# Any advice on moving to America from the UK



## SiB86 (May 18, 2008)

Hello all,
I am hoping to move over to America (Austin, Texas) to be with my partner who lives there, we have been looking at various visa options and i was hoping i might get some advise on what i need to do to live and work in the states. I'm 21 and have a bachelors degree. We have disused marriage and are looking particularly at applying for a K-1 visa.. The hole process is more than a little bewildering and after reading so many stories about visas being rejected i wanted to know if anyone had advice on what i should do to get this right.
any help is much appreciated.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Hi, and welcome to the forum.

OK, with a K-1 visa (the so-called fiancé visa) you will have to get married within 90 days of your arrival in the US. The other "trick" is that your partner in the US must be a US citizen. There is considerably more detail on the process here: Nonimmigrant Visa for a Fiance(e) (K-1) on the US State Dept. site.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## Fatbrit (May 8, 2008)

SiB86 said:


> Hello all,
> I am hoping to move over to America (Austin, Texas) to be with my partner who lives there, we have been looking at various visa options and i was hoping i might get some advise on what i need to do to live and work in the states. I'm 21 and have a bachelors degree. We have disused marriage and are looking particularly at applying for a K-1 visa.. The hole process is more than a little bewildering and after reading so many stories about visas being rejected i wanted to know if anyone had advice on what i should do to get this right.
> any help is much appreciated.


Your educational history is irrelevant for this visa.

Skeletons in the closet include previous visa infringements, criminal record and health history. He needs an income, either of you needs capital, or there needs to be a joint sponsor. Beyond that, it's just a matter of researching the visa, pushing the papers and paying the fees. Budget 10 months from you first submission to receiving the visa.


----------



## Guest (May 18, 2008)

*To SiB86*

I would say that the best advice is to keep at it, and not waste a day's effort. The link to federal government is easy to acquire. But one of the things I have seen is that some people look at doing what has to be done as something of a hobby or pasttime, done when convenient, perhaps not really focusing. The only way to do it is to do it, with focus and time is the key. Go at it hard. Let the others who are casual about it falter, but you must work at it as a professional person does any job. Also I would suggest considering an immigration lawyer, and there are those specialize, such as UK to US. Similar to my comment on the only way to get it done is to do it and not treat it as a hassle but as reality, I say something similar regarding immigration lawyers: since they do charge fees, and I have seen as low as $3,000, and of course they go higher, so taking a perspective that it might cost $5,000 (who knows, look into it) or whatever the cost, the real (emphasized REAL) issue is what is the value of getting it done? If not worth $5,000 then I would say the desire is not worth the effort anyway. If it entails staying up nights, then it is worth it. It is a tough love type of approach: do it, or get off the pot so to speak. And it is true that some immigration lawyers appear to just be an intermediary for the paperwork with the federal government (and some are), so it goes back to the question: why pay for a lawyer? Well, then don't pay for one, but stay on top things down to the minutia and waste not a day or single point in any of it in anyway whatsoever. Even lawyers who appear as simple intermediaries have some value, as they know the system, they monitor the situation, make recommendations, etc. So whichever it be, on your own or with an immigration lawyer, it is a matter of prioritizing and getting done exactly what needs to get done, and getting it in motion today and treating it as a serious task that you will do, and do right, from beginning to end. Not everything is in any our control. But it is what IS in our control that counts, thus doing absolutely all that one can to make it happen is the key, and not moaning or fretting over the whys, hows, and so forth of getting it done, but instead actually getting it done.


----------



## Rachel_Heath (Mar 16, 2008)

AllThatJazz said:


> Also I would suggest considering an immigration lawyer, and there are those specialize, such as UK to US. Similar to my comment on the only way to get it done is to do it and not treat it as a hassle but as reality, I say something similar regarding immigration lawyers: since they do charge fees, and I have seen as low as $3,000, and of course they go higher, so taking a perspective that it might cost $5,000 (who knows, look into it) or whatever the cost, the real (emphasized REAL) issue is what is the value of getting it done? If not worth $5,000 then I would say the desire is not worth the effort anyway.


Personally I think an immigration lawyer for something as straightforward as a K-1 visa is probably overkill. Whilst it's not a simple process unless you've skeletons in the closet or something that will upset the immigration apple-cart I'd have thought you should be able to navigate the K-1 maze relatively easily...


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2008)

*K-1 visa : each case is different. Getting on it is what is most important*



Rachel_Heath said:


> Personally I think an immigration lawyer for something as straightforward as a K-1 visa is probably overkill. Whilst it's not a simple process unless you've skeletons in the closet or something that will upset the immigration apple-cart I'd have thought you should be able to navigate the K-1 maze relatively easily...


