# K1 Visa process



## LostInT (May 26, 2014)

We have applied for a K1 Visa and it has been three months. I have been reading around and have several questions with concerns.

I'm aware of the timeline for processing, but we have not received our NOA2 yet and wondering if something is long due to having looked at other peoples timelines in detail?

Support of affidavit: We are wondering due to being on the lower end of the earning scale what papers are required to value your property income? We also wonder what papers will do when it comes to asset evaluations and which papers with with regards to property value are suffice (tax vs real estate agent)? Also, what can be applied to assets to bump up the figure?

Thanks regards...


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

Three months would be an unusually fast turnaround. There's no surprise here.


----------



## Davis1 (Feb 20, 2009)

K-1 ttakes around 8-10 months


----------



## Woodstock (Mar 11, 2009)

Took us eight months. Would have been six months but the consular officer wanted additional documentation. My lawyers and I were stunned. We submitted an ADDITIONAL 300 pages of SKYPE records in addition to the 700 pages already submitted. I believe it might have been a case of bias against homosexuals.
At any rate, my partner is now in America and we are married. 
If there's more imformation you would like, just let me know. 
I am very turned off to the mean-spiritedness of the U.S. Embasy personnel. We are all vulnerable humans. No one deserves to be abused.
Sincerely,
WOODSTOCK


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

Woodstock said:


> I believe it might have been a case of bias against homosexuals.


It's much more likely it was simple unfamiliarity. U.S. immigration rights for same-sex spouses only came into force in the wake of the late June, 2013, U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

By the way, I don't know why your lawyers were "stunned," at least not from your description. Consular officers have been requesting more and more invasive information about spousal ties (and spousal intentions) "forever." Opposite-sex couples have endured such questioning and demands for further evidence of their relationships.

In my view the whole Congressionally-constructed (or at least -preserved) immigration system is ridiculous -- and yes, to be perfectly clear, there's only one party to blame. Just give every U.S. citizen and U.S. national the ability to sponsor one foreign non-criminal adult "partner" at any single moment in time (probably also with a lifetime cap -- 10 marriages is probably enough), and don't even bother trying to determine whether their relationship is "genuine." (As if a consular officer could anyway.) The sponsor already has to sign up for financial responsibility and swear under penalty of perjury the relationship is genuine, so leave it at that. (And continue requiring co-residence per normal.) If there's visa fraud, prosecute that when/if incidentally detected. And at least allow ESTA-privileged foreigners to join their qualified U.S. spouses in the United States immediately without additional pre-clearance. Let them adjust their statuses in the United States, after they arrive. If we trust them enough to enter the U.S. for tourism without a visa, why on earth aren't we letting them stay as the legal spouses they are? Most developed countries do, including most EU countries.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Depends on the EU country, but at the least there is a certain "right" to have your legal spouse join you on a full residence permit (with work privileges). In France, they may make you go back "home" to apply for the visa, but they can't deny the visa except in case of fraud or "threat to national security." Various other countries may have similar restrictions - but then again, take a look at what the UK requires for a spouse visa. Very similar to the US.

But like you, I suspect the OPs situation may have resulted more from the "newness" of the regulations than from overt bias. The US changed their rules more or less over night and the wheels of government grind slowly. 
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Woodstock said:


> Took us eight months. Would have been six months but the consular officer wanted additional documentation. My lawyers and I were stunned. We submitted an ADDITIONAL 300 pages of SKYPE records in addition to the 700 pages already submitted. I believe it might have been a case of bias against homosexuals.
> At any rate, my partner is now in America and we are married.
> If there's more imformation you would like, just let me know.
> I am very turned off to the mean-spiritedness of the U.S. Embasy personnel. We are all vulnerable humans. No one deserves to be abused.
> ...


About a year ago it would not have been possible. Instead of counting your blessings you are looking for something to gripe about. You were abused by a request of additional information. Talk to couples with unusual backgrounds or from unusual countries. 300 pages of Skype records are icing on their cakes.

