• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

DV2015 Summary...

The numbers you are quoting are not complete. Use table 7 which includes AoS.

AF - 19686
EU - 19811
AS - 7570
OC - 844
SA - 1459
NA - 7
Total - 49377

Now - the two areas where the quota seems far below expectations are Africa (where no shows were the problem) and AS where KCC seemed to have held the door open for Iranians, perhaps assuming that background checks would be completed in time.

For the Iranian issue, I can understand the thought process that they probably used. Being subjected to a AP lasting months is already bad enough. But to get cleared through AP and then be told your visa had been allocated to someone else in the meantime - that seems too cruel.

Overall, they missed the 50k by a few hundred, although we know they could actually have issued around 3000 more. It was that that made me so certain they would have got to 55000 for AF as a minimum and why AS was also a big shock to me (I felt 10000 would be the minimum). In both those cases my estimates were mathmatically correct - but I did not account for them being prepared to leave so many visas wasted.
 
uc
 
DV4ROGER said:
uc
Click to expand...


Thanks Roger.

2015 taught us that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Iran was certainly hit by AP checks, but outside of that the DS260 forms seemed to have caused the issue where people, particularly Africans, submitted their DS260 even without full intention or ability to proceed with their cases (because there was no cost to submit the form). This led to the shortfall in AF, IMHO.
 
Hey guys, am back, hello to britmimon, susie, hope you guys remember my case back in 2014 with the DV, I will be letting you on an interesting development on that case here,

On May 01 2013, I was randomly selected for further processing in the Diversity Immigrant visa program for the fiscal year 2014. My Case number was 2014AF00076071. On July 25 2014, the Kentucky Consular Center (KCC) sent me an appointment schedule with the US Embassy in Yaounde for September 16 2014 at 07:30AM. I arrived at the embassy on the 16th of September 2014 at 06:00AM and after going through security, I was admitted into the consular section at 08:30 AM and issued queue no 347. I paid a non refundable DV lottery fee of 174.000 FCFA (330 US DOLLARS) and was finally interviewed by the Consular officer at 17:00PM. The interview was successful and my visa was approved. The Consular officer gave me a congratulatory piece of paper requesting that I should come back to the embassy on the 09th of October 2014 in person to pick up my visa packet. I came to the embassy on the 09th of October 2014 to pick up my visa packet but was informed that it is not yet ready. Some private security agents at the embassy asked those of us whose visa packages were not yet ready to write our names and contact numbers on a piece of paper and the embassy will contact us. They advised that we check again with the consular section after two weeks.


On the 15th of October 2014, I called the consular section to verify the status of my visa since online checks showed no information but I was asked to come back to the consular section on the 22nd of October 2014 at 2PM for a final decision. I went to the embassy on the 22nd of October 2014 at 2PM and was only admitted into the consular section at 3:30PM. At 5PM, the consular section announced to us (waiting at the court yard) through one of its security agents that they were experiencing technical problems which is affecting their systems and we were asked to come back again in two weeks. I will leave the city of Douala where I live which is more than 300 kilometers away from Yaounde where the embassy is situated and this meant extra cost for me every time I was asked to come back.

I returned to Douala very disappointed and stressful as usual and kept calling the consular section for updates on my case in vain. On the 05th of November 2014, I was admitted into the consular section and I approached the consular officer at one of the counters who returned my passport and my original documents and in an apologetic tune informed me that the embassy ran short of visa numbers for applicants whose visas were approved for DV 2014. She also added that it was the best explanation she could offer me at the moment. I learned from other reliable sources that the Kentucky Consular Center (KCC) issued out more than the required 55,000visas in the DV 2014 fiscal year therefore it was not a matter of principle that we were victimized.