I have done it, and my best friend has done it, and I have met and spoke with others who have done it. Some on their own, others with immigration lawyers. Some have tried on their own, then later went ahead and got a lawyer, wishing they had done it from the start. In some cases, it is relatively easy. In other cases it is not. I would suggest that the best way to approach it is to understand that it appears to be easy, but there can be a lot more involved than what appears on the surface. One way to look at it is this: if it were really as easy as it appears to be, then there would be millions and millions of it done every year. But there aren't. Each case has factors that make it different from other cases. For example: Who would expect that a copy of the receipt for the engagement ring would have been requested? Perhaps not so difficult to acquire. But to find that out that it is needed, the application will have had to have been submitted, reviewed, and requests for clarification or unknown missing parts returned and then resubmitted. Then received again, and with the requirement of documentation of an engagement ring. That will have taken time just to get to that point. And/or finding out that written letters going both ways between the two people involved going back at least 6 months or longer are necessary? If those don't exist, then those will have to be started, meaning the time that has already elapsed from submitted the application to that point in time, it will be a minimum of another 6 months after starting with those letters back and forth so as to be able to submit those letters 6 months later. And/or what if a picture of the couple together taken sometime within the last 12 months is needed? If none can be found, then a trip is necessary just to get that done. And so on. And/or whatever else. And what if something gets lost during any of it? Then it means more time and redoing it. And then assuming that everything is in order, who knows what the appointment scheduling time frame is at the particular embassy or consulate? Maybe once everything is in order the appointment is scheduled and it is three months out. And then what if during that meeting come to find out that something is missing or that some aspect of the law has changed, thus another appointment is necessary thus possibly adding more months onto it. And/or what about if it is better to go ahead and get married in one or the other country, and then move forward as a couple? Or would that be worse and end up taking more time? The point that I am making is that it is extremely easy to see what is expected: that there is a K-1 application, and further, that it is just a rubber stamp that is needed, therefore it is easy to sit back and hope/guess/assume that that is all there is to it, therefore there is no need for concern, no need for action, just do it whenever one feels like it and assume that that will be that. If that's all it ends up being needed in a particular case, then great!!! But still, waiting another day means that another day has passed, while getting on it today is the only way to start reducing the time to find that out and to ultimately get a decision on that particular case. What is more difficult is to look at is the unexpected, because it is exactly that: unknown and thus unexpected. So instead of expecting the expected and assuming that the K-1 application is all that is needed, it allows for postponing in doing any, waiting, or worse is basing all future actions on that single supposition. By doing nothing today it means that the unexpected will not be known and thus cannot be dealt with until even further points of time in the future. And if there is one overriding aspect of the whole thing, it is "time." Reducing the time frame is ultimately the goal. If it would otherwise be 6 months, then trying to reduce it to 4 months. If it would be one year, then trying to reduce it to 9 months. ANd I know of a case where it took 5 years. It is all about each individual case. Each day that passes is yet another day that adds to the time. So by starting today and being so on top of things everyday and in everyway, whatever the particulars are in any case, and whatever decision and outcome ultimately will be in a particular case, at least the number of days is shortened by 1, 10, 30, 180, or 365 days, etc. If there is the desire to unite with a loved one, then anything and everything in one's control will be done to shorten that time frame by any amount of time. If it ends up being extremely easy and extremely quick in that particular case, so be it. Or if it ends up being extremely difficult and complicated in that particular case, so be it. Starting today is the only way to do it. The best conclusion drawn is the conclusion drawn at the end after all is done, not at the beginning, and worse of all is drawing a conclusion before even getting started at the beginning. I would purport that the easiest thing to do is get started, and that it actually takes more effort and time to continue to justify not getting started.


----------



## synthia (Apr 18, 2007)

What country were the fiance's from? I suspect that applicants from developed countries with educations and resources aren't hassled as much, while the relatively undeducated fiance from a poor country has to provide a lot more proof that the relationship is in fact a relationship.

By the way, long posts with no paragraphs are very difficult to read.


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

*Various, motion, and return key was not functioning*

England, Germany, Poland, Brazil, Russia, Canada, and other countries. All assumptions on what will transpire could be determined as valid and reasonable assumptions, ad infinitum.

The practicalities of each scenario will come to light only upon it moving moved outside of the realm of projected hypotheticals and intead into the realm of a case that is actually in motion.

Yesterday the return key wasn't functioning in this expatforum diaglog box, thus I was unable to create paragraphs.


----------



## Fatbrit (May 8, 2008)

synthia said:


> By the way, long posts with no paragraphs are very difficult to read.


I gave up on about line 3 -- it was either that or go find my glasses. Was it a "yes" or a "no" for the lawyer, then?