Have you tried to picture yourself in their position? A total change on policy, a wave of applications (most of them not to par; your attorney handled how many homosexual applications before you?), personal view versus business policy, .....


----------



## Woodstock (Mar 11, 2009)

twostep said:


> About a year ago it would not have been possible. Instead of counting your blessings you are looking for something to gripe about. You were abused by a request of additional information. Talk to couples with unusual backgrounds or from unusual countries. 300 pages of Skype records are icing on their cakes. Have you tried to picture yourself in their position? A total change on policy, a wave of applications (most of them not to par; your attorney handled how many homosexual applications before you?), personal view versus business policy, .....


Dear Two Step,

The abuse about which I wrote was NOT about the system. I was referring to the abusive nature and mean-spiritedness of the consular staff. The three times my partner dealt with the staff in the American Embassy, Bangkok, he was talked down to, literally YELLED at by the consular officer because she couldn't understand the word "statue." 
Is there no oversight of these officers? 

The system protects us. No problem with that. Verbal abuse? UNACCEPTABLE.

I wasn't "griping" as you wrote. I was civil in my note. One would hope replies would be written in a similar tone.


----------



## twostep (Apr 3, 2008)

Woodstock said:


> Dear Two Step,
> 
> The abuse about which I wrote was NOT about the system. I was referring to the abusive nature and mean-spiritedness of the consular staff. The three times my partner dealt with the staff in the American Embassy, Bangkok, he was talked down to, literally YELLED at by the consular officer because she couldn't understand the word "statue."
> Is there no oversight of these officers?
> ...


That is your side of the story. Then there is his, their's and the truth.


----------



## TeamTrumbley (Apr 23, 2015)

BBCWatcher;5271009s. said:


> In my view the whole Congressionally-constructed (or at least -preserved) immigration system is ridiculous -- and yes, to be perfectly clear, there's only one party to blame. Just give every U.S. citizen and U.S. national the ability to sponsor one foreign non-criminal adult "partner" at any single moment in time (probably also with a lifetime cap -- 10 marriages is probably enough), and don't even bother trying to determine whether their relationship is "genuine." (As if a consular officer could anyway.) The sponsor already has to sign up for financial responsibility and swear under penalty of perjury the relationship is genuine, so leave it at that. (And continue requiring co-residence per normal.) If there's visa fraud, prosecute that when/if incidentally detected. And at least allow ESTA-privileged foreigners to join their qualified U.S. spouses in the United States immediately without additional pre-clearance. Let them adjust their statuses in the United States, after they arrive. If we trust them enough to enter the U.S. for tourism without a visa, why on earth aren't we letting them stay as the legal spouses they are? Most developed countries do, including most EU countries.


oh gosh I vote for you to be put immediately in charge of immigration and possibly the country 

I'm currently on month 9 of our application and just sending off the package of supporting documents including Skype logs), but to be fair we had two delays on our end due to the illness and death of my Father and then my husband being laid off and just not having the funds to continue for a couple of months.

Of course I live in the UK, which is the one EU country actually harder to get into than the US, (in my opinion obviously, based on the very subjective criteria of being married to a non EU national)

We've been really lucky I think with the speed at which everything is being handled.


----------



## creativeheart (Dec 12, 2015)

Hear, hear! Well said, friend


----------



## idealbody (Jan 25, 2016)

To be qualified for a K-1, the following requirements must be met:

The alien fiancé/fiancée must reside outside of the U.S.;
Both the U.S. citizen and the fiancé/fiancée must be legally free to marry and remain unmarried until the arrival of the alien fiancé in the U.S. 
The alien fiancé/fiancée and U.S. citizen must have met in person, at least once, within the past two years of filing the I-129F petition.
The U.S. citizen must file an I-129F petition with USCIS and have it approved before the alien fiancé/fiancée may apply for a K-1 visa from a US Consular Office abroad.


----------

