Partner wins Lottery - Advice needed for KCC Douments and Process Starting

[Sensei-san]

I was told that whatever I do, I have till September 2015 to reschedule and it can be done just once. Not that I really care about rescheduling anyway. But I want to get to the root of this matter...this is why I am hoping for one of those who went through the same to tell how it ended for them.

In my case, I tried to get the the US embassy in Poland to elaborate on what might apply as "Incorrect information" to no avail. The DV instructions highlight what might lead to a disqualification on this particular subject of marital status.....
i- Failure to add the name of an already married spouse on the entry.
ii-Failure to add names of any children on the entry.

They kept mentioning at the start of a few correspondences that "You could have filled in the correct information" while balancing it out in the end with "when you attend your interview, a consular will look at the case". I just wonder why they couldn't simply elaborate on what exactly the incorrect information applies to and how come a few unmarried/engaged couples are treated as married couples for tax purposes in the US.
I know of people who get married via social media like skype...Yes skype, and are not given marriage certificates, whose marriages are recognized for Visa purposes.
I know of a few friends while working in the US that legitly got tax benefits as couples while unmarried and mentioned it to whoever was on the other end to which they didn't respond.
I also know of couples that are traditionally co-joined esp in countries in the West Africa subregion, whose unions are blessed and recognized as marriage unions for Visa purposes, and qualify as married couples. Since I am from West Africa married to a woman from Poland, isn't it right that whatever rules apply to people from there should apply to me?

Plus I was told exactly the same thing like the consular told Mamacyta who had the same case so how come the translation of US immigration laws are applied differently only in Warsaw, Poland. Nowhere else in the world. How come they make their own rules there?

Whoever answers emails or phone calls at an embassy is probably not a CO. So that person is not in the position to give you a resolute authoritavie answer, that you could take as evidence to an interview. Moreover, staff's interpretation may or may not be comprehensive. Thus, they tell you that a CO has final say on this.

I did not look into the DV instructions, but if it really talks only about i and ii, than what you have is not a direct violation ot these spectific instructions. However, you need to look at other instructions and decide whether your situation could be construed as a material misrepresentation by a CO.

As you probably know, different embassies may have different interpretations and levels of strictness as they apply instructions to issue visas. You may also find that some COs are more discretionary, within reason, than others.

When did you officially get married?

 

[Sensei-san]

I really think lukasz did not mean to offend Britsimon (BS).
Yes, it sounded like he dicounted BS a bit, but that's probably because he did not know how big BS was. But than, the conversation got aggravated, because others rushed to defend BS.

lukasz ,
Britsimon , Sm1smom and SusieQQQ are rightfully the Holy Trinity of DV. In law, IT and other subjects, they are the best chance you've got.

 

[lukasz]

Whoever answers emails or phone calls at an embassy is probably not a CO. So that person is not in the position to give you a resolute authoritavie answer, that you could take as evidence to an interview. Moreover, staff's interpretation may or may not be comprehensive. Thus, they tell you that a CO has final say on this.

I did not look into the DV instructions, but if it really talks only about i and ii, than what you have is not a direct violation ot these spectific instructions. However, you need to look at other instructions and decide whether your situation could be construed as a material misrepresentation by a CO.

As you probably know, different embassies may have different interpretations and levels of strictness as they apply instructions to issue visas. You may also find that some COs are more discretionary, within reason, than others.

When did you officially get married?

"Whoever answers emails or phone calls at an embassy is probably not a CO. So that person is not in the position to give you a resolute authoritavie answer, that you could take as evidence to an interview. Moreover, staff's interpretation may or may not be comprehensive. Thus, they tell you that a CO has final say on this." I thought COs were the ones that answered emails directly sent to the Contact Consular email links?

We officially got married in June, had our child in July(9 months from October as advised by the doctor to put away any plans for marriage in early November 2013 when she had just confiemed conception just to increase our chances of keeping the pregnancy)

 

[lukasz]

All you can do is reschedule and see what happens. Go with as much information/docs to back up your case.
We can keep pontificating but it's all up to you. The original posters of this issue seem to have long gone. You go for it and let us know how it goes.

You are right about that.

 

[lukasz]

If only I knew anything about immigration law instead of just IT....

But just to be clear - the rules are applied the same everywhere because the laws are US laws. The LAW recognizes that marriage is different in various countries around the world - you just want to pick and choose to create the scenario most advantageous to your liking. The remote marriage thing you "know" is specifically excluded from acceptable marriages and a lot of other stuff you "know" is complete BS. But you don't want to listen - you just want to go on and on and on....

In all seriousness, if you ever do get an interview you are likely to talk yourself into a denial. I honestly cannot remember if you are the selectee or not, but if you are a derivative they will have no interest in 99.9% of what you want to say. Most interviews last 3 to 5 minutes. No one will have time or patience to listen to your speeches, and quite honestly they are just going to ignore your waffle and make a decision based on the documents your present.

