experts" they would've noticed that my wife's birth date on her birth certificate and K-1 application didn't match. 

[Sarah G 166]

On 10/3/2019 at 12:01 AM, geowrian said:

I agree with 90% of the post, but not the above. No immigration process allows one to remove comprehension (or active involvement and research) from the process...not without doing themselves a serious disservice. Whether one goes with a service, attorney, or DIY, it requires staying on top of the process and becoming more informed.

I completely agree! I perhaps didn't say it quite the way I meant it. Essentially, RV spoon feeds the customer by asking simple questions to fill out the forms and providing a list of required documents. A person COULD complete their application without actually understanding the process, but as you say, they wouldn't be doing themselves any favours at all. Knowledge is power. 

[Electrichead64 29]

On 10/2/2019 at 11:07 PM, geowrian said:

To avoid going off topic, I will limit my responses. If you want to take the conversation into another forum or PM, that is fine.

 

You have a right - supported and regulated by law - to petition an eligible family member.

A visa applicant has no right (IMO) and certainly has no legal foundation that they are entitled to a visa because they meet x/y/z requirements. They are entitled to a decision on their case, which has been upheld by law. They are not entitled to the visa - that is a discretionary decision by the CO that they meet the requirements for eligibility (of which there are several major discretionary factors) and that they are not inadmissible. This is not a regulation - this is in the INA directly as law, and has been upheld by courts.

 

"There is no limit on family based immigration"

You might want to check the several million relatives waiting for their PD to become current due to annual quotas. No limit exists on immediate relatives of a USC (and note that IRs are limited to a spouse, an unmarried child under 21, or a parent). Limits certainly exist for other forms of family based immigration. Ask the people waiting >20 years.

 

Family-based AOS does not have any inherit priority over other types of AOS. Last I checked, the majority of employment-based AOS applications were being processed a couple months faster than family-based AOS applications at most local field offices. See https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/.

Either that, or you are misunderstanding what AOS actually refers to.

 

The bold is very far from accurate. There are numerous discretionary decisions by the CO. Many people are denied a CR/IR visa due to not having a bona fide relationship just like a K-1 for a fiance/fiancee. It's seen on this site almost daily. Please research as that misunderstanding can lead to some very bad and dangerous advice.

The CO also determines, as just one other very, very common example, if the applicant is likely to become a public charge. A common misconception is that one just needs to earn the minimums to qualify. under the minimum = no visa. Over the minimum = judgement call. I once saw somebody refused with a $200,000/year job and provided the proper paperwork. They needed to find a joint sponsor. That kind of extreme is very uncommon, though...usually it's if the income is borderline or there are high costs associated with the immigrant (i.e. petitioning parents due to health issues and insurance coverage).

 

The law provides for other discretionary decisions. Heck, even the president is granted the ability to deny entry to any alien or class of alien. See INA 212(f): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

"Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. "

 

I have more sense than to go into that professional (nothing against the helpful ones on VJ!).

 

 

The doctrine of consular non-reviewability has never been reviewed by the United States Supreme Court as it applies and affects US Citizens.  To even SUGGEST that a CO, the US Department of State or even the President himself has the power to violate the Constitutional rights and protections of the US Citizen without probable cause, and without due process, without evidence, is LAUGHABLE.  I'm betting on a 9-0 decision if it is ever brought to court by a citizen.  It violates SO many clauses of the US Constitution, its not even funny.

Maybe a fiance of a US Citizen would not stand  the test, but a lawfully wedded SPOUSE should.    The immigrant may not have standing or rights, but the citizen darn sure does.  Only a tyrant would think otherwise, and if thats the case, good luck with that one buddy, since a good number of US Citizens who consider marrying a foreign fiance and bringing her home are veterans.  It better be with just cause.  

[Boiler 43,437]

We are  not talking about US Citizens, now if we were then it is a totally different situation.

