Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Getting in LEGALLY is hard. It would take YEARS for the OP to be well enough established in a job so that the govt would consider him good enough to be a sole sponsor. Quitting school and getting a fulltime job at Burger King is probably not going to give him enough money and a good work history for being a sponsor although maybe....maybe it would do the trick if he cannot find a co-sponsor. He would have to work there at least a year and get them to write a letter saying that he would continue to be employed there. Fiances can get rather nervous in the meantime, waiting and waiting.
This is a good point that I should have brought up earlier. Its not like the OP can just run out and get a job paying x amount of dollars and Immigration would then just rubber stamp his I-864. He is gonna have to show years of employment above that min threshold. If he doesn't meet the req now, he is 3 years away from it. They wanna see tax returns for last 3 years. If all 3 aren't above the min then it would most likely get denied unless he gets lucky during the immigration officer drawing lottery and they work with him and his workplace contemplating his continues employment.
Exactly. OP was clear that he wants to pay off a stranger (possibly from Craigslist) who is not actually willing to sponsor his wife. He wants assistance in creating a fraudulent application in exchange for cash. That's not exactly subtle!
How would the application be fraudulent? That the 3rd party gets paid by the OP is immaterial to the case as far USCIS is concerned, the only thing they care about is if he meets the 3 requirements to be a sponsor and willingly signs a statement supporting the fact. No where has any fraud been committed. There is no box for the sponsor to check [] Have you been compensated for your support? All they wanna know is his last 3 years income, his place of residence and his citizenship status.
How would the application be fraudulent? That the 3rd party gets paid by the OP is immaterial to the case as far USCIS is concerned, the only thing they care about is if he meets the 3 requirements to be a sponsor and willingly signs a statement supporting the fact. No where has any fraud been committed. There is no box for the sponsor to check [] Have you been compensated for your support? All they wanna know is his last 3 years income, his place of residence and his citizenship status.
Because the sponsor for a K1 visa is the affianced? The wording from the State Department website seems pretty clear, viz:
Okay, good. Finally we got beyond the needless bashing of the OP an the accusations of doing something "illegal." Now we are back at the beginning of the thread again.
How to find co-sponsors, how many can you have, and would they be acceptable. It sure takes a big waste of time before some people finally think and read. Seems to me that all the USCIS wants is someone (or a few someones) who will do the paperwork and make the promises.
I used a co-sponsor and there MAY have been questions about how long I had known her, I don't remember.
Okay, good. Finally we got beyond the needless bashing of the OP an the accusations of doing something "illegal." Now we are back at the beginning of the thread again.
How to find co-sponsors, how many can you have, and would they be acceptable. It sure takes a big waste of time before some people finally think and read. Seems to me that all the USCIS wants is someone (or a few someones) who will do the paperwork and make the promises.
I used a co-sponsor and there MAY have been questions about how long I had known her, I don't remember.
I believe that if the USCIS were to discover during their investigation of the co-sponsor that, (a) the co-sponsor had no prior relationship with the prime sponsor and, (b) was paid, they would likely consider this "illegal". It should also be noted that where other visas are concerned the USCIS tends to be more accepting of co-sponsors than they are with the K-1 visa and many USCIS agencies won't even consider a co-sponsorship on the K-1.
I believe that if the USCIS were to discover during their investigation of the co-sponsor that, (a) the co-sponsor had no prior relationship with the prime sponsor and, (b) was paid, they would likely consider this "illegal". It should also be noted that where other visas are concerned the USCIS tends to be more accepting of co-sponsors than they are with the K-1 visa and many USCIS agencies won't even consider a co-sponsorship on the K-1.
Look, you just do not understand the immigration process very well. The petitioner has to be a sponsor. BUT if his income doesn't meet the min then he has 2 choices. He can combine another household members income with his to meet the requirement OR he can get any other person in the US to sponsor the immigrant with their income alone (cannot combine with his). Does not change who is marrying who, it only changes the responsibility of providing for that immigrant from the fiancee to some 3rd party.
All they care about in this instance is someone to go after financially should the immigrant become a user of government financial assistance. This has nothing to do with the validity of the relationship between the immigrant and the fiance.
You can believe whatever you want, it doesn't make it right. Again please provide ANY reference where the USCIS requires the sponsor to be related.
Its true that IF they found out that about the payment that they might take a closer look at everything, its true that they might even deny the application for some arbitrary reason (easy to do). What they couldn't do would be bring any criminal charges against any party in this.
Also everyone should note that it will be extremely difficult for the OP to find a stranger to sponsor this. I am sure though that if he asks enough people that eventually one would say yes.
As to your statement in bold, there are other visas but they don't use the I-864 they use I-134. What we are discussing is the I-864 which is used in all cases of immigrant visas (with a few exceptions).
Last edited by justanokie; 10-15-2013 at 02:11 PM..
Look, you just do not understand the immigration process very well. The petitioner has to be a sponsor. BUT if his income doesn't meet the min then he has 2 choices. He can combine another household members income with his to meet the requirement OR he can get any other person in the US to sponsor the immigrant with their income alone (cannot combine with his). Does not change who is marrying who, it only changes the responsibility of providing for that immigrant from the fiancee to some 3rd party.
All they care about in this instance is someone to go after financially should the immigrant become a user of government financial assistance. This has nothing to do with the validity of the relationship between the immigrant and the fiance.
You can believe whatever you want, it doesn't make it right. Again please provide ANY reference where the USCIS requires the sponsor to be related.
Its true that IF they found out that about the payment that they might take a closer look at everything, its true that they might even deny the application for some arbitrary reason (easy to do). What they couldn't do would be bring any criminal charges against any party in this.
Also everyone should note that it will be extremely difficult for the OP to find a stranger to sponsor this. I am sure though that if he asks enough people that eventually one would say yes.
As to your statement in bold, there are other visas but they don't use the I-864 they use I-134. What we are discussing is the I-864 which is used in all cases of immigrant visas (with a few exceptions).
I can't rep you again for telling the truth as opposed to the other poster who wants to call everything "illegal" and just doesn't know. This is getting tiresome.
Yes, the USCIS might take a more careful look if the sponsor hasn't known the person for a long time. That is not equal to being illegal.
I can't rep you again for telling the truth as opposed to the other poster who wants to call everything "illegal" and just doesn't know. This is getting tiresome.
Likewise tiresome to be labeled as, "the other poster who wants to call everything 'illegal' and just doesn't know", neither of which glittering generality is true.
Care to explain how the OP would be guilty of "marriage fraud"?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