LOL@ "In all seriousness, if you ever do get an interview you are likely to talk yourself into a denial.......No one will have time or patience to listen to your speeches, and quite honestly they are just going to ignore your waffle " There you go again with the funny talk. If I replied to that in the same tone, I'm sure your supporters club'll all jump out from their hiding places again to tackle me for talking back to their almighty BS. I'll just ignore the offensive tone of your response and start by thanking you for writing out your thoughts. I didn't just start migrating yesterday. And truly, if only you knew more about immigration law just the way you do your IT discipline, you'd understand that

1-Nope the rules are not being applied everywhere and the proof in that is on the US post in Warsaw's placing of that misleading general statement on their website when other US posts stick to the DV instructions and it's listed disqualifying factors (aside from Post specific findings on other criteria that might lead to a disqualification). Thus my wanting to get more information from those who have undergone the same here.

2-What you refer to as "remote marriages" are actually legally considered as "proxy marriages" and though they are valid, the US govt usually doesn't recognize them for immigration purposes "UNLESS" the parties involved consumate the marriage after it is done. And by consumate, yes I mean have sexual relations after the marriage. So because BritSimon thinks it is BS , It is not BS to the agencies that work with these situations.

3-I am not new to being interviewed at US consulates. If I ever did get an interview for this case, I know that the entire eligibility screening would be on my wife(the winner) and she would need to do the talking; though certain factors about me would be taken into consideration in adjudicating the whole process(medical report, police history, if I had any criminal records in Nigeria, Poland, UK or the US which are places I have lived in for more than 6 months since after turning 18). so don't worry about "anyone being likely to talk themselves into a denial".

4- Wasn't my coming here to ask questions about this subject all about firstly knowing if the misleading statement on the US consul in Warsaw Poland's website concerning the too general statement on incorrect entries regarding marital status applies to this case, before I start thinking about what and how to present proof documents to be presented by my wife?

 

[lukasz]

I really think lukasz did not mean to offend Britsimon (BS).
Yes, it sounded like he dicounted BS a bit, but that's probably because he did not know how big BS was. But than, the conversation got aggravated, because others rushed to defend BS.

lukasz ,
Britsimon , Sm1smom and SusieQQQ are rightfully the Holy Trinity of DV. In law, IT and other subjects, they are the best chance you've got.

Nope I didn't set out to offend BS or anyone else and yes I discounted what he said for a good reason. We are all learning via each others' experiences, the experiences of those around us but outside this forum and from each others' advanced knowledge on certain subjects. Britsimon might know a lot about the DV process but even he himself will agree that he doesn't know it all. Neither do I know it all. So if I or anyone else is giving out wrong information, let those who have better knowledge confront that person with the proof so that We all would be better for it and actually learn something which can help someone somewhere out.

The fact that someone's name bears the tag "new member" doesn't always mean they are always totally new to immigration. Unlike Britsimon who is very helpful here, I have a lot of activities that keep me outside, else I too would be here helping people. So it's totally okay that people would jump in behind Brit to talk the new guy down.

 

[Britsimon]

Haven't you hired a lawyer yet?

 

[SusieQQQ]

This entire thread can now be summed up as tl;dr !!!

 

[Biggie]

Haven't you hired a lawyer yet?

Classic

 

[lukasz]

Haven't you hired a lawyer yet?

BS, Don't worry, if I was looking for a lawyer to advise me on this case, it definitely won't be you. If I was even looking for someone to recommend a lawyer that would take up this case, it won't be you. So thank you for the help rendered in spotting this inconsistency on the US post in Warsaw's website.

Meanwhile, moving on....
SusieQQQ, I thought this was you giving really solid advise to the user Sabal whose case was somehow related to mine here.
- http://forums.immigration.com/threads/dv2015-and-marriage-challenge.321859/

Especially when you said, "I would like to add something that may not get 100% agreement here. It appears that while leaving off derivatives is a definite disqualification, that adding in a spouse before you are legally married is not necessarily one. Even if you cannot get a copy of the original documents, in your situation I personally would still take the chance of going for the visa, taking all the evidence of the relationship you've spoken about, including the movie etc of the wedding in the US."

You were also onto something when you said, "Like I said before, previous consular official link gives the result of case 2 as visa granted. Seems they don't mind extra people on the form, just don't like leaving them out."

The conversation between you SusieQQQ, the user EURO2014 and the poster Sabal was very informative and was leading somewhere. I wonder why Sabal didn't come back to tell how his case ended.

 

[EURO2014]

BS, Don't worry, if I was looking for a lawyer to advise me on this case, it definitely won't be you. If I was even looking for someone to recommend a lawyer that would take up this case, it won't be you. So thank you for the help rendered in spotting this inconsistency on the US post in Warsaw's website.

Meanwhile, moving on....
SusieQQQ, I thought this was you giving really solid advise to the user Sabal whose case was somehow related to mine here.
- http://forums.immigration.com/threads/dv2015-and-marriage-challenge.321859/

Especially when you said, "I would like to add something that may not get 100% agreement here. It appears that while leaving off derivatives is a definite disqualification, that adding in a spouse before you are legally married is not necessarily one. Even if you cannot get a copy of the original documents, in your situation I personally would still take the chance of going for the visa, taking all the evidence of the relationship you've spoken about, including the movie etc of the wedding in the US."

