# How much is a reasonable amount of time to be out of America before returning on ESTA



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Hi, I'm new to the site and joined just to ask this question, so sorry if its in the wrong thread?

I have a girlfriend in New York (not the city, but up state) We are both 30, My trips so far are as follows-

July 16th to 1st September 2014
January 15th to 15th April 2015

I have already booked a flight for mid/end June till start of September, purely because its cheaper at that time, and we want to spend the summer together, which I had no problem with until reading about other peoples experiences of getting 'flagged' and pulled up for extra questioning at the border, if I knew what I know now I never would have spent the full 90 days on my last visit.

Has anyone else in or been in a similar situation to mine who has taken trips so close together for long stays run into any problems? Is it just a case of facing some extra questions or is it likely that I will be denied entry to the USA?

Also I'm in a position where I can visit her a lot for a long time while she isn't in the position to visit me right now.

Thanks for any help.


----------



## Crawford (Jan 23, 2011)

We've had people on this forum who have been flagged.

The immigration official might think you are trying to live in the US on the VWP.

You obviously do not have strong ties to the UK and have taken some 20 weeks vacation from mid July 2014 to mid July 2015.

Who has a job where they can take that amount of vacation time and afford such long vacations anyway?

They could think that you are illegally working in the US while spending such a lot of time there.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

I live with parents, work with an employment agency, and I have a child of 7 living in England. I work until I have enough money to come visit my gf, then leave and work again in England until I have enough money to see her again


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

Maybe she could visit the U.K. this time around, even if that's for a week or two instead of a long stay?

Another option (perhaps in addition) is to push this next trip into September-October when it's still pleasant weather, preferably to coincide with the autumn folliage season, and also when your first trip is more than one year in the past. Late summer into autumn is a beautiful time of year. If you time it right you can swim at the beginning of the trip and watch the leaves fall toward the end.


----------



## EVHB (Feb 11, 2008)

You staying that long all the time will raise the chances of being flagged. Consequence: not being able to travel to the US anymore without a visa. A visa that will be hard to get with not more ties to the UK... You can always take the risk, if you are ready to live with the consequences.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

The rules call for no more than 90 days in any 180 day period, so to play it safe, you should remain outside the US at least as long as you were there. And even then, you may get flagged. 

The proper response to that is to carry plenty of evidence with you that shows that you will return home at the end of your visit. The fact that you have a daughter in English is a good point. You may want to line up a few "committments" in the first days and weeks after your intended return - work related or not. All just further evidence of your intent to return.

And just expect to be pulled aside now and then for further questioning. If you're prepared for it, it usually doesn't happen, but it's always possible you'll hit an immigration agent having a particularly bad day.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Thanks Bev, this kinda makes me feel a bit better about things, but are you saying I should change the travel dates, or take lots of evidence with me showing that I will return home at the end of my visit with the dates I plan on going how they are?


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Thank you for your enquiry.

There is no specific limit on the number of times an eligible individual may travel to the United States in any one year or any specific time period that an individual must remain outside the United States between two trips under the Visa Waver Program (VWP), provided that no one visit exceeds 90 days in duration.

However, please be aware that, each time you apply for entry to the United States, you will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of immigration officials that you are a bona fide visitor and that you have sufficiently strong social, economic and personal ties to your country of residence to compel you to depart the United States at the conclusion of your temporary visit. Final determination of each individual’s eligibility for entry to the United States is made by immigration officials at the Port of Entry.



Sincerely, 

Consular Information Unit
U.S. Embassy, London
CONS/CIU/RD

cid:[email protected] cid:[email protected] slideshare-logo-300x300.png wordpress_48_0.png

If you have a further question, please check our FAQs first. If your question is not answered, you may send a further email. Please include the entire email chain in any subsequent correspondence. 

*This is what the U.S. Embassy, London, said in response to the same question I posted on here*


----------



## Crawford (Jan 23, 2011)

Pretty much what we said - the immigration official, based on how many times you have visited and their duration, together with ties to your home country, has the last word on whether you get entry or not.


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

You asked questions and got answers. At the end of the flight the immigration officer has the last word.


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

I'm just wondering - no doubt quite a few people reading this have visited the US under the VWP. I certainly have. I've always been asked the intention of my visit to the US (the same question as on my existing visa), but not once have I been asked to demonstrate binding ties to another country.

Has anyone else been questioned thus? 