The psychological trauma has been unbearable for me during this period and as a result of the cumulative effects I have decided to seek some kind of reparation by writing to the Attorney General of the US on the 21st of December 2015 more than a year after and copying the following officals:

John Forbes Kerry
US Secretary of State
Michael S. Hoza
US Ambassador to Cameroon
Paul Ryan
Speaker of the House
Denis McDonough
White House Chief of Staff
The Honorable Jeh Johnson
Secretary of Homeland Security

On the 11th of January 2016, I received an email from USCIS DHS that read:

Acknowledgement Letter


Dear:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has received your inquiry. Our Customer Assistance Unit is currently researching your issue. We are dedicated to proactively providing information and guidance to USCIS applicants, petitioners, and advocates regarding immigration benefits. Please allow 15 business days for us to respond to your inquiry. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Customer Assistance Unit
USCIS
MB



Please, can anyone suggest to me what i should possibly be expecting from them after this 15 business days?

Thank you
 
Hi Tossam,
I'm very sorry to hear your story and I can't even begin to try understand how heartbreaking it must have been.
However, there were a number of people with similar stories to yours (running short of visa numbers, one family of 4 even got only 2 visas) and by law they cannot issue visas for a DV year after that year has ended. So the response you received above is a routine initial reply and while I cannot say exactly what you can expect, an apology and maybe an explanation is most likely. You will not get a visa. Good luck with moving forward from here.
 
I agree with Susie. There is not much that can be done - especially given the whole thing happened outside of the USA.

FYI there were not more than 55K visas issued - It was 52342.
 
Thanks Susie and Britsimon for your insight, but i dont get the point, if there were 52342 visas instead of 55000 issued for the 2014DV then on which bases did the CO tell me that visa nos were finished on a visa that had been approved earlier on when 2658 visas ended up not being used?
 
TOSSAM said:
Thanks Susie and Britsimon for your insight, but i dont get the point, if there were 52342 visas instead of 55000 issued for the 2014DV then on which bases did the CO tell me that visa nos were finished on a visa that had been approved earlier on when 2658 visas ended up not being used?
Click to expand...

The actual number of visas available under DV is 50k, not 55k, though they sometimes do extra taking from Nacara. Unfortunately irrespective of what the numbers actually were, even if there was a mistake in a denial or whatever, by law they cannot issue a DV visa after the end of the fiscal year in which the number is valid.
 
TOSSAM said:
Thanks Susie and Britsimon for your insight, but i don't get the point, if there were 52342 visas instead of 55000 issued for the 2014DV then on which bases did the CO tell me that visa nos were finished on a visa that had been approved earlier on when 2658 visas ended up not being used?
Click to expand...


In addition to what Susie said - (and I agree that that number was OVER, not under the allocation), imagine the difficulties in last minute visa approvals. KCC are getting reports in from 150 embassies in the world. Those embassies are giving feedback on how many visas they used, how many were unused or the need for more visas. In cases where the selectee was scheduled normally during that final month, there should be a visa allocated for each selectee BUT if someone has been rescheduled for some reason that would not be the case. Since it sounds like you did not switch embassies or reschedule, the only explanation is that the embassy somehow screwed up and used your visa slot for someone else.

Regardless of the reason, they are not able to change the decision, they have no legal liability to you and I would be surprised if you even got an apology. I am sorry to say, you are wasting your time on this.
 
I am not wasting anytime, they should be wasting their own time researching on a case for 2 weeks if they knew already it was useless, besides thats even too mean going down by your narrative. Excuse me, i respect your insights on this subject which suggests to me that you have a lot of experience on it but the fact that they have no legal liability to me does not justify this. The fact that i want to have answers to a decision that did not make sense to me and many others should tell you that they are not dealing with idiots or fools maybe desparados-yes. I spent money, time and energy into this process and i also understand they did too but if there should be mutual respect for each party then i think they have responded in a mature manner by asking me to allow them 15 days to research on it. That reaction is a step that i appreciate and I am sure you will be more than surprised. You should not be sorry though.
 
TOSSAM said:
I am not wasting anytime, they should be wasting their own time researching on a case for 2 weeks if they knew already it was useless, besides thats even too mean going down by your narrative. Excuse me, i respect your insights on this subject which suggests to me that you have a lot of experience on it but the fact that they have no legal liability to me does not justify this. The fact that i want to have answers to a decision that did not make sense to me and many others should tell you that they are not dealing with idiots or fools maybe desparados-yes. I spent money, time and energy into this process and i also understand they did too but if there should be mutual respect for each party then i think they have responded in a mature manner by asking me to allow them 15 days to research on it. That reaction is a step that i appreciate and I am sure you will be more than surprised. You should not be sorry though.
Click to expand...