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

*Yes to getting an immigration lawyer*

It is a Yes. I recommend an immigration lawyer. The lowest possible value is that one gets advice but then acts on one's own. The highest value is that it is turned totally over to them and everything gets done perfectly and timely. Better to know that everything possible was done than to look back later and wish that it had been done. One can argue after the fact that one could have done it themself. However, one cannot argue after the fact that they wish they had gotten an immigration lawyer. The goal is to get the visa, regardless of knowing or believing afterwards that one could or could have done it better on their own. Keep in the mind the goal, and not necessarily on the whos, hows, or whats on achieving that goal.

And it is suggested that it is better to get an immigration lawyer based in the target country, in this case, The U.S., and if possble in the immediate area where the sponsor is located. Experience, expertise, location, and ability to respond immediately all can help reduce the time frame.

If there is anything that is not understandable, not just what I have written, but any documentation or notes related to what you are trying to achieve, move it into something that is understandable. For example, one can take the text I wrote yesterday and copy and paste it into a Word or text document, then enlarge the font, etc. Just do whatever has to be done, whether it turns out to be very easy or very difficult.

Wishing you well.


----------



## Fatbrit (May 8, 2008)

AllThatJazz said:


> It is a Yes. I recommend an immigration lawyer. The lowest possible value is that one gets advice but then acts on one's own. The highest value is that it is turned totally over to them and everything gets done perfectly and timely. Better to know that everything possible was done than to look back later and wish that it had been done. One can argue after the fact that one could have done it themself. However, one cannot argue after the fact that they wish they had gotten an immigration lawyer. The goal is to get the visa, regardless of knowing or believing afterwards that one could or could have done it better on their own. Keep in the mind the goal, and not necessarily on the whos, hows, or whats on achieving that goal.
> 
> And it is suggested that it is better to get an immigration lawyer based in the target country, in this case, The U.S., and if possble in the immediate area where the sponsor is located. Experience, expertise, location, and ability to respond immediately all can help reduce the time frame.
> 
> ...


Problem is, on my extensive reading of immigration forums over the past 4 or 5 years, I've seen more than a handful who've taken a wrong turn with professional help -- so an immigration lawyer is never a cast-iron guarantee. If an applicant has reasonable intelligence, proficiency in English, internet access, there are no warning signs, and they are able and willing to spend the time doing their research, then it's not a particularly difficult task. And you end up saving a considerable amount of money. 

I have seen absolutely no evidence that an immigration lawyer can reduce "time frames". They certainly can't reduce waiting times for processing. Did you mean something else?


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

*Case by case*

No scenario is iron clad. Indeed it is not even cast until it is in motion. The overriding issue is getting it in motion, whether on one's own or with an immigration lawyer. I have seen two cases where on one's own, the person was able to move quicker than a lawyer. I have seen another case where the person and the lawyer worked in close conjunction with one another as consultant both ways, and it reduced the time frame that would have otherwise occurred for a successful conclusion. Another case, the person tried on their own, and six weeks later got an immigration lawyer and it then went speedy. Yet another case where the person spent months contemplating which route but in the meantime doing nothing. And two other cases in which the immigration lawyer performed fully and as quickly as possible given the time involved in the process itself.

All assumptions are valid on reasonableness of who can do what as well as what will transpire. From what I have seen, the weight falls on the side that it is better to have an immigration lawyer than not to have one. Others might have seen examples that lead to a different conclusion, which means they have seen another set of cases.

It is a case by case situation in which each person must decide. But decide they must, and then take action.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

OK, before we beat this particular horse to death  it might be helpful if the OP came back to give us a bit more detail about the situation.

Note that he or she referred only to their "partner" and that the idea of marriage had been "discussed" (I assume - the original said "disused"). The OP also only said that the partner "lives in Texas" - if this person is not a US citizen, then the whole K-1 scenario is off the table.

Personally, I think the use of an attorney is only helpful where there is some complicating factor that needs to be presented in the "right" way in order to avoid an automatic rejection due to some technicality. For a K-1, if the couple hasn't known each other very long, or can't produce the sorts of documents to "prove" the relationship, then an attorney might be able to help with the process by suggesting alternative approaches to establishing the legitimacy of the request.

But in some cases, use of an attorney will simply arouse suspicion that "something isn't right and they are trying to get around it all." The immigration officials are given considerable discretion to follow their hunches and intuitions, and any visa application is a real crap shoot these days.

Anyhow, it would be helpful to know a little more about the OP and his or her situation.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

*At this point*

It would be of some help if the OP explained the specific situation, but at this point it is probably better for the OP did research elsewhere. In fact it is hoped that the person has moved onward to taking some action.

Immigration doesn't care if there is there is a lawyer involved. Indeed they likely wouldn't even know, as decision makers don't communicate with the person, but clerical staff do. And from that perspective, immigration might even prefer that a lawyer be in place in order to reduce workflow and duplicative efforts on their end.