I shared a chuckle with a consular officer in Austria two months ago, applying for a new visa. She asked what the purpose of my visit to the US was. I said "that's where I live". She was OK with that.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Bellthorpe said:


> I'm just wondering - no doubt quite a few people reading this have visited the US under the VWP. I certainly have. I've always been asked the intention of my visit to the US (the same question as on my existing visa), but not once have I been asked to demonstrate binding ties to another country.
> 
> Has anyone else been questioned thus?
> 
> I shared a chuckle with a consular officer in Austria two months ago, applying for a new visa. She asked what the purpose of my visit to the US was. I said "that's where I live". She was OK with that.


I've never been asked to demonstrate ties to my country either when visiting America, never even been asked to show a return flight ticket, the only thing that's ever been said to me was on my last visit when I stayed the full 90 days, and even then the women was more concerned about what would happen if my flight was cancelled and I would be technically over staying and maybe not to cut it so fine next time, I found the immigration officers to always be genuinely nice and welcoming, and well trained enough to spot when things don't quite add up. I do feel sometimes that things would be a bit different if I was coming from another country judging from airport workers reactions when I tell them where I'm from and usually there's a smile and small chat about all things British.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Crawford said:


> Pretty much what we said - the immigration official, based on how many times you have visited and their duration, together with ties to your home country, has the last word on whether you get entry or not.


Well not really when people are saying to stay out at least the same amount of time I was visiting for


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

CBP is aware of the propensity of particular cohorts, including cohorts from particular countries, to overstay. Some countries' visitors have a statistically high probability of overstaying, and others do not. CBP officers are allowed to consider these factors when screening incoming passengers. They're also allowed to consider appearance, for example.

In short they're not only allowed to discriminate in deciding who and when to screen more thoroughly, they're encouraged to.


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

Dexterror said:


> > Originally Posted by Crawford
> > Pretty much what we said - the immigration official, based on how many times you have visited and their duration, together with ties to your home country, has the last word on whether you get entry or not.
> 
> 
> Well not really when people are saying to stay out at least the same amount of time I was visiting for


Yes, really. 

The person who interviews you at arrival (yes, that is an interview, not a greeting) has absolute (no appeal) authority over your entry into the US. Or denial. Do not underestimate this.


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

This is also true when a foreigner visits practically any country other than his/her home country. Foreigners are guests with no right to entry. They are admitted solely at the discretion of passport control officials.

It's like a club with a rope line. There are absolutely no guarantees you'll be granted entry. Even if the club is empty and it's a Tuesday. 

If you're mentally prepared for that reality, then you'll be much more relaxed and enjoy your international travel more. If you're denied entry, OK, you turn around and head home (or elsewhere). So be it. There are roughly 200 clubs (countries) in the world.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Dexterror said:


> Well not really when people are saying to stay out at least the same amount of time I was visiting for


That's not a bad rule of thumb, since the actual rule limits you to 90 days in any 180 day period - so at least you meet the technical specifications.

The other thing to consider is that it's up to the airline to pre-screen you before they let you on the flight. If you get refused entry, I believe they have some obligation to fly you back home - and obviously that costs them money. It's one of the reasons they check your passport when you check in for the flight. 

It's not a sure thing by any means, but if the airline is at all hesitant about your situation at check-in, they'll most likely say something.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Bellthorpe said:


> I'm just wondering - no doubt quite a few people reading this have visited the US under the VWP. I certainly have. I've always been asked the intention of my visit to the US (the same question as on my existing visa), but not once have I been asked to demonstrate binding ties to another country.
> 
> Has anyone else been questioned thus?
> 
> I shared a chuckle with a consular officer in Austria two months ago, applying for a new visa. She asked what the purpose of my visit to the US was. I said "that's where I live". She was OK with that.


Apparently you were not applying for B2.


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Bevdeforges said:


> That's not a bad rule of thumb, since the actual rule limits you to 90 days in any 180 day period - so at least you meet the technical specifications.
> 
> The other thing to consider is that it's up to the airline to pre-screen you before they let you on the flight. If you get refused entry, I believe they have some obligation to fly you back home - and obviously that costs them money. It's one of the reasons they check your passport when you check in for the flight.
> 
> ...


Bev - can you lease give a link to the 90/180 rule?
Return flights are not free of charge. Generally a passenger has to show a round trip ticket at checkin.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

It may have changed with the introduction of ESTA, but it always used to be that you couldn't accumulate more than "half time" presence in the US. Or perhaps I'm confusing this with the 6 months out of the year allowance on a B type visa. 

