CIrcle110

I actually did return and speak with them yesterday (BTW, they open at 7:30, not 8:30) and everyone there agrees that I meet the official requirements 100% and that our case should have been decided differently. However, they can't review the cases once they are initially decided so we are out of luck. The only way to get a review to happen is to go through the State Department in Washington.
I came by my "vast" knowledge by reading the instructions and regulations that they have posted in several places on the State Department website. Those instructions are very specific and clear and I way, way over qualify and have the appropriate documentation as requested in those regulations.
Plus, your comment about making an "exception" in our case is ridiculous. We aren't asking for an exception, just asking that they apply the regulations that they give you when you apply. If I would have known that they don't accept assets nor current income and only go by the last 1040, or if I would have though that our case was going to be a close call in any way I would have sought a joint sponsor before applying to avoid this headache.

The officials who work at the consulate.
Sorry Señor Troll, I am now finished with responding to you.

The officials who work at the consulate.
Sorry Señor Troll, I am now finished with responding to you.

I actually did return and speak with them yesterday (BTW, they open at 7:30, not 8:30) and everyone there agrees that I meet the official requirements 100% and that our case should have been decided differently. However, they can't review the cases once they are initially decided so we are out of luck. The only way to get a review to happen is to go through the State Department in Washington.
I came by my "vast" knowledge by reading the instructions and regulations that they have posted in several places on the State Department website. Those instructions are very specific and clear and I way, way over qualify and have the appropriate documentation as requested in those regulations.
Plus, your comment about making an "exception" in our case is ridiculous. We aren't asking for an exception, just asking that they apply the regulations that they give you when you apply. If I would have known that they don't accept assets nor current income and only go by the last 1040, or if I would have though that our case was going to be a close call in any way I would have sought a joint sponsor before applying to avoid this headache.

I actually did return and speak with them yesterday (BTW, they open at 7:30, not 8:30) and everyone there agrees that I meet the official requirements 100% and that our case should have been decided differently. However, they can't review the cases once they are initially decided so we are out of luck. The only way to get a review to happen is to go through the State Department in Washington.
I came by my "vast" knowledge by reading the instructions and regulations that they have posted in several places on the State Department website. Those instructions are very specific and clear and I way, way over qualify and have the appropriate documentation as requested in those regulations.
Plus, your comment about making an "exception" in our case is ridiculous. We aren't asking for an exception, just asking that they apply the regulations that they give you when you apply. If I would have known that they don't accept assets nor current income and only go by the last 1040, or if I would have though that our case was going to be a close call in any way I would have sought a joint sponsor before applying to avoid this headache.

I actually did return and speak with them yesterday (BTW, they open at 7:30, not 8:30) and everyone there agrees that I meet the official requirements 100% and that our case should have been decided differently. However, they can't review the cases once they are initially decided so we are out of luck. The only way to get a review to happen is to go through the State Department in Washington.
I came by my "vast" knowledge by reading the instructions and regulations that they have posted in several places on the State Department website. Those instructions are very specific and clear and I way, way over qualify and have the appropriate documentation as requested in those regulations.
Plus, your comment about making an "exception" in our case is ridiculous. We aren't asking for an exception, just asking that they apply the regulations that they give you when you apply. If I would have known that they don't accept assets nor current income and only go by the last 1040, or if I would have though that our case was going to be a close call in any way I would have sought a joint sponsor before applying to avoid this headache.

Thank you, Boiler.
But in any case, we're taking the path of least resistance. No sense trying to explain to the "experts" that they goofed up. I have a certain insight into this situation since my entire professional career has been advising government agencies on how to clean up and streamline their convoluted processes using computer systems. This is a major case in point.
DCF is for people who have residency overseas but are now returning to the US with a spouse they married while abroad. Almost all of them are in a similar position to me. Either they lived off of assets while overseas (like me), or they had a job in the foreign country. However, the previous year's income from a job in the foreign land is not allowed to qualify since the foreign income won't travel with them to the US, so their last year's taxes won't help them. We sabbatical/pretirement folks didn't have income while abroad because we didn't need it due to our financial resources. That's why they created a qualification by assets - precisely for people in our situation. Lotta good it has done us. :S
Yes, CDJ is the #1 place for resident visas but 99.999% of the applicants have petitioners that are Mexican nationals who are now US permanent residents or naturalized citizens and have lived and worked in the US for years and are now bringing in their family. They are not moderately well off US natives who took a sabbatical for a few years, got married and then accepted a job back in the USA. That's why there is confusion.
Our case is a pretty unique for those "experts", so they didn't want to hear about the gringo that took a 5 year "pretirement" and is now returning to the US. They just want to apply the regulations that they were taught to use and apply 99.999% of the time. So, in a zen sort of way, we decided to behave like the cattails and bend with the wind instead of trying to resist it and running the risk of breaking.

Thank you, Boiler.
But in any case, we're taking the path of least resistance. No sense trying to explain to the "experts" that they goofed up. I have a certain insight into this situation since my entire professional career has been advising government agencies on how to clean up and streamline their convoluted processes using computer systems. This is a major case in point.
DCF is for people who have residency overseas but are now returning to the US with a spouse they married while abroad. Almost all of them are in a similar position to me. Either they lived off of assets while overseas (like me), or they had a job in the foreign country. However, the previous year's income from a job in the foreign land is not allowed to qualify since the foreign income won't travel with them to the US, so their last year's taxes won't help them. We sabbatical/pretirement folks didn't have income while abroad because we didn't need it due to our financial resources. That's why they created a qualification by assets - precisely for people in our situation. Lotta good it has done us. :S
Yes, CDJ is the #1 place for resident visas but 99.999% of the applicants have petitioners that are Mexican nationals who are now US permanent residents or naturalized citizens and have lived and worked in the US for years and are now bringing in their family. They are not moderately well off US natives who took a sabbatical for a few years, got married and then accepted a job back in the USA. That's why there is confusion.
Our case is a pretty unique for those "experts", so they didn't want to hear about the gringo that took a 5 year "pretirement" and is now returning to the US. They just want to apply the regulations that they were taught to use and apply 99.999% of the time. So, in a zen sort of way, we decided to behave like the cattails and bend with the wind instead of trying to resist it and running the risk of breaking.

Good point. Actually, we have found a possible joint sponsor. If that comes through then we'll do just as you say - give them what they want.
I'm going to make one last trip to the consulate this morning to see if I can get someone to at least look at my assets and explain why I don't qualify. I printed out the requirements for I-864 qualification by assets from the State Department website. Don't know if that will help but I'll give it a shot.

Thank you, Nelly and Charlie!
That helps a lot. We are just finishing the DS-260 and will make our appointments. The hotel and flight recommendations are really helpful as well.
I recall reading that you can have the vaccinations done elsewhere within 3 months previous and bring along proof and that will reduce the cost of the medical exam. Do you know if that is true?
Thanks again,
Michael and Miriam