Tossam. I am not the enemy. I am not wishing you to fail. Just giving you "real" advice.

So let me ask you - what is the best outcome you would want to come from this?
 
TOSSAM said:
I am not wasting anytime, they should be wasting their own time researching on a case for 2 weeks if they knew already it was useless, besides thats even too mean going down by your narrative. Excuse me, i respect your insights on this subject which suggests to me that you have a lot of experience on it but the fact that they have no legal liability to me does not justify this. The fact that i want to have answers to a decision that did not make sense to me and many others should tell you that they are not dealing with idiots or fools maybe desparados-yes. I spent money, time and energy into this process and i also understand they did too but if there should be mutual respect for each party then i think they have responded in a mature manner by asking me to allow them 15 days to research on it. That reaction is a step that i appreciate and I am sure you will be more than surprised. You should not be sorry though.
Click to expand...
However unfair the personal outcome may have been, what I do not understand is this: you are talking 2014AF00076071, which is such a long time over and done with. Why are you raising this issue now in December 2015/January 2016? What outcome, if any, would you expect to result from a long expired government program, closely regulated by US law? Sometimes, as difficult as it may be, it is better to get bad news in life behind you and to start looking forward.
 
TOSSAM said:
I am not wasting anytime, they should be wasting their own time researching on a case for 2 weeks if they knew already it was useless, besides thats even too mean going down by your narrative. Excuse me, i respect your insights on this subject which suggests to me that you have a lot of experience on it but the fact that they have no legal liability to me does not justify this. The fact that i want to have answers to a decision that did not make sense to me and many others should tell you that they are not dealing with idiots or fools maybe desparados-yes. I spent money, time and energy into this process and i also understand they did too but if there should be mutual respect for each party then i think they have responded in a mature manner by asking me to allow them 15 days to research on it. That reaction is a step that i appreciate and I am sure you will be more than surprised. You should not be sorry though.
Click to expand...

I think Simon meant -- don't hold a false hope that they will grant you a visa.

(Also I am certain the "2 weeks" is an automatic response to every inquiry they get, rather than a time period based on the merits of your particular case. I wouldn't read anything into that at all.)
 
Simon, why would putting that number into CEAC result in "Your search did not return any data." ?
(It can't be age of visa case - my 2013 DV case still comes up. Surely there should be something of ready/issued/refused/something if it went to interview??)
 
SusieQQQ said:
Simon, why would putting that number into CEAC result in "Your search did not return any data." ?
(It can't be age of visa case - my 2013 DV case still comes up. Surely there should be something of ready/issued/refused/something if it went to interview??)
Click to expand...

They delete some records - that one has been deleted. The reason or commonality between the cases that get deleted is not clear - but I have clear evidence of cases that are deleted - and even had to make a change in the extract program to cope when they delete the principal winner (but not the derivatives). This has been happening for as long as I have been running the scripts, but there was a mass delete on 2015 data after the year ended.
 
EURO2014 said:
However unfair the personal outcome may have been, what I do not understand is this: you are talking 2014AF00076071, which is such a long time over and done with. Why are you raising this issue now in December 2015/January 2016? What outcome, if any, would you expect to result from a long expired government program, closely regulated by US law? Sometimes, as difficult as it may be, it is better to get bad news in life behind you and to start looking forward.
Click to expand...


