In a perfect world, that would be the case. However, we've all seen numerous cases on this forum where the IO refused to approve a case until proof of payment was provided, despite the fact that the applicant stated that s/he paid the ticket.
Traffic tickets and naturalization (threads merged)
- Thread starter patel789
- Start date
In a perfect world, that would be the case. However, we've all seen numerous cases on this forum where the IO refused to approve a case until proof of payment was provided, despite the fact that the applicant stated that s/he paid the ticket.
Maybe the amount of traffic tickets received in a given time is a trigger for some IOs to ask for evidence of payment eventhough you tell them they are all paid.
It's possible. However, a recent NYC applicant was asked to bring proof of payment for 1(!!!) ticket. He had no other tickets, but the IO refused to approve his application until proof was provided.
Here's the link to the post: http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1903469&postcount=1314
I stand corrected. This individual had several traffic tickets, but was only missing proof of payment for one of them.
Last edited by a moderator:
My interpretation is based on the personal experience and what I have seen recently on this Board (acorss multiple DOs).
- No need to mention the minor moving violations on the N-400 (< $500).
- However, take a copy of DMV/MVA record (covering last 7 years)
- Take the proof of payments for the recent traffic tickets
During the interview, the question is bound to be asked if you have EVER been cited by a Law Enforcement officer, be truthful and mention the minor traffic tickets. In many instances the IO will just say you are fine and will not ask you futher questions on the minor tickets (many recent examples in the Baltimore DO). On the otherside of it and as it happened in my case in the Washington DC (Fairfax DO), the IO Will ask to see the proof if you have paid for those minor tickets that you just mentioned in the interview. Now they will not ask you HOW MANY tickets you have got, only that IF YOU HAVE PAID for them (Demonstrating Good Moral Character).
- No need to mention the minor moving violations on the N-400 (< $500).
- However, take a copy of DMV/MVA record (covering last 7 years)
- Take the proof of payments for the recent traffic tickets
During the interview, the question is bound to be asked if you have EVER been cited by a Law Enforcement officer, be truthful and mention the minor traffic tickets. In many instances the IO will just say you are fine and will not ask you futher questions on the minor tickets (many recent examples in the Baltimore DO). On the otherside of it and as it happened in my case in the Washington DC (Fairfax DO), the IO Will ask to see the proof if you have paid for those minor tickets that you just mentioned in the interview. Now they will not ask you HOW MANY tickets you have got, only that IF YOU HAVE PAID for them (Demonstrating Good Moral Character).
i'm gonna go with- if it's under 500bucks and you did (obviously) pay them, and your case is relatively straight forward, don't mention them at all.
let's do this- instead of heresay, and speculation- let's do a poll...
1. you didn't mention them, it wasn't asked, and you got approved.
2. you didn't mention them, it was asked, you admitted to some- but you still got approved without proof
3. you didn't mention them, it was asked, you admitted- you didn't get approved cause you had no proof.
4. you mentioned them, it wasn't asked, you got approved
5. you mentioned them, it was asked, you had proof, you got approved
6. you mentioned them, it was asked, you didn't have proof, you got denied.
7. you mentioned them, it was asked, you didn't have proof, you got approved.
I'd say the MAJORITY either fall into 1/2
camp12, did or didn't the IO go over all the question of the N-400 with you at the interview? It's been reported that many IOs basically go over all the questions, line by line at the interview so answering "no" to question 16 and not disclosing any traffic tickets you have technically is lying under oath.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Community relations doc posted here is seems deliberately vague. The idea of that question on N400 seems to be that , "Yes mention everything you know but IO will determine if it is relevant and persue it if needed" and so it says "No need for additional documentation" till IO asks for it. Determining moral character is totally subjective and so they want to know everything about you and then have an IO make that subjective decision. Basically, you are at the mercy of the IOs subjective decision.
To end the controversy and the confusion they should alter the question in the application and/or add a question that refers to traffic related incidences only. The problem with the question is that minor traffic violations get thrown together with other criminal behavior without being distinguishable. If they are not interested in speeding tickets and non DUI related traffic violations then they should clearly state so, if they are they should also clearly state that and also state what documents they want included in the application or in the interview. Whatever it is that they really want, people have a hard time understanding. I truly think it is the only question in the application that is utterly confusing.
I think they left this as it is just to make it more confusing for people. I never mentioned mine (since USCIS told me not to when I contacted them) and the IO asked if I had been in court ever, so I told him yes and both were for speeding tickets that were under $500/non dui. He didn't show any interest after that and I got my citizenship without any problems.
