Mentioning traffic violation??

If you decide to disclose the ticket, make sure you bring proof of payment/court disposition to the interview. There's a good chance that the IO will ask for it, despite what the Guide to Naturalization says. There have been a few reports on this forum of applicants getting continuance letters for minor traffic tickets because the IO wanted to see proof that they were settled.
 
If you decide to disclose the ticket, make sure you bring proof of payment/court disposition to the interview. There's a good chance that the IO will ask for it, despite what the Guide to Naturalization says. There have been a few reports on this forum of applicants getting continuance letters for minor traffic tickets because the IO wanted to see proof that they were settled.

Yes you will definatly need to bring all proof if you mention it as it's often asked if you disclose it. If you do not it's rare that they will ask for it, unless there are other concerns with your N-400.

One easy way to determine if you should or should not mention them is by how complex your N-400 is. If you have nothing unusual, long stays, any criminal records etc, then in most cases you don't need to mention them.

If you have a lot of tickets, or have had some convictions or been to court for lawsuits or been away for a long peoriod out of the US, then you might want to bring them to prove that you are upholding US law by paying them.

Really though, as the 1-800 INS people stated, the lawyers I talked to stated and my own interviewing IO stated. No you do not need to disclose them if they are under $500 and non-DUI. The only time I've heard people saying you must disclose them are common users on this board, never from the professionals or the INS themselves.

But it's up to you, it doesn't hurt, but it can be time consuming if you have to go find all the documentation on all your tickets from all the places you got them from...
 
You're 100% correct. Not to sound like a broken record, but the IO in charge of my oath ceremony specifically stated that no one is to disclose minor traffic tickets on the back of the oath letter. When one oath taker tried to disclose a ticket, she stopped the ceremony and repeated that she doesn't want anyone disclosing minor traffic tickets.

As we've determined time and time again, there is absolutely no uniformity to the treatment of traffic tickets on the N-400. For example, Ron Gotcher, a known immigration attorney, states that applicants with traffic tickets should answer "YES" not only the Question 16, but to Question 15 as well (Have you ever committed a crime or offense for which you were not arrested?). I've even seen some attorneys equate traffic tickets to arrests. Bottom line is this: there are as many opinions as there are attorneys. My personal take is that if M-476 specifically instructs applicants not to submit documents for minor traffic tickets and since they don't count toward one's moral character requirement, then what exactly is the purpose of disclosing them? If we must disclose minor traffic tickets, then we should also disclose parking tickets, red light camera tickets, and written warnings.

Here's another example that just came to mind. One of my old coworkers, who didn't disclose his traffic tickets on the N-400, had his interview in April 2007. After having read this forum, I advised him to disclose his traffic tickets and to bring proof of payment. When he attempted to do it at the interview, the IO waved him off and said that they don't care about minor traffic tickets. The interview, by the way, was at 26 Federal Plaza, the same DO where nyc_newbie's application was denied for 2 speeding tickets. Go figure.

Yes you will definatly need to bring all proof if you mention it as it's often asked if you disclose it. If you do not it's rare that they will ask for it, unless there are other concerns with your N-400.

One easy way to determine if you should or should not mention them is by how complex your N-400 is. If you have nothing unusual, long stays, any criminal records etc, then in most cases you don't need to mention them.

If you have a lot of tickets, or have had some convictions or been to court for lawsuits or been away for a long peoriod out of the US, then you might want to bring them to prove that you are upholding US law by paying them.

Really though, as the 1-800 INS people stated, the lawyers I talked to stated and my own interviewing IO stated. No you do not need to disclose them if they are under $500 and non-DUI. The only time I've heard people saying you must disclose them are common users on this board, never from the professionals or the INS themselves.

But it's up to you, it doesn't hurt, but it can be time consuming if you have to go find all the documentation on all your tickets from all the places you got them from...
 
Vorpal, I also dont think its wise to give advice on this forum that its ok to blindly say no to all the traffic violations. As warlord mentioned, if you have lots of tickets then its better to mention them because getting a ticket every other month in my opinion can be against GMC.
 
Vorpal, I also dont think its wise to give advice on this forum that its ok to blindly say no to all the traffic violations. As warlord mentioned, if you have lots of tickets then its better to mention them because getting a ticket every other month in my opinion can be against GMC.

I think you should reread what I've posted. At no point did I advise anyone not to disclose traffic tickets. I merely recounted my experience and stated that it worked for me. As far as GMC goes, it has already been determined by courts that minor traffic tickets don't count towards moral character requirements. There was a case in the late 1950s, where an naturalization applicant had his application denied due to traffic tickets. From what I remember, he had something to the extent of 20 speeding tickets in a year, as well as other traffic violations. He took his case to court and was naturalized. The court decided that minor traffic violations do not constitute poor moral character.

Before you even ask, I don't have a link to this particular case, but it has been discussed on this forum in the past.
 
Top