Certainly the airline will try to collect for your return flight - but in cases where someone doesn't have a return ticket or really doesn't have the money for the "unexpected" flight, I believe it's the airline that winds up having to eat the extra fare. (Or so they tell the airline employees to "encourage" them to check passengers' passports.)
Cheers,
Bev

PS - I stand corrected. Just found something on FB, which explains there is an EU directive that sticks the airlines with the cost of returning someone refused entry on arrival due to problems with their passport or documents. Must admit I'd be surprised if there isn't something similar for the US, but maybe I've just been living over here too long.


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

There is something similar for the United States: passenger manifest transmission and clearance. Flights to the United States cannot even take off if the manifest hasn't been transmitted and approved. (More precisely, they can take off, but they'd be denied permission to enter U.S. airspace.) If airlines get the manifest wrong then there are penalties.


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Bevdeforges said:


> It may have changed with the introduction of ESTA, but it always used to be that you couldn't accumulate more than "half time" presence in the US. Or perhaps I'm confusing this with the 6 months out of the year allowance on a B type visa.
> 
> Certainly the airline will try to collect for your return flight - but in cases where someone doesn't have a return ticket or really doesn't have the money for the "unexpected" flight, I believe it's the airline that winds up having to eat the extra fare. (Or so they tell the airline employees to "encourage" them to check passengers' passports.)
> Cheers,
> ...


So, there is no rule.
What does passport check by an airline have to do with entry refusal at port of entry?


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Bevdeforges said:


> It may have changed with the introduction of ESTA, but it always used to be that you couldn't accumulate more than "half time" presence in the US. Or perhaps I'm confusing this with the 6 months out of the year allowance on a B type visa.
> 
> Certainly the airline will try to collect for your return flight - but in cases where someone doesn't have a return ticket or really doesn't have the money for the "unexpected" flight, I believe it's the airline that winds up having to eat the extra fare. (Or so they tell the airline employees to "encourage" them to check passengers' passports.)
> Cheers,
> ...


I really do think you're wrong with that when even officials are saying no such rule exists.

And I believe the sticker the airline places on the back of your passport has something to do with their obligations to fly you home if your refused, well that's what I was told why to never remove those stickers until your in the country


----------



## Davis1 (Feb 20, 2009)

You seen to think that what the Dept of State tell you has a bearing on immigration officers working for the Dept of homeland security ... and can virtually do ands say what they want 
and believe me quote the State Dept and the fur will fly


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

There's not actually a formal 180 day part to the 90 day stay limitation, though the "half time" limit is an important "rule of thumb." Here's what CBP (the agency running U.S. passport control) says:

_The terms of the VWP are very clear - it is only to be used for *occasional, short visits to the U.S.* If the CBP Officer thinks you are trying to "reset" the clock by making a short trip out of the U.S. and re-entering for another 90-day period, you can be denied entry. (If that happens, you will have to obtain a visa for any future travel to the U.S.) In order to be re-admitted to the U.S. shortly after a previous admission expired, you will have to convince a CBP Officer that you are not trying to "game" the system....

If you visit other countries such as England or Costa Rica, then return to the U.S., your re-entry will be considered to be a new admission (thereby restarting the 90 day clock), rather than a re-entry from a contiguous country in the course of your initial visit, and the admission inspection may be more strenuous. The Officer inspecting you will want evidence that you intend to go back home to your country of citizenship to live as opposed to returning again and again to the U.S. after visits to other countries._

(Emphasis mine.)


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

BBCWatcher said:


> There's not actually a formal 180 day part to the 90 day stay limitation, though the "half time" limit is an important "rule of thumb." Here's what CBP (the agency running U.S. passport control) says:
> 
> _The terms of the VWP are very clear - it is only to be used for *occasional, short visits to the U.S.* If the CBP Officer thinks you are trying to "reset" the clock by making a short trip out of the U.S. and re-entering for another 90-day period, you can be denied entry. (If that happens, you will have to obtain a visa for any future travel to the U.S.) In order to be re-admitted to the U.S. shortly after a previous admission expired, you will have to convince a CBP Officer that you are not trying to "game" the system....
> 
> ...


