Dv 2014 Kenyan Selectees report here

[benzpattt]

guys help have just seen this:-
Some of the most bizarre Lottery-specific denials that we have seen over the years relate to photographs. One would think that if the State Department’s Lottery website accepted a photograph for entry that the photograph met the requirements. Not true, in the opinion of some consular officers. Many have disqualified applicants because the photograph in the DV-entry was not on a neutral background; was partially darkened; was not “recent”; or did not look like the person because they gained a lot of weight. These individuals and their families were refused by a consular officer after 1) the State Department accepted the DV entry; 2) the KCC did not disqualify the entry after selection; and 3) they paid the processing fees, bolstering the coffers of the government by tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees and allowing officers to reallocate the visas to other individuals.

 

[SusieQQQ]

guys help have just seen this:-
Some of the most bizarre Lottery-specific denials that we have seen over the years relate to photographs. One would think that if the State Department’s Lottery website accepted a photograph for entry that the photograph met the requirements. Not true, in the opinion of some consular officers. Many have disqualified applicants because the photograph in the DV-entry was not on a neutral background; was partially darkened; was not “recent”; or did not look like the person because they gained a lot of weight. These individuals and their families were refused by a consular officer after 1) the State Department accepted the DV entry; 2) the KCC did not disqualify the entry after selection; and 3) they paid the processing fees, bolstering the coffers of the government by tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees and allowing officers to reallocate the visas to other individuals.

Whoa. Tens of thousands of dollars? Really! Did you even stop to try figure out how many visa denials on the basis of photos there would have been if that was true? Is there anything anywhere that tells you that a photo accepted by the photo validator is automatically acceptable (and did you not see the other threads on this?) and can you explain how a validator is supposed to figure out how recent a photo of someone is? Are you aware that a large number of photo refusals are because the person in the photo is not the person standing in front of the CO? That the excuse about weight is nonsense? That they use photo recognition software? Why are you surprised that visa numbers from denials are reallocated, did you not realise that is how it works? Did you not read the instructions/guides that tell you visa fees are for the interview and not refundable in case of refusal? Are you aware that only a CO in an interview can determine whether or not an application will be disqualified (other than for duplicate entries)?

In short, stop being ridiculous and start thinking.

 

[benzpattt]

Whoa. Tens of thousands of dollars? Really! Did you even stop to try figure out how many visa denials on the basis of photos there would have been if that was true? Is there anything anywhere that tells you that a photo accepted by the photo validator is automatically acceptable (and did you not see the other threads on this?) and can you explain how a validator is supposed to figure out how recent a photo of someone is? Are you aware that a large number of photo refusals are because the person in the photo is not the person standing in front of the CO? That the excuse about weight is nonsense? That they use photo recognition software? Why are you surprised that visa numbers from denials are reallocated, did you not realise that is how it works? Did you not read the instructions/guides that tell you visa fees are for the interview and not refundable in case of refusal? Are you aware that only a CO in an interview can determine whether or not an application will be disqualified (other than for duplicate entries)?

In short, stop being ridiculous and start thinking.

@SusieQQQ am not ridiculous and am thinking as well was just posting thing may be it can be of good help to the members of ths forum. thankx for ur response it will help many

 

[Britsimon]

guys help have just seen this:-
Some of the most bizarre Lottery-specific denials that we have seen over the years relate to photographs. One would think that if the State Department’s Lottery website accepted a photograph for entry that the photograph met the requirements. Not true, in the opinion of some consular officers. Many have disqualified applicants because the photograph in the DV-entry was not on a neutral background; was partially darkened; was not “recent”; or did not look like the person because they gained a lot of weight. These individuals and their families were refused by a consular officer after 1) the State Department accepted the DV entry; 2) the KCC did not disqualify the entry after selection; and 3) they paid the processing fees, bolstering the coffers of the government by tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees and allowing officers to reallocate the visas to other individuals.

Could you post the source please.

As for the bolstering the coffers, well they spend more than that in fuel to get Air Force one off the ground, so I doubt it is some sort of inverse Robin Hood story...

