# would you have answered yes or no



## twisted-pixel (Aug 14, 2018)

I realise that nobody on here can give legal advice, but I have a question and would like to hear other peoples advice.

5 years ago I moved to the US on an E2 visa. I was loving it. bought a house, was going to get married etc...life was great. 

Then came the bombshell that mergers and acquisitions had changed the structure of my company significantly enough that my visa was no longer applicable and I had to leave.

My company have a way of sending me back, but it requires working in the UK for a period of 1 year.

I recently filled in an ESTA application so I can return to the US for the purpose of selling my house, tying up loose ends etc.

In the ETSA application there is a question that asks if you have *ever been convicted of a criminal offense that resulted in serious damage to a person or business*

I was convicted of shoplifting in 1988 when I was 17, and an offense of driving with no insurance when I was 21

When I applied for the E2 visa, I declared these and was worried that they would reject me, but in fact they said that the limit for convictions was 4, but since mine happened when I was 17, they do not count, and my visa was approved.

Fast forward 5 years and I have to return on an ESTA and of course answered no to this question. Our immigration attorney is having a fit because I answered no to this question, but I do not believe I answered incorrectly. He says this will be seen as fraud and I will get denied future visas

In 1 year I'll be applying for an L1 visa and will have to go through the whole thing again. Like before, I am expecting to give them all details of the convictions, and like before I expect that because of the age of the convictions (30 years ago), the seriousness (or lack of!!), and the fact that any sentence was less than 1 year (I got 40 hours of community service) will mean that they do not count this against me.

so..back to the question...would you have answered yes or no to that question?


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/WebHelp/ESTA_Screen-Level_Online_Help_1.htm
Let the attorney deal with correcting ESTA, applying for waiver and B2. Enforcement of existing rules has drastically increased. You do not need to be present to close on real estate sales.

As the attorney has apparently already pointed out - it is not your offenses but visa fraud he will have to deal with when filing your L1.

"...in fact they said that the limit for convictions was 4, but since mine happened when I was 17, they do not count, …" - can you elaborate? Limit of convictions?


----------



## twisted-pixel (Aug 14, 2018)

the problem is that if I answer yes to this question, the visa would be denied and I'd have to spend weeks applying for waiver etc. I can't wait that long

I don't need to be in the US to do a real estate deal maybe, but you can't just up and leave a house with all your stuff in it and expect someone else to take care of that.

I've research this to death and my convictions do not fall even close to what they are describing as CIMT. They were too long ago, too minor, and the punishment was so far short of the 12 months sentence that the guidelines suggest. 

any person reading the question would ask themselves the same thing. was shoplifting a cassette tape 30 years ago a crime involving serious damage to a business or person?? of course not

In addition, I found a document Immigrant Legal Resource Center QUICK REFERENCE CHART which explains some offenses and whether or not they are CIMT which states that shoplifting definitely isn't. and for it to be CIMT it would have to have incurred a permant loss to someone of $10,000!

the limit of 4 is what I was told when I went to the embassy in 2013 to apply for my E2. Our attorney originally thought that the application would go to review because my convictions, but during the interview they informed me that since these happened before I was 18 they were not a factor and my visa was granted on the spot.


----------



## twisted-pixel (Aug 14, 2018)

so, here's a quick update. Spoke to attorney again who said that while they may not be *relevant*, they do *exist* and so you have to declare them.

So I did, and as expected the Authorisation to Travel was denied, so we have to apply for the B visa. He says there's a 99.9% chance of this being approved because the previous two times I've applied have been successful because the crimes are not considered CMIT and are so long ago etc etc.

But, I do have to go through the process...which sucks because it's 3-4 weeks more time


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

twisted-pixel said:


> so, here's a quick update. Spoke to attorney again who said that while they may not be *relevant*, they do *exist* and so you have to declare them.
> 
> So I did, and as expected the Authorisation to Travel was denied, so we have to apply for the B visa. He says there's a 99.9% chance of this being approved because the previous two times I've applied have been successful because the crimes are not considered CMIT and are so long ago etc etc.
> 
> But, I do have to go through the process...which sucks because it's 3-4 weeks more time


Best of luck! You will not have to request a waiver for fraud when your company sends to you back to the US. 

On an other board we recently had a similar case and now an EB5 in the air. If approved it will be around the time the 300k increase goes into effect.


----------

