goat

I just came across this thread while starting to think about bringing my wife's sister from Thailand on a tourist visa for a legitimate visit.

I am a lawyer in the Los Angeles area, but before I married a Thai woman in 2008 I had little experience with immigration "law." I was horrified and outraged at the way my wife and I were treated with the K-1 application, green card, and eventual removal of conditions. (We are good now, thanks in part to visajourney). I have 33 years of presenting "proof" in a courtroom, but the concept of "proof" has a different meaning to USCIS than it does to a real judge. My convicted criminal clients have far greater rights than an ordinary visa applicant who has done no wrong. And it is unfair that immigrants originating in the western hemisphere can simply walk across the border somewhere, while less advantaged Asians, Africans and Europeans have so much trouble. Books could be written, and have been written, on how messed up the process is.

I think it is unfair to taunt Niels Bohr over his unique efforts to provoke a change in an unjust system. His methods may be misguided, but his frusration is understandable. Most users of this forum have been victimized by this "legal" process. If the question is, "do we have a right to be treated fairly by our government," the answer is "yes" for citizens and no for everyone else. And if we, the citizens, are not being treated fairly, what is our recourse? I have written endless letters to my senator and congressperson. They are liberal democrats who favor a form of immigration reform that would give greater opportunities to ordinary people seeking a better life. But they have no authority to intervene in the day to day affairs of the USCIS, and they generally don't. This is a failure of democracy, and certainly not the only one. Think about it, no one is going to run for office on a platform that favors easing restrictions on tourist visas for people from poorer countries, for the benefit of their American families.

So deal with the reality as it is and will be. The USCIS and state department branches are guided by "aspects of life that bind people to their place of residence, including, but not limited to, possessions, family relationships, employment, education, and prospects in Cambodia. As each person's situation is different, there are no set answers or documents as to what constitutes adequate ties." The issue for the interviewer is: what is the likelihood of this applicant becoming part of the underground employment economy and overstaying their visa? This is not a legal standard, it is a bureaucratic standard that employs racist and sexist assumptions and denies the applicant any individualized treatment. "there are no set standards" means "we will be arbitrary if we feel like it."

There is a cottage industry in Bangkok near the embassy on Thanon Wittayu where specialists assist Thai people with visas. As a lawyer, I tip my hat to these folks because they have a much better sense of how to satisfy the bureaucrats than American "immigration lawyers" do, and they charge a lot less. What they would tell a Thai person (equally applicable to a Cambodian) is to create an appearance of binding ties to the country of origin. And in many instances, this means planning far ahead. As someone mentioned, plunking a lump sum of money into a relative's bank account by wire a week before the interview is not going to cut it.

I get my information from the Thai experts. The visa applicant must have roughly $3000 (US) in their account at least three months before the application, because this is the estimated cost of a low budget trip to the U.S. for legitimate tourism. The visa applicant must have a plausible explanation for a source of funds in the country of origin, which is tough in a country where 60% of income is under the table. And the person must have a reason to come back - a skill that will land a job, a job that they have had for more than a year, minor children, a husband or wife, a dependent parent, ownership of land, and so forth. And if they lack these things, the appearance of having these things can be created, over a period of time. No amount of sponsor wealth will change the application process directly. (well, maybe the Koch brothers have special channels)

I see Thai tourists in Los Angeles all the time. Thailand is a relatively income-stratified country with many poor, a small middle class, and a smaller group of wealthy people. The latter two groups get tourist visas as a matter of course, while the poorer people do not. So I think the best answer is to help the applicant become a middle class person for a while. And using a local assistant is usually a good idea, but don't let them handle the cash beyond their fee. I am not advising anyone to defraud the authorities. Lying to anyone during this process leads to long term ineligibility if not a permanent disqualification.

Finally, seeking vengeance against a mindless, soul-less bureaucracy through legal action and complaints is likely to cause more psychic damage than it relieves. You cannot reasonably expect a satsifying result. It will add to your frustration.

Plan ahead, Niels Bohr, and persevere. It can be done.

Goat

Re: recently completed interviews in BKK

I am posting my question here rather than as a new topic because this Thread seems to be appropriate for Bangkok embassy information.

Our interview is coming up on July 10 at 8 am. I will arrive BKK at 2am and accompany Puy. I hope to have enough energy to celebrate afterwards.

Over the past few months, there have been posts concerning changes in the identities and temperaments of the consular services interviewers in BKK.

They seemed to be positive changes. It would be great to have some confirmation of this by people who have undergone their interviews recently.

I know that posting to VJ is the last thing on the minds of recent visa recipients but it sure encourages the people in line behind you.

Thanks in advance, congratulations to the successful interviewees, best wishes for everyone still waiting.

Goat

Thanks, Magic Girl!!

next station, satani trong pai, Ploenchit

Ralph and Puy

We were notified of a July 10 interview date after returning packet 3 on May 29, 2009. No missing documents mentioned. Already have medical stuff to bring with us.

I will arrive BKK from Los Angeles at 1 am on July 10, meet up with Puy at our hotel and we will leave for the embassy early AM, like 6:00.