You were also onto something when you said, "Like I said before, previous consular official link gives the result of case 2 as visa granted. Seems they don't mind extra people on the form, just don't like leaving them out."

The conversation between you SusieQQQ, the user EURO2014 and the poster Sabal was very informative and was leading somewhere. I wonder why Sabal didn't come back to tell how his case ended.

LOL - looks like I haven't missed much while I was away in Europe & returned the US end of last week... Anything else happened while I was gone?

 

[Sensei-san]

LOL@ "In all seriousness, if you ever do get an interview you are likely to talk yourself into a denial.......No one will have time or patience to listen to your speeches, and quite honestly they are just going to ignore your waffle " There you go again with the funny talk. If I replied to that in the same tone, I'm sure your supporters club'll all jump out from their hiding places again to tackle me for talking back to their almighty BS. I'll just ignore the offensive tone of your response and start by thanking you for writing out your thoughts. I didn't just start migrating yesterday. And truly, if only you knew more about immigration law just the way you do your IT discipline, you'd understand that

1-Nope the rules are not being applied everywhere and the proof in that is on the US post in Warsaw's placing of that misleading general statement on their website when other US posts stick to the DV instructions and it's listed disqualifying factors (aside from Post specific findings on other criteria that might lead to a disqualification). Thus my wanting to get more information from those who have undergone the same here.

2-What you refer to as "remote marriages" are actually legally considered as "proxy marriages" and though they are valid, the US govt usually doesn't recognize them for immigration purposes "UNLESS" the parties involved consumate the marriage after it is done. And by consumate, yes I mean have sexual relations after the marriage. So because BritSimon thinks it is BS , It is not BS to the agencies that work with these situations.

3-I am not new to being interviewed at US consulates. If I ever did get an interview for this case, I know that the entire eligibility screening would be on my wife(the winner) and she would need to do the talking; though certain factors about me would be taken into consideration in adjudicating the whole process(medical report, police history, if I had any criminal records in Nigeria, Poland, UK or the US which are places I have lived in for more than 6 months since after turning 18). so don't worry about "anyone being likely to talk themselves into a denial".

4- Wasn't my coming here to ask questions about this subject all about firstly knowing if the misleading statement on the US consul in Warsaw Poland's website concerning the too general statement on incorrect entries regarding marital status applies to this case, before I start thinking about what and how to present proof documents to be presented by my wife?

I admit that I was wrong with my previous post here. Actually, this is egragiously arrogant that you started use the BS abriviation to mean profanity.
I do apologize to Britsimon , cause I brought it up in this tread.
People that are helping others here have massive experience of dealing with other people's cases over the years. Not many denial cases come back here to tell their experience after the fact. That is why I said that the best chace to get a meaningfull informational input is to lister to the Troika. You are fee to make your own conclusions and act based on them.
Your are reading what other knowledgeable wrote, but only find that information interesting if it does not refute you hypothesis. You violently defend your hypothesis if the information contradicts you preconlusions. This quite a congnitive dissonance that you are struggling with.

Other people feel indebted to Britsimon for his pricelees help. It hurts other people feelings when their hero is getting attacked.

Anyways, you just need to read as much as you can, decide where you want to interview and make your case to CO.
And please come back and tell your story even if it is not a happy one.

 

[lukasz]

I admit that I was wrong with my previous post here. Actually, this is egragiously arrogant that you started use the BS abriviation to mean profanity.
I do apologize to Britsimon , cause I brought it up in this tread.
People that are helping others here have massive experience of dealing with other people's cases over the years. Not many denial cases come back here to tell their experience after the fact. That is why I said that the best chace to get a meaningfull informational input is to lister to the Troika. You are fee to make your own conclusions and act based on them.
Your are reading what other knowledgeable wrote, but only find that information interesting if it does not refute you hypothesis. You violently defend your hypothesis if the information contradicts you preconlusions. This quite a congnitive dissonance that you are struggling with.

Other people feel indebted to Britsimon for his pricelees help. It hurts other people feelings when their hero is getting attacked.

Anyways, you just need to read as much as you can, decide where you want to interview and make your case to CO.
And please come back and tell your story even if it is not a happy one.

Nope, if you read my post well the BS was used sometimes as a person identifier and sometimes as bullshyt. And how was I doing the attacking when your boy was and has been the one doing just that by unprofessionally making funny remarks, mocking and putting out bad information? Funny remarks, which I didn't even respond to.
I've followed other topics related somehow to this case and some really great information came from SuzieQQQ and some from EURO2014 from the link I provided in my previous post... The information these two specifically gave had been noted, but I made the initial post to try and draw the attention of any of the previous members who had a similar or first hand experience related to this subject...before all the BS started.
Anyway it's cool though, I'll do me on this one.