One reason not to send CSC too many faxes

Who knows, maybe they really transferred me because of my faxes?

Here are my contacts with the government:

7 fax inquiries to CSC
3 phone inquiries to NCSC
2 phone inquiries to CSC (1 of which to the "lawyer number")
1 phone inquiry by lawyer (informing me that my case is still pending)
2 inquiries by Senators
7 e-mails to Ombdusman Khatri (of which only 1 regarding my case specifically)
14 e-mails to Director Neufeld (none of which regarding my case, but that maybe nailed me anyway)
 
3 faxes, letters to senator => RFE

I sent at least 3 faxes, letters to senators.. probably that inspired RFE within a month...

mind you all.. this is total speculation.. my employer was a very small startup, so who knows whats why!!
 
ruxrux said:
Who knows, maybe they really transferred me because of my faxes?

Here are my contacts with the government:

7 fax inquiries to CSC
3 phone inquiries to NCSC
2 phone inquiries to CSC (1 of which to the "lawyer number")
1 phone inquiry by lawyer (informing me that my case is still pending)
2 inquiries by Senators
7 e-mails to Ombdusman Khatri (of which only 1 regarding my case specifically)
14 e-mails to Director Neufeld (none of which regarding my case, but that maybe nailed me anyway)
Click to expand...


I don't think so. There are forum members here who did lots of faxes and writing to senators/congress(wo)men, but still got approved - for example, kashmir, toonarmy. Whatever we draw conclusion here are purely speculation without any basis.
 
pralay said:
I don't think so. There are forum members here who did lots of faxes and writing to senators/congress(wo)men, but still got approved - for example, kashmir, toonarmy. Whatever we draw conclusion here are purely speculation without any basis.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree with Pralay
 
pralay said:
I don't think so. There are forum members here who did lots of faxes and writing to senators/congress(wo)men, but still got approved - for example, kashmir, toonarmy. Whatever we draw conclusion here are purely speculation without any basis.
Click to expand...
But Kashmir was named in the lawsuit - maybe they wanted him to be out of it ?
Not sure about toonarmy.

I agree what we have is just a suspicion now -- but unless we follow through with this analysis, we'll never find out ( if there is such a conspiracy ) !!!
 
gopher97 said:
I know I have taken heat in the past for discouraging multiple faxes to CSC. Here's my reasoning
Click to expand...
Come on! Where is the proof? Just because ruxrux got a transfer it doesn't signify ANYTHING. He has actively served in the military of another country, he is from croatia, those are just as good reasons for a transfer as compared to sending faxes. This is pure speculation with not a grain of truth to it. There are atleast as many people, who have sent multiple faxes, received their approvals as compared to those who have received transfers or RFE's.

I would leave this matter to each ones individual opinion and gut feeling, personally I don't think it matters, but please feel free to disagree.
 
No conspiracy theory

max2k1 said:
But Kashmir was named in the lawsuit - maybe they wanted him to be out of it ?
Not sure about toonarmy.

I agree what we have is just a suspicion now -- but unless we follow through with this analysis, we'll never find out ( if there is such a conspiracy ) !!!
Click to expand...

One of my friends got hold of his I-485 adjucator oneday by phone and literally foul-mouthed with him. Still he got approved shortly. You have to consider that they are professionals too and just doing their jobs (just like you and me). Yes, it's a lousy govt organization and most of the things are messed up there. But as I said, it's just "messed up", no conspiracy.
 
140_takes_4ever said:
There are atleast as many people, who have sent multiple faxes, received their approvals as compared to those who have received transfers or RFE's.
Click to expand...

Come on! Where is the proof?

Its just my opinion anyway. Having worked several years in customer service, I have personally seen the "special treatment" handed :rolleyes: to the constant pests, though I may be wrong in comparing that to BCIS' strange ways.
 
pralay said:
One of my friends got hold of his I-485 adjucator oneday by phone and literally foul-mouthed with him. Still he got approved shortly. You have to consider that they are professionals too and just doing their jobs (just like you and me). Yes, it's a lousy govt organization and most of the things are messed up there. But as I said, it's just "messed up", no conspiracy.
Click to expand...

How do u get a hold of the adjudicator?
:confused:

No conspiracy... just basic human psychology
 
pralay said:
I don't think so. There are forum members here who did lots of faxes and writing to senators/congress(wo)men, but still got approved - for example, kashmir, toonarmy. Whatever we draw conclusion here are purely speculation without any basis.
Click to expand...

Speculation, I agree just like almost everything else on this forum. I do have a basis though.
 
pralay said:
One of my friends got hold of his I-485 adjucator oneday by phone and literally foul-mouthed with him. Still he got approved shortly. You have to consider that they are professionals too and just doing their jobs (just like you and me). Yes, it's a lousy govt organization and most of the things are messed up there. But as I said, it's just "messed up", no conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Yeah - am not sure how your "friend" got hold of the adjudicator

Maybe it was just the poor CSR :D

Standard disclaimer: IF you manage to get hold of the adjudicator, do not "foul mouth" him/her :)

Anyways - who cares - all of us have our theories on this one .... you'll hear what you want to hear anyways !
 
gopher97 said:
How do u get a hold of the adjudicator?
:confused:
Click to expand...

Well, I believe that's a rare luck. He called regular customer service number for CSC. My friend foul-mouthed (with a bad accent and wrong annoying English....as I know him) so much that the IIO could not take it anymore. "Ok, I am transferring to the officer who is handling your case. You can discuss with him". When he was transferred to officer, he told "Either you deny it, or approve it. Why are you sitting on it for so long?". At one point officer told "yes, I can deny your case based on the information I have."
Within a month he was approved.
 
I think ruxrux's military background in Croatia is the reason why his case is transfered. I also think that he case was delayed due to the same fact.

I sent many faxes, they wrote me and asked me to back off and wait. got 2nd FP right after getting the letter and approval the following month. But, I don't encourage sending too many faxes (specially at weekly basis).
 
It may well be that, because I remember that I answered the question on "have you been in military service" as yes. However, I have also explained the circumstaces, that I was recruited and there was nothing I could do to avoid going.
But, I have at least 4 other Croatian friends who got approved without any questions asked, who were also recruited. They sent no faxes at all. This is too small a control group to draw any valid conclusions.

After the interview, I promise to let you know what was the centerpoint of the questioning. That is, if you keep hanging on here until then.

I just can't believe that CSC is so organized that they can keep track of one's faxing history and thus maliciously retaliate based on faxing. This would be outrageous.
 
Yes, all of us had to put yes there. No use lying to CIS, they won't deny my case based on that.
 
digdugxy said:
Did your friends also put Yes on the military service question?
man, you are honest.
Click to expand...

Are you dishonest?
It's always better to be honest when you know that you are innocent (or not-innocent), considering the special circumstances. It's always better to deal with the facts than trying to be perfect with lie/dishonesty. CIS does not take decision solely based on the information you provide. It has lots of ears - FBI, CIA and others.
 
pralay said:
Are you dishonest?
It's always better to be honest when you know that you are innocent (or not-innocent), considering the special circumstances. It's always better to deal with the facts than trying to be perfect with lie/dishonesty. CIS does not take decision solely based on the information you provide. It has lots of ears - FBI, CIA and others.
Click to expand...

Not dishonesty, little inaccuracy is okay, as one American president said, it saves a lot of explanation :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top