Does anyone know which BTS station is closest to the embassy (Wittayu Road)???? Thanks for the help.

Very excited that this ordeal is nearly over.

Ralph

We got our packet 3 letter from the Bangkok consulate a few days ago. It is a leter with a slip of paper instructing us to download the forms. We had anticipated this and had gotten everything ready to go.

I wanted to be sure it was the same forms that were in effect last month.

First, I could not access the forms at the web address on the slip of paper using internet explorer (6). I had to download Mozilla Firefox. That worked.

Second, the forms have changed!!! At the bottom it says Rev: May/09

There is a new form, DS-2001, unique to bangkok that is used for scheduling the interview. I had never seen it before in either the 2007 packet 3 or the revised undqated packet 3 that some people have posted here.

Finally, these instructions come to me while we are in Bangkok. I have put the pdf file on a thumb drive and tomorrow we will look for a shop that can plug this into a USB port and print them out so we can submit them.

This visa process has a onnection to the recently-named disorder known as post traumatic embitterment disorder. Google if interested. It is a test of our patriotism.

Goat

We just got notice by email that our petition has been sent. We got a letter in March saying "will be sent within a week" but that was a lie. It took three weeks to find out that we were stuck at NVC in admin processing, as they continued to lie until reached by telephone.

Our total wait in AP = 43 days (March 18-April 30)

I have a feeling that NVC imposes an AP deadline on themselves that allows the consulate to get the file, send the Packet 3, and schedule an interview within the 4 month period for which the USCIS approval is good. Like, right at the very end of that 4 month period, and assuming the petitioner and beneficiary send stuff back quickly.

We had the consular case number, and we downloaded the Packet 3 stuff from the consular website and went and got the medical exam, police certificate, etc., while waiting for AP to finish. Now we expect to get Packet 3 around May 15 and send everything in the next day.

Goat

Our 1-129F petition was filed at the California Service Center on November 18, 2008. The NOA1 showed up soon thereafter and NOA2, stating the petition was approved, came on March 10, 2009.

The NVC case forwarded letter came on March 18, 2009. It says, without qualification,"within a week the petition will be forwarded to the appropriate visa-issuing post . . . ."

This turns out not to be true, and it was not easy to find out.

1. Emails to the consulate in Bangkok got one answer: petition not received as of April 10, please allow 2-4 weeks.

2. Emails to NVCinquiry got the maddening answer: you will be notified when your petition is forwarded ( I already was!)

3. Finally, a telephone call to NVC at (603) 334-0700 had good parts and bad parts. The good part was that I only had to wait three minutes to talk to a real person. The bad part was that I was told the file is still at NVC, undergoing "processing" with "no time frame." I pointed out that the letter I received 6 weeks ago says the file was to be forwarded to Bangkok "within a week." I asked how that could be true if the file was undergoing indefinite processing at NVC. The government employee replied: "It is sent within a week in the ordinary case."

So, for those of you who expect our government to be truthful, here's another lesson. You can't believe everything you see and hear.

Our expectations have been shattered. What is even worse is that the NVC will not disclose the reason for the delay or how long it will be.

Needless to say, I've already written to my representative. I would have done that 5 weeks ago if I had known what was really going on.

Good luck to the rest of you.

Goat

I am new to this website and this is my first post.

Whether an elected official will be helpful depends upon the nature of your problem. If you don't understand the rules or the process has stopped because the ball is in your court and you haven't moved on it, your elected official will be unsympathetic. If the system has failed you despite reasonable effort on your part, then your elected official could be your best friend.

In 2003, my spouse visa application stalled for reasons no agency could tell me. I asked my congresswoman to intervene. Her assistant that specializes in immigration problems found out within 2 days that some bureaucrat somewhere had misspelled my wife's name during data entry. That resulted in the administrative process grinding to a halt. The congresswoman's office put it back on track, within a week.

Now, in 2009, I have a K-1 application (divorced last year from 2003 wife) that made it through NOA2 and the letter from NVC using the words "within a week" and "soon." My inquiries reveal that NVC sent the file weeks ago but the consulate in Bangkok never received it. "Lost file." Who is going to look for it? No one.

This is the sort of problem that no lawyer can straighten out, only someone with political influence who could cause job loss in the consulate management. A lost file, like a data entry error, is something an elected official can be very helpful in fixing. I will be contacting my congresswoman again tomorrow.

An elected official will not help you if you haven't followed the rules, submitted the necessary docs, want to get an exemption from the process that everyone else has to go through.

The best results in dealing with elected officials or government types generally is to make it as easy as possible for them to grasp your problem and take the appropriate action. A cover letter should not exceed a page, and should attach copies of any communications you have sent or received relative to the problem you want help on. Your letter should identify you as a constituent and as someone who votes and is politically active, preferably in the same party as the official.

Congresspersons are more accessible then senators. Sen. Feinstein represents 30 million Californians. Each congressperson in California represents about 700,000 people. Same in other states. Congresspersons are far more likely to help individual constituents.

Good luck.

Goat