 

[God-Is-Love]

Whoa. Tens of thousands of dollars? Really! Did you even stop to try figure out how many visa denials on the basis of photos there would have been if that was true? Is there anything anywhere that tells you that a photo accepted by the photo validator is automatically acceptable (and did you not see the other threads on this?) and can you explain how a validator is supposed to figure out how recent a photo of someone is? Are you aware that a large number of photo refusals are because the person in the photo is not the person standing in front of the CO? That the excuse about weight is nonsense? That they use photo recognition software? Why are you surprised that visa numbers from denials are reallocated, did you not realise that is how it works? Did you not read the instructions/guides that tell you visa fees are for the interview and not refundable in case of refusal? Are you aware that only a CO in an interview can determine whether or not an application will be disqualified (other than for duplicate entries)?

In short, stop being ridiculous and start thinking.

Ohhh.. You scared me @SusieQQQ.
Do you know any way of checking photos entered at the time of EDV application prior to interview date?

 

[Britsimon]

Ohhh.. You scared me @SusieQQQ.
Do you know any way of checking photos entered at the time of EDV application prior to interview date?

No.

 

[Banangeh]

I thank God for journey mercies am in states now and this place rocks.very lovely

Loving this place and wish all processing their cases well...............I noticed here when ou want to cross the road there is a button u press attached to traffic lights pole n in a few mins yu are allowed to cross safely..........my headache is the left driving but will get used to it

 

[Banangeh]

welcome banange yu were among 2014 few remaining to relocate in The forum ,am gud guys only waiting for winter ,here in maryland no spoted snow unlike other states like indiana,minnesota,pennsylvania and others may God bless yu Simon it's been along way welcome to the USA.

@rogers.com thanks so much well i thank God i made it here safely and wish we can meet as forum mates for the thanksgiving holiday

 

[SusieQQQ]

@SusieQQQ am not ridiculous and am thinking as well was just posting thing may be it can be of good help to the members of ths forum. thankx for ur response it will help many

Sorry if I sounded impatient but, well, I have little patience when people post things like that which are clearly someone trying to scaremonger. Trying to make it sound like the US government, which spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year, is going to try scam a DV applicant out of a few hundred dollars. "Just passing it on" also doesn't really work as an excuse for me... Anyway hopefully my response helped.

Btw when COs pick up that someone has fraudulentiy used a selectee's 2NL, and this is often through the photos not matching, they can and do cooperate with local law enforcement to get the guys arrested for fraud.

 

[Sm1smom]

guys help have just seen this:-
Some of the most bizarre Lottery-specific denials that we have seen over the years relate to photographs. One would think that if the State Department’s Lottery website accepted a photograph for entry that the photograph met the requirements. Not true, in the opinion of some consular officers. Many have disqualified applicants because the photograph in the DV-entry was not on a neutral background; was partially darkened; was not “recent”; or did not look like the person because they gained a lot of weight. These individuals and their families were refused by a consular officer after 1) the State Department accepted the DV entry; 2) the KCC did not disqualify the entry after selection; and 3) they paid the processing fees, bolstering the coffers of the government by tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees and allowing officers to reallocate the visas to other individuals.

Like Susie already responded, there's absolutely nothing bizarre in a COs decision to deny a visa petition at the time of the interview based on the applicant's failure to meet the stated photo requirements. The fact that the DOS photo validator passes the checked photo does not necessarily mean the submitted photo is error free - the photo validator does not check the content, it merely checks the size and width of the photo. The photo validator has been tested in the past with pictures of animals and inanimate objects, and the validator marked those photos as acceptable because they met the dimensional requirements.

To address your 2nd point about KCC not disqualifying an entry based on not meeting the photo requirements following the selection - KCC CANNOT disqualify anyone, all they will do when a discrepancy is noticed on an application will be to flag such a file before sending it to the applicable embassy so that the CO can deal with it at the time of the interview.