There's still nothing in that statement that says you have to stay out for as long as you were in the country.
Out of all the stories I've heard I've not yet found one where someone has been denied entry without good reason, I even heard of one guy stay 3 months go home for 1 month then go back for 3 months, and do this a number of times, he only ran into problems one he said he was coming into the country to see his fiancée formally girlfriend and not being on the fiancée visa the CBP officer obviously thinking he's come over to get married. Same as another story I looked at were a guy said fiancée and not on the right visa, one guy got denied for carrying his birth certificate and divorce certificate.
I think coming back after a week or two will raise questions, but at the same time I think they need some kind of proof your intending to work, or over stay, or get married before you can be denied, that's what I get from what I've read.
Every story I've read about someone being denied has felt dodgy to me and the officer right to have been suspicious.
If they can't pin anything on you and you prove you are returning after your time is up you are well within your rights to visit as a tourist.
I mean when I entered the US in January the officer did say that the 90 days is more of a guide and not to be used to the max, but at the same time she asked if I had stayed the full 90 day in the past, like she had no idea of my past visits?


----------



## Crawford (Jan 23, 2011)

Just one point - you have NO rights to visit as a tourist.

We have offered you advice which you appear not to want to take. 

So carry on visiting as you have and let us know how you get on.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

I just fail to see one good example of someone getting denied without good reason, i.e. suspected of working, over staying, or getting married. 
I really think they have bigger fish to fry other than someone who is fully intending on returning, not working and innocently just visiting.


----------



## Crawford (Jan 23, 2011)

Dexterror said:


> I just fail to see one good example of someone getting denied without good reason, i.e. suspected of working, over staying, or getting married.
> I really think they have bigger fish to fry other than someone who is fully intending on returning, not working and innocently just visiting.


You started this thread by being concerned after reading of other people getting flagged and pulled aside for questioning.

We responded by saying yes, this happens and over the years we have heard from people who have been held at immigration.

However, since we cannot produce hard evidence that staying too long or too often in the US can lead to problems you choose not to believe us.

Therefore as said, carry on.


----------



## Davis1 (Feb 20, 2009)

And when your visa waiver goes really bad 

Barbara Dixon and Richard Cross locked up in U.S. after visa blunder | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Crawford said:


> You started this thread by being concerned after reading of other people getting flagged and pulled aside for questioning.
> 
> We responded by saying yes, this happens and over the years we have heard from people who have been held at immigration.
> 
> ...


I was concerned when I first posted this question, and no one was really very helpful in easing my concerns, but after doing much research it does seem people have no problems doing this, unless you are up to something dodgy then I fully believe you will be caught up, maybe some still slip through?


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Davis1 said:


> And when your visa waiver goes really bad
> 
> Barbara Dixon and Richard Cross locked up in U.S. after visa blunder | Daily Mail Online


 And again, these people had over stayed, and to me it looks like they were trying to rest the clock, I don't buy their story just because they look old and innocent.
I would have been out of the country for 2 months by the time I return, I'm not trying to rest the clock by taking a few days out, and I fully intend on returning home before the 90 days are up


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Saw this article in the NY Times today and thought it might come in handy somewhere:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/o...-suspicious-traveler.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Admittedly, the author is about to try a US entry for the first time, but I did find the statistic interesting;


> Despite all that, a visa does not guarantee entry; Customs and Border Protection officials still have the authority to deny admission. In 2014, 223,712 people were refused entry to the United States. Grounds for inadmissibility included immigration violations and national security reasons. Sometimes, no justification was given.


You play the game and you take your chances. In my experience, as long as you have a Plan B, you generally won't need it.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

Dexterror said:


> I think they need some kind of proof your intending to work, or over stay, or get married before you can be denied, that's what I get from what I've read.


You've got that back to front. *You* need proof that you don't intend to work or stay.

The officer doesn't 'need' anything - he has the ability to deny you entry. Period.



> If they can't pin anything on you and you prove you are returning after your time is up you are well within your rights to visit as a tourist.


Can you elaborate on those 'rights'? 



> I mean when I entered the US in January the officer did say that the 90 days is more of a guide and not to be used to the max, but at the same time she asked if I had stayed the full 90 day in the past, like she had no idea of my past visits?


Standard procedure when interrogating someone. Ask them something you already know.