I am raising this issue now irrespective of the fact it is a long expired government program closely regulated by US law as you put it because i do not believe this same US law prescribes the treatment of human beings as fools, idiots and morons who after subjecting them to a series of rigorous administrative stress to comply with their consular requirements would not even have the courtesy to explain to an applicant in the phase of a decision which leaves even the so called experts wondering. I am raising it because i believe so strongly that it is the right thing to do. I am not under any illusion that the White House, the DHS, DOS, Capitol Hill or the Dept of Justice will give me a visa but i know these institutions have the power to do so and non of you in this forum can convince me otherwise. Like i said, that is not my intention and i have moved on since that incident but moving on does not mean i do not deserve the right to find out what went wrong even if this information should be to my disadvantage and so i am confident and wanna know why. I have other methods of putting pressure to bear on the US government over this issue, I got great contacts with documentary film makers who can rally victims to access the various levels this decision have affected their lives, it could also be likened so some kind of an organise scam and they will be a case to argue on in the social media and the civil societies. Believe me it will go viral on youtube and gather enough signatures to necessitate a debate in congress. So please do not give me the impression that you have a problem when intelligent people simply try to stand up for their rights and in this case i fulfilled my own part of the deal.
 
TOSSAM said:
I am raising this issue now irrespective of the fact it is a long expired government program closely regulated by US law as you put it because i do not believe this same US law prescribes the treatment of human beings as fools, idiots and morons who after subjecting them to a series of rigorous administrative stress to comply with their consular requirements would not even have the courtesy to explain to an applicant in the phase of a decision which leaves even the so called experts wondering. I am raising it because i believe so strongly that it is the right thing to do. I am not under any illusion that the White House, the DHS, DOS, Capitol Hill or the Dept of Justice will give me a visa but i know these institutions have the power to do so and non of you in this forum can convince me otherwise. Like i said, that is not my intention and i have moved on since that incident but moving on does not mean i do not deserve the right to find out what went wrong even if this information should be to my disadvantage and so i am confident and wanna know why. I have other methods of putting pressure to bear on the US government over this issue, I got great contacts with documentary film makers who can rally victims to access the various levels this decision have affected their lives, it could also be likened so some kind of an organise scam and they will be a case to argue on in the social media and the civil societies. Believe me it will go viral on youtube and gather enough signatures to necessitate a debate in congress. So please do not give me the impression that you have a problem when intelligent people simply try to stand up for their rights and in this case i fulfilled my own part of the deal.
Click to expand...
You clearly are in the wrong forum, this one is for folks seeking advice on how to successfully obtain permanent residency through DV Lottery. As several people have repeatedly told you, you won't get such benefits from DV-2014. End of story as far as this forum is concerned. As you seem to like dwelling in history: your one and only chance for successful processing occurred between the day of your interview, September 16th and September 30th 2014, the day DV 2014 expired. That was your chance to raise hell and to make sure a visa number had been assigned to your case, to wait until October 9, 2014 and to do nothing was not smart, to say the least.

Anyway, this is all water under the bridge... You may rather want to take your case to a forum where folks with US Government grievances gather. There are many of those, I guess, and you will find sympathy and encouragement for "other methods of putting pressure to bear on the US government over this issue". Good luck with that.
 
Last edited:
EURO2014 said:
Anyway, this is all water under the bridge... You may rather want to take your case to a forum where folks with US Government grievances gather. There are many of those, I guess, and you will find sympathy and encouragement for "other methods of putting pressure to bear on the US government over this issue". Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

Indeed. He may also want to look up the class action of the winners who weren't in DV2012, etc.
Apart from the fact that the well documented ways of getting things debated in Congress do not include "going viral on YouTube", but I guess some people just won't hear what they don't want to hear. As far as DHS is concerned they already told him "what went wrong" anyway, but he refuses to understand that the limit is 50k not 55k. Anyway you are right, this is not the forum for him.
 
I was derivative on a DV2014 case. The 1NL said this:-

"You have been randomly selected for further processing in the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program for the fiscal year 2014 (October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2014). Selection does not guarantee that you will receive a visa because the number of applicants selected is greater than the number of visas available. Please print out this letter and take it with you to your visa interview.

Approximately 125,000 individuals were registered for further processing. Therefore, it is very important that you carefully follow instructions to increase your chances of possible visa issuance."

So - from the second sentence I knew we were not guaranteed a visa/GC. The 4th sentence makes it clear that there are more winners than visas. The 5th sentence made it clear that even if I followed all the instructions I was still only "increasing my chances".

I thought everyone got that same letter....


Oh - and one last thing - my case number has been deleted from CEAC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top