The KCC will review each DS-260 submission as they are received, and will update the electronic record in DVIS as required. In cases where a potentially disqualifying factor has been identified at the KCC during case creation, a remark will be entered at the top of the DS-260 for the interviewing consular officer's information. The KCC has no adjudicatory role, and so cannot determine an applicant's eligibility or qualification for the visa. Remarks are intended as additional information for officers to review as part of the adjudication process.
​

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87840.pdf (p.3)

The CO is required to review the picture submitted with the eDV application at the time of the interview and is required to deny applicants with invalid photos:

The Department will disqualify entries lacking the required photos or including invalid photos. Consular officers must review the entry photo at the time of adjudication. If you determine that the photo on the entry is not that of the applicant, you may pursue a refusal under INA 212 (a)(6)(C) (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(6)(C)). Otherwise, refuse the applicant under INA 212 (a)(5)(a) (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(5)(a)).
​

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87840.pdf (p.2)

The "tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees" you've claimed is nothing but a drop in the bucket when it comes to the financial standing of the U.S. government. If they think that money will make a difference at all, they could have made is such that everyone submitting an eDV application make a payment before their application will be considered, or they could have asked everyone selected to go ahead and pay the visa fee while still telling them there's no guarantee paying the fee will lead to a visa being issued, don't you think? By the way, the DV visa fee used to be $440 per applicant as at 2009, if that was something the US government highly depended on, why will they bother to reduce the processing fee?

I know you're clearly trying to be of help to other forum members, but we shouldn't join others by spreading unfounded rumors or insinuations that cannot be backed up simply because the people making the allegations clearly have no understanding of what they're talking about.

 

[ARNOLD NGANDA]

TYT,
Please say something. ..u r missing in action

 

[Britsimon]

TYT,
Please say something. ..u r missing in action

What do you expect him to say??

 

[benzpattt]

Like Susie already responded, there's absolutely nothing bizarre in a COs decision to deny a visa petition at the time of the interview based on the applicant's failure to meet the stated photo requirements. The fact that the DOS photo validator passes the checked photo does not necessarily mean the submitted photo is error free - the photo validator does not check the content, it merely checks the size and width of the photo. The photo validator has been tested in the past with pictures of animals and inanimate objects, and the validator marked those photos as acceptable because they met the dimensional requirements.

To address your 2nd point about KCC not disqualifying an entry based on not meeting the photo requirements following the selection - KCC CANNOT disqualify anyone, all they will do when a discrepancy is noticed on an application will be to flag such a file before sending it to the applicable embassy so that the CO can deal with it at the time of the interview.

The KCC will review each DS-260 submission as they are received, and will update the electronic record in DVIS as required. In cases where a potentially disqualifying factor has been identified at the KCC during case creation, a remark will be entered at the top of the DS-260 for the interviewing consular officer's information. The KCC has no adjudicatory role, and so cannot determine an applicant's eligibility or qualification for the visa. Remarks are intended as additional information for officers to review as part of the adjudication process.
​

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87840.pdf (p.3)

The CO is required to review the picture submitted with the eDV application at the time of the interview and is required to deny applicants with invalid photos:

The Department will disqualify entries lacking the required photos or including invalid photos. Consular officers must review the entry photo at the time of adjudication. If you determine that the photo on the entry is not that of the applicant, you may pursue a refusal under INA 212 (a)(6)(C) (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(6)(C)). Otherwise, refuse the applicant under INA 212 (a)(5)(a) (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(5)(a)).
​

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87840.pdf (p.2)

The "tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees" you've claimed is nothing but a drop in the bucket when it comes to the financial standing of the U.S. government. If they think that money will make a difference at all, they could have made is such that everyone submitting an eDV application make a payment before their application will be considered, or they could have asked everyone selected to go ahead and pay the visa fee while still telling them there's no guarantee paying the fee will lead to a visa being issued, don't you think? By the way, the DV visa fee used to be $440 per applicant as at 2009, if that was something the US government highly depended on, why will they bother to reduce the processing fee?

I know you're clearly trying to be of help to other forum members, but we shouldn't join others by spreading unfounded rumors or insinuations that cannot be backed up simply because the people making the allegations clearly have no understanding of what they're talking about.

good good and well answered

 

[usken go]

[QUOTE="Britsimon, post: 2374209, Could you post the source please.

As for the bolstering the coffers, well they spend more than that in fuel to get Air Force one off the ground, so I doubt it is some sort of inverse Robin Hood story...[/QUOTE]

BEnzpatt must have got this from http://blog.visarefusal.com/?p=574.
I guess this is an immigration attorney trying some infomarketing approach. There is a thread about this photo issue and i think the co's discretion counts. Susie has also stated that the photo recognition software works well.
Over the rainy season, my internet connection works at its own pleasure

 

[usken go]

Like Susie already responded, there's absolutely nothing bizarre in a COs decision to deny a visa petition at the time of the interview based on the applicant's failure to meet the stated photo requirements. The fact that the DOS photo validator passes the checked photo does not necessarily mean the submitted photo is error free - the photo validator does not check the content, it merely checks the size and width of the photo. The photo validator has been tested in the past with pictures of animals and inanimate objects, and the validator marked those photos as acceptable because they met the dimensional requirements.