Others have, so it's going to be one of those where it boils down to the IO and just the IO. If you have other things on your application that might be in question then it's probably better to mention them. If not, then, well, take a chance.
This topic will never be fully understood until they do re-form the question.
It doesn't hurt to mention them at all, but if you do, be prepared to have evidence you paid them...
Others have, so it's going to be one of those where it boils down to the IO and just the IO. If you have other things on your application that might be in question then it's probably better to mention them. If not, then, well, take a chance.
This topic will never be fully understood until they do re-form the question.
It doesn't hurt to mention them at all, but if you do, be prepared to have evidence you paid them...
If you tell them about the tickets, they just want to make sure that you have paid... most of the IOs take your word for the fines under $500.00. If you have marked 'No' for question 16, they will mark it yes when you talk about that in the interview time... it is not a big deal.. shouldnt worry about that... court doc or anything that supports that you have paid are the papers you should have it in interview to be on the safe side... but they will not look at it.. most likely.
Jackolantern
Registered Users (C)
Don't forget #8 ... you didn't mention them, it was asked, you didn't admit to them, you got approved, then some years later they find out and you're denaturalized and deported.
To which you can add "You fought deportation, appealed your case successfully to the district court who upheld that not disclosing traffic tickets on a naturalization form in itself is not enough to denaturalize and deport you . You later go on to write a book about your ordeal, sign a movie deal and become rich and famous in the process and decide to retire in Cuba"
Well the USCIS isn't going to be doing all the research on people to see if they had speeding tickets in the past after already passing them in the interview way down the road. In a lot of cases people have had trouble getting their own records from the districts they got the fines since they have been either purged or what not from the system.
USCIS have much more important things to do and look for then someones speeding ticket they didn't mention...
USCIS have much more important things to do and look for then someones speeding ticket they didn't mention...
Based on my experience I feel that there is no need to disclose simple traffic tickets, although I did so, but if you do then you should be ready to provide evidence of disposition. Either way one should be fine from naturalization perspective. Even better is to get professional opinion if this question is causing too much grief.
ajaykumar87
New Member
Definition of "citation" - Just wanted to be clear
Here is how merriam-webster defines "citation"
-----------------------------------------------
Main Entry: ci·ta·tion
Pronunciation: \sī-ˈtā-shən\
Function: noun
Date: 13th century
1: an official summons to appear (as before a court)
2 a: an act of quoting; especially : the citing of a previously settled case at law b: excerpt, quotation
3: mention: as a: a formal statement of the achievements of a person receiving an academic honor b: specific reference in a military dispatch to meritorious performance of duty
-----------------------------------------------
If you were not summoned to appear before a court, it was not technically a citation. How does USCIS define citation?
Here is how merriam-webster defines "citation"
-----------------------------------------------
Main Entry: ci·ta·tion
Pronunciation: \sī-ˈtā-shən\
Function: noun
Date: 13th century
1: an official summons to appear (as before a court)
2 a: an act of quoting; especially : the citing of a previously settled case at law b: excerpt, quotation
3: mention: as a: a formal statement of the achievements of a person receiving an academic honor b: specific reference in a military dispatch to meritorious performance of duty
-----------------------------------------------
If you were not summoned to appear before a court, it was not technically a citation. How does USCIS define citation?
You make a valid point. However, let's say that instead of paying the ticket, a person pleads not guilty and goes to court to plead their case in front of an administrative law judge. Does it become a citation then?
Just to let you know, I fully support not disclosing traffic tickets that are non-DWI/DUI/reckless driving and are under $500. My question is purely academic.
I just want to come back and give an update. I went to the NYC government website to dispute the parking ticket based on Vorpal's response. I did the online hearing. Put all my address, contact numbers, and reasons for my defense. I don't owe anything and I am clear now. I was hoping they would send me some types of notification or confirmation. However, it didn't and I just went back to check the ticket status online. it's clear.
I am happy to hear that. Thanks everyone.
I am happy to hear that. Thanks everyone.
See, didn't I tell you everything would be OK and the ticket would get dismissed?
Congratulations and good luck with your N-400 next year!
That's good. You can appy for N-400, but remember parking ticket is not a big deal. it is very small. told you not to worry about it.
I am curious.. what did the status say exactly after you put your contact information and reasons online at the NYC govt website?