K1 intent.

[Jumper]

I remember not long ago several members debating the 90 days of the K1's intent.

the debate reached back to the world war GI based legislations and the factors and thoughts behind the intent of the legislation and the 90 day period.


So while of course the 90 days are actually used be people in many  ways,
and  i certainly don't care how someone uses them..

 the intent is clearly spelled out in the I 129F instruction form so i thought i'd share it.
This is copied directly  from  the forms instructions in the common questions section:


What if we are engaged but have not yet decided to marry?
The fiancé(e) visa is a temporary visa that simply permits your fiancé(e) to enter the United States so that the two of you can marry in the United States within the 90 days permitted from the date of entry. It is not a way for you to bring a person here so you can get to know one another, or spend more time together to decide whether or not you want to marry.



 While the *question* is worded oddly..
I see no shades of grey there ,your intent is to marry and to use the time to arrange it.Anyone going to a K1 interview should answer accordingly.

[Chicagoguy]

And they will enforce this   how ?

[Shadow]

And they will enforce this   how ?

If taken literally, when during the interview there is any doubt that marriage is the sole target of the visa it may be refused.

For instance if a questions is asked "When will you get married"  and is answered in an unsure manner that indicates no plans for marriage have actually been made, it coulde be reason for denial.

However I am sure that most embassies know their customers pretty well and would prefer the K-1 to be legislated in a different way.

[Jumper]

And they will enforce this   how ?

no idea?
 
It's not that big of deal,but felt clarification, directly from the USCIS would be good?

I wouldn't  advise anyone to answer differently when facing a consulate interview officer?

The previous debate wasn't over enforcement ,
or even the legality of how people used the time .
It was over what the *intent* of the K1 ,and its time frame , actually was.

The USCIS instructions makes the intent fairly clear.

others can use it however they feel?


I  simply found the advise to use it as a getting to know one another time,
when the instructions state clearly it is not..
 in a * context *of someone approaching an interview as odd.

The person going to the interview  should be clear when going in of the visa's stated intent, and  the consulate officer is expecting to hear clear answers in line with the visas intent, regardless either the applicants,beneficiaries, or the consulate officers  personal feelings on the subject?
 
*shrugs*

I again state i don't care how anyone uses it,
I don't care if the USCIS would or would not enforce it , or even try to.
Simply feel those approaching an interview for a K1 visa, should have the correct information on its stated intent.

The prior debate fogged the issue, because how people feel it should be used, how they plan to use it,  or  how they feel the USCIS defines it , doesn't help the interviewee much?

[ECOCKS]

As often happens, we see a difference between the letter of the law and the practical.


I definitely don't advise anyone to tell the interviewer they are hoping to come over and check out the possibility of getting married. Jumper's right that our discussions and common references to looking things over during the 90 days could potentially mess up someone's interview.


A casual reader of the threads could easily miss this and it bears repeating regularly.

[Faux Pas]

And they will enforce this   how ?

They have no desire to enforce it or even care. However, they do play tricks during the interview process and can deny a K-1 based on nothing more than an agent's hunch. It's not really enforceable but the intent of the K-1 is pretty clear.

[tfcrew]

This is the super reason to get the round trip or an open end ticket  http://www.ehow.com/about_5081718_definition-openended-ticket.html when a visa has been granted and travel is made to start the 90 day visit.

There is no guarantee that a marriage will go through so it is best to arrange the trip back if needed.

A round trip ticket costs only a fraction more than a one way or at least did last time I checked.
My wife had one when she first came, but as good fortune had it...it wasn't needed.

[Jumper]

As often happens, we see a difference between the letter of the law and the practical.


A casual reader of the threads could easily miss this and it bears repeating regularly.

Ed, yes that was exactly my worry after reviewing a few threads on the topic,
and my reason to repost some clarity in that given context (of approavcing the interview)

I do think most know and understand the scenario, but it bore repeating.

[Wayne]

A few airlines, such as Aerosvit and LOT actually do sell one way tickets at a little more than half of a round trip. All US based airlines do not.

[Shadow]

A few airlines, such as Aerosvit and LOT actually do sell one way tickets at a little more than half of a round trip. All US based airlines do not.

If a one way tickes is sold, it is often based on the price of a non-discounted fare.
Checking discounted fares will then lead to the conclusion that an unused half of the round trip is cheaper. Apart from that it will give an added feeling of safety to he knowing that if there is a problem she can return at any time against a small changeover fee.