----------



## Fatbrit (May 8, 2008)

AllThatJazz said:


> Indeed they likely wouldn't even know,


They would and do know!!! You tell them on the forms submitted.


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

*Naught*

Immigration cares not if a lawyer is involved, so whether they know or not is moot, on the forms or otherwise, it matters not.

To the person who originally was seeking advice: I advise getting an immigration lawyer based on experience as well as knowledge of a variety of different cases and their corresponding outcomes. See other postings for rationale, then move on and get something going on it today, whether it be on your own or not.


----------



## SiB86 (May 18, 2008)

*Letters?*



AllThatJazz said:


> And/or finding out that written letters going both ways between the two people involved going back at least 6 months or longer are necessary? If those don't exist, then those will have to be started, meaning the time that has already elapsed from submitted the application to that point in time, it will be a minimum of another 6 months after starting with those letters back and forth so as to be able to submit those letters 6 months later. And/or what if a picture of the couple together taken sometime within the last 12 months is needed?


Thanks Guys i wasnt expecting all these responses after only putting my question up a few days ago. i just wanted to ask about the letter evidence? i hadnt heard anything about personal letters being used in visa's before? do they help? and/or would things like msn logs and emails be any help with such an aplication.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Hi again - glad to see you back!

As I understand it, the letters and blogs and whatever else are useful if there is some question about the validity or duration of the relationship. Obviously, if you're asking to enter the US on a fiancé visa, then ideally you have known each other for a while and spent a certain amount of time together so as to make it reasonable to assume you really are intent on getting married within the 90 days after your arrival.

The immigration officials are looking to avoid sham marriages and situations like in the film, "Green Card" where someone is getting married solely to get into the US and get their green card.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

*More is generally better*

Letters, emails, postcards, pictures.....whatever. The more, the better. And whatever you don't submit, take them all with you anyway to the interview, too. Inundate them, anything to prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. I would even suggest the partner going to the interview. Not that he/she would be allowed in the actual interview, but that single statement "He/she flew over, and is outside in the waiting room" can help. 

Even on that note, there is a constant argument about the expenses, and why spend more than one "has to." I say this: who says that you have to do anything? Do nothing, spend nothing if so desired. And even gamble with the visa getting issued. Or keep this single goal in mind: to get a visa so you can be with your loved one. If one gets into the mindset of achieving that single goal, then one can ignore what others say about trying to take short cuts, or trying to penny pinch here and there, why this, why that, etc. All items that detract from the goal are detractors from the goal. When indeed the goal is the goal, so get in that mindset and back it up with real action all of the time, without exception, 100%, and don't let anyone talk you into trying short cuts or penny pinching along the way. Advice that detracts from the goal is advice that might well intended on secondary and tertiary goals, but still detracts from the real goal. Hindsight is 20/20, but today and everyday must be 100% towards achieving the goal.


----------



## SiB86 (May 18, 2008)

In reply to the members asking if my partner is an American citizen,they are, and earns more than the requirements in the terms of k-1's sponsors annual income. were pretty sure about hiring a lawyer to get us through this (one in the US) im a English citizen neither of us have criminal records, i will hopefully be able to apply for a work permit when i get the K-1 so i can work in the period between going to America and marrying my partner. 
I'm going to throw everything i have at this, i don't want to take the risk of getting something wrong through this process, thats why were going to use a lawyer.


----------



## Fatbrit (May 8, 2008)

SiB86 said:


> Thanks Guys i wasnt expecting all these responses after only putting my question up a few days ago. i just wanted to ask about the letter evidence? i hadnt heard anything about personal letters being used in visa's before? do they help? and/or would things like msn logs and emails be any help with such an aplication.


The main requirement is that you've met in person within the last two years -- so make sure the evidence submitted includes that. Logs and emails (just send a selection) will be fine -- the consular officer realizes that this is the contemporary form of communication.


----------



## Fatbrit (May 8, 2008)

SiB86 said:


> i will hopefully be able to apply for a work permit when i get the K-1 so i can work in the period between going to America and marrying my partner.


This is a tricky one! The K1 provides work authorization for the first 90 days after entry. However, the only port of entry that actually provides a suitable stamp that satisfies HR departments is JFK -- and then you sometimes have to ask for it. Working for relatives or friends should not be a problem without the stamp (especially since you can apply for a social security number), but some employers will be reluctant to hire.

After the 90 days of your visa are up, so is your work authorization. As soon as you marry, you can apply for an EAD in your AOS package, but there is a delay of up to 3 months before the card actually comes through (there have been recent reports of this becoming quicker). Between the 90 days and receipt of your EAD, you're not actually authorized to work -- though USCIS don't seem interested in punishing infringements.

Afraid it's just one of the many illogical anomalies in the wonders of US immigration.


----------