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Dexterror said:


> And again, these people had over stayed, and to me it looks like they were trying to rest the clock, I don't buy their story just because they look old and innocent.
> I would have been out of the country for 2 months by the time I return, I'm not trying to rest the clock by taking a few days out, and I fully intend on returning home before the 90 days are up


I have news for you - you will get to the point of looking old one day. Wha you try or not try is irrelevant. Pond hopping tends to catch up with most folks sooner or later.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Bevdeforges said:


> Saw this article in the NY Times today and thought it might come in handy somewhere:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/o...-suspicious-traveler.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
> 
> Admittedly, the author is about to try a US entry for the first time, but I did find the statistic interesting;
> ...


I think considering how many people come into the US year year that number is quite low, and I wonder how many are from VWP countries, I mean after all the VWP is only for countries where the overstay rate is low anyway, so I think already I'm under low suspicion. And my and my girlfriend plan on living in England in the future, why would I want to live in America when England is so much better, so far from what I've seen of America

What do you mean by plan B? You mean if I line up all the evidence of my intensions of visiting and my intent to return home I probably won't even be asked to produce it, or questioned?


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Dexterror said:


> I was concerned when I first posted this question, and no one was really very helpful in easing my concerns, but after doing much research it does seem people have no problems doing this, unless you are up to something dodgy then I fully believe you will be caught up, maybe some still slip through?


What do you expect to hear? Please come and go at your leisure? Try that the other way around and you will face UK hospitality.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Bellthorpe said:


> You've got that back to front. *You* need proof that you don't intend to work or stay.
> 
> 
> Standard procedure when interrogating someone. Ask them something you already know.


I mean I've read stories of people being found with cv's, and work clothing, and US bank cards on them, all points to them working illegally.

So when she asked if I had stayed the full 90 day's in the past, I said yes, even though I hadn't, I said yes as to appear like I was experienced in what I was doing, even though my last visit was only 6 weeks


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

*Rights to enter as a tourist*

Yes, that's always a good tactic - lying to an immigration office.



> If they can't pin anything on you and you prove you are returning after your time is up you are well within your rights to visit as a tourist.


Can you elaborate on those 'rights'?


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

twostep said:


> I have news for you - you will get to the point of looking old one day. Wha you try or not try is irrelevant. Pond hopping tends to catch up with most folks sooner or later.


Yeah and then I'm sure I'll be just as negative as you. This is the last time for a while I plan on going to America, my girlfriend will be coming to England for a while after this, next time I go back will be in December for a week or two


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

twostep said:


> What do you expect to hear? Please come and go at your leisure? Try that the other way around and you will face UK hospitality.


All I wanted was just one example of someone being denied without good reason, which I'm still yet to see


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

> If they can't pin anything on you and you prove you are returning after your time is up you are well within your rights to visit as a tourist.


Can you elaborate on those 'rights'?


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

Bellthorpe said:


> Yes, that's always a good tactic - lying to an immigration office.


What does it matter, she didn't seem to know and I still got in, lied that I stayed less time than I actually had it's hardly anything that's gonna go against me, probably the first time anyone has done that


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

Dexterror said:


> What does it matter, she didn't seem to know and I still got in, lie about how long I stayed last time it's hardly anything that's gonna go against me


Were you to have been found out, it would certainly go against you. You would not have been allowed to enter.



> If they can't pin anything on you and you prove you are returning after your time is up you are well within your rights to visit as a tourist.


Can you elaborate on those 'rights'?


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Bevdeforges said:


> You play the game and you take your chances. In my experience, as long as you have a Plan B, you generally won't need it.


Plan B is simply an alternative plan on the off chance that you are, in fact, denied entry. True, it doesn't happen all that often - but one point made (only briefly) in the article is that they actually don't have to give you a reason. 

Hey, I even get grilled on occasion on entry to the US (and I'm a US citizen - supposedly they HAVE to let me in). Answer only the question asked and be polite and pleasant. Quickest and easiest way to get through the necessary procedure, no matter what your status.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Dexterror said:


> There's still nothing in that statement that says you have to stay out for as long as you were in the country.
> Out of all the stories I've heard I've not yet found one where someone has been denied entry without good reason, I even heard of one guy stay 3 months go home for 1 month then go back for 3 months, and do this a number of times, he only ran into problems one he said he was coming into the country to see his fiancée formally girlfriend and not being on the fiancée visa the CBP officer obviously thinking he's come over to get married. Same as another story I looked at were a guy said fiancée and not on the right visa, one guy got denied for carrying his birth certificate and divorce certificate.
> I think coming back after a week or two will raise questions, but at the same time I think they need some kind of proof your intending to work, or over stay, or get married before you can be denied, that's what I get from what I've read.
> Every story I've read about someone being denied has felt dodgy to me and the officer right to have been suspicious.
> ...