 

Now if an Alien is in the US then the situation definitely becomes more beneficial for the Alien, outside the country well the US Constitution is not in the main not applicable for obvious reasons.

[geowrian 22,335]

25 minutes ago, Boiler said:

We are  not talking about US Citizens, now if we were then it is a totally different situation.

 

Now if an Alien is in the US then the situation definitely becomes more beneficial for the Alien, outside the country well the US Constitution is not in the main not applicable for obvious reasons.

^This. Big difference between protections for a US citizen, resident alien (permanent, temporary, or even illegal), and an alien abroad.

Doctrine of consular non-reviewability is current policy and a long-held precedent for cases brought forward. What one believes would happen if it reaches SCOTUS has no bearing on anything here. It is not in front of SCOTUS, let alone would a USC have a standing except for activities related to the petition itself.

[piffler 2]

On 10/1/2019 at 8:50 PM, Tartaglia said:

The title explains it all. I'm a soldier that is excessively busy and have had barely any time to work on my fiance's visa. I've heard about RapidVisa but never anything in-depth. Has anyone here used them?

 

Started mine in the Army and only used this site. You can get all the info you need by searching the forums or reading the guides. Also know of several others i was stationed overseas with that did the process and used this site (thats how I heard of it). If you have any questions please feel free to message me Soldier.

[Steve17 0]

In my experience, RapidVisa did just fine. 
     - I was able to ask them questions while filling out the forms. 
     - I was able to have them review the text where I wrote a couple of pages about how I met my fiance, and get their editorial input, to make that section more presentable.
     - I submitted my application and supporting documents and had them review the entire package before submitting.  They had me make some changes and then resubmit.  They gave their final nod of approval before sending it in.
     - I was approved by the USCIS.

It's not for everyone, but for me, the small fee (compared to using a lawyer) was worth the security of getting it right the first time around with USCIS.

Edited October 6, 2019 by Steve17

[Scandi 3,970]

13 hours ago, Steve17 said:

In my experience, RapidVisa did just fine. 
     - I was able to ask them questions while filling out the forms. 
     - I was able to have them review the text where I wrote a couple of pages about how I met my fiance, and get their editorial input, to make that section more presentable.
     - I submitted my application and supporting documents and had them review the entire package before submitting.  They had me make some changes and then resubmit.  They gave their final nod of approval before sending it in.
     - I was approved by the USCIS.

It's not for everyone, but for me, the small fee (compared to using a lawyer) was worth the security of getting it right the first time around with USCIS.

Visajourney does the same for free, ask any questions you may have and you will get the answers. To no cost. Most of us have been through visa and greencard applications on our own with help from VJ only and have been approved just fine without even a single RFE. 

 

Once someone has found VJ, there's no reason to pay someone to answer questions.

[Matt W 16]

I used Rapidvisa. I thought it was worth the fee to help get everything correct.

 

On the other hand, I think paying thousands of dollars is crazy, but many people do it anyways.

 

I think it just depends on if you have the money to spend or not and if it gives you some peace of mind. Rapidvisa was well worth the cost for me.

 

You can definitely do it on your own.

[Myn4kix 12]

I am using a service similar to RapidVisa and they do provide valuable information about the process.  As far as getting a visa they do not speed up the process they slow it down. My visa application has spent too much time sitting in their P.O. box or on a desk somewhere when should have been sent for processing. 

[Electrichead64 29]

5 hours ago, Myn4kix said:

I am using a service similar to RapidVisa and they do provide valuable information about the process.  As far as getting a visa they do not speed up the process they slow it down. My visa application has spent too much time sitting in their P.O. box or on a desk somewhere when should have been sent for processing. 

Really?  Even with RV I spent about a month going over everything and putting it all together.  But the net result was a pristine, beautiful package that I'm sure made some government goon happy.  RapidVisa kicked it out the door to the lockbox THE NEXT DAY.  I assume it was because they looked at it and said "Yep .. this one is squared away"