To address your 2nd point about KCC not disqualifying an entry based on not meeting the photo requirements following the selection - KCC CANNOT disqualify anyone, all they will do when a discrepancy is noticed on an application will be to flag such a file before sending it to the applicable embassy so that the CO can deal with it at the time of the interview.

The KCC will review each DS-260 submission as they are received, and will update the electronic record in DVIS as required. In cases where a potentially disqualifying factor has been identified at the KCC during case creation, a remark will be entered at the top of the DS-260 for the interviewing consular officer's information. The KCC has no adjudicatory role, and so cannot determine an applicant's eligibility or qualification for the visa. Remarks are intended as additional information for officers to review as part of the adjudication process.
​

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87840.pdf (p.3)

The CO is required to review the picture submitted with the eDV application at the time of the interview and is required to deny applicants with invalid photos:

The Department will disqualify entries lacking the required photos or including invalid photos. Consular officers must review the entry photo at the time of adjudication. If you determine that the photo on the entry is not that of the applicant, you may pursue a refusal under INA 212 (a)(6)(C) (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(6)(C)). Otherwise, refuse the applicant under INA 212 (a)(5)(a) (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(5)(a)).
​

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87840.pdf (p.2)

The "tens of thousands of dollars in visa fees" you've claimed is nothing but a drop in the bucket when it comes to the financial standing of the U.S. government. If they think that money will make a difference at all, they could have made is such that everyone submitting an eDV application make a payment before their application will be considered, or they could have asked everyone selected to go ahead and pay the visa fee while still telling them there's no guarantee paying the fee will lead to a visa being issued, don't you think? By the way, the DV visa fee used to be $440 per applicant as at 2009, if that was something the US government highly depended on, why will they bother to reduce the processing fee?

I know you're clearly trying to be of help to other forum members, but we shouldn't join others by spreading unfounded rumors or insinuations that cannot be backed up simply because the people making the allegations clearly have no understanding of what they're talking about.

Thanks mom, especially for this link. So The CO's discretion is actually well guided particularly in in regard to prevention of fraud.

 

[usken go]

[QUOTE="Britsimon, post: 2374209, Could you post the source please.

As for the bolstering the coffers, well they spend more than that in fuel to get Air Force one off the ground, so I doubt it is some sort of inverse Robin Hood story...

BEnzpatt must have got this from http://blog.visarefusal.com/?p=537 paragraph 6, not http....../574 as i had earlier posted

 

[benzpattt]

BEnzpatt must have got this from http://blog.visarefusal.com/?p=537 paragraph 6, not http....../574 as i had earlier posted

yes and i realy appreciated coz my worries are gone dnt have to worry again about it

 

[Sm1smom]

BEnzpatt must have got this from http://blog.visarefusal.com/?p=537 paragraph 6, not http....../574 as i had earlier posted

A bunch of bs put together by the "immigration attorney". A perfect example showing the fact that someone calls him/herself an immigration attorney doesn't necessarily mean they know jack about immigration process. At best, a lot of them are simply experienced 'form fillers', outside of that they can tell you nothing useful with regards to your case.

 

[Britsimon]

[QUOTE="Britsimon, post: 2374209, Could you post the source please.

As for the bolstering the coffers, well they spend more than that in fuel to get Air Force one off the ground, so I doubt it is some sort of inverse Robin Hood story...

BEnzpatt must have got this from http://blog.visarefusal.com/?p=574.
I guess this is an immigration attorney trying some infomarketing approach. There is a thread about this photo issue and i think the co's discretion counts. Susie has also stated that the photo recognition software works well.
Over the rainy season, my internet connection works at its own pleasure[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the link, but as you say this is just a lawyer trying to drum up business.

 

[SusieQQQ]

Yeah. I've seen immigration lawyers state unequivocally that your chances of being denied if you don't use a lawyer for DV are extremely high! I am flabbergasted that they can put such blatantly false stuff out there with no apparent comeback...