So much for what you read on the Internet





Your only proof of returning is when you are on an outbound plane.

Tourist rights? Would you mind to elaborate?

The IO had your complete entry/exit records in front of her after she scanned your passport. Sneaky thing was confirming what she saw.


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

speedysteve said:


> Hi Linda e
> 
> Speaking from personal experience.
> 
> ...


I really wish I had just read this post before asking my question, instead of getting a load of sarcastic remarks from negative people, it is the best answer I've seen on here, shame this guy isn't a mod.


----------



## Bellthorpe (Jun 23, 2013)

I wish I'd known before reading your post that you were just after someone whose answer would agree with your pre-conceived ideas.

This happens a bit on the Internet, but I'll ask anyway. Why do you label those who are trying to give you good, honest advice (albeit advice with which you don't agree, as most of your responses contain 'I think' followed by a contrary view) as 'negative'?

And again I'll ask, and wonder why you refuse to answer, what it is that you mean by 'rights to visit as a tourist'? Really, just saying 'I got it wrong' will be very well received, but not as well as you describing rights that many of us don't realise we have ...


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

As I have been deemed negative and sarcastic please let me answer one question. You can interpret being put on a outbound flight a tourist's right or better privileg. 

So many one-post-wonders want to get their interpretation of something confirmed. Sometimes they do surface again, here or elsewhere, to rant about the unfair system.


----------



## WestCoastCanadianGirl (Mar 17, 2012)

Dexterror said:


> What does it matter, she didn't seem to know and I still got in, lied that I stayed less time than I actually had it's hardly anything that's gonna go against me, probably the first time anyone has done that


Before I moved to the UK to get married, if I were to have done what you did and lied to the UKBA/Home Office about my previous visit history, I could have faced a 10 year ban from entering the UK - not even marrying my UK husband could have fixed things for me... like you, I did nothing wrong and left, but because of the simple fact that _*I lied*_, it would have been grounds for the UKBA to ban me.

In my experience, the UKBA is much more lenient and forgiving than the US INS - if the UKBA will ban for lying, then I can only imagine what the US INS will do

(Trust me, as a Canadian who grew up close to the Canada/US border, I've had plenty of experience dealing with the US INS in my time... they detained me for 30 minutes once, when I was starting off on a car trip from Vancouver to Minnesota - nobody gave me any reason for detaining me, but I was made to report to immigration, show my passport & driving license at the border checkpoint and my car was searched... I am convinced that it was because I am a visible minority, as everyone else in the immigration hall was other-than-caucasian, but as I had no proof, I kept my mouth shut as I didn't want to get deported)


----------



## Dexterror (Apr 18, 2015)

WestCoastCanadianGirl said:


> Before I moved to the UK to get married, if I were to have done what you did and lied to the UKBA/Home Office about my previous visit history, I could have faced a 10 year ban from entering the UK - not even marrying my UK husband could have fixed things for me... like you, I did nothing wrong and left, but because of the simple fact that _*I lied*_, it would have been grounds for the UKBA to ban me.
> 
> In my experience, the UKBA is much more lenient and forgiving than the US INS - if the UKBA will ban for lying, then I can only imagine what the US INS will do
> 
> (Trust me, as a Canadian who grew up close to the Canada/US border, I've had plenty of experience dealing with the US INS in my time... they detained me for 30 minutes once, when I was starting off on a car trip from Vancouver to Minnesota - nobody gave me any reason for detaining me, but I was made to report to immigration, show my passport & driving license at the border checkpoint and my car was searched... I am convinced that it was because I am a visible minority, as everyone else in the immigration hall was other-than-caucasian, but as I had no proof, I kept my mouth shut as I didn't want to get deported)


Now when thinking back to it, when she said "have I done this sort of thing before?"
this could have just been referring to long stay and not the full 90 days thing, so I don't think I lied, I just said yes, no reference to how long I stayed last time, even though it was a long stay.


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

FYI, U.S. INS was dissolved at the end of February, 2003. From March 1, 2003, the agency responsible for, among other things, screening incoming passengers to the United States is Customs and Border Protection (CBP). (USCIS and ICE also assumed some of INS's mission.)


----------

