Travel subsidy scheme said to boost post-flood tourism in the north

[hotandsticky]

A friend's partner got knocked back with her USA visa application - declined under section 214B on the grounds that she hadn't evidenced sufficient ties to Thailand.

 

 

Absolute nonsense and the submitted paperwork showed:-

 

She is a Thai citizen aged 55 and has an English de-facto partner of 10 years - she is a housewife.  Her partner evidenced a 6 figure UK bank balance. She owns a house and land where she has lived for 30+ years. She has traveled international and was granted a UK visa earlier this year.

 

The reason for the visit is a one week trip to join a family wedding anniversary in Las Vegas.

 

There is absolutely no risk of flight and UKVI determined that "on the balance of probability the applicant would return to Thailand...." when granting the UK visa.

 

 

 

Any advice should the applicant choose to reapply would be welcome.

 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

It has always been difficult for single women to obtain a visa to visit the US.

 

Not having significant formal employment works against her. Her partner's UK bank balance doesn't evidence strong ties to Thailand.

 

She might have a better chance of success if she were able to demonstrate that her partner has been in Thailand for a number of years and either owns a company or has a good job. In such a case, being legally  married to her partner would probably help.

 

Good luck.

[Phillip9]

1 hour ago, hotandsticky said:

She is a Thai citizen aged 55 and has an English de-facto partner of 10 years - she is a housewife.  Her partner evidenced a 6 figure UK bank balance. She owns a house and land where she has lived for 30+ years. She has traveled international and was granted a UK visa earlier this year.

 

I wouldn't have mentioned her partners bank balance.  That doesn't help show ties to Thailand.  It just makes it look like they could afford to stay and live in the US together.

 

 

[hotandsticky]

2 hours ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

It has always been difficult for single women to obtain a visa to visit the US.

 

Not having significant formal employment works against her. Her partner's UK bank balance doesn't evidence strong ties to Thailand.

 

She might have a better chance of success if she were able to demonstrate that her partner has been in Thailand for a number of years and either owns a company or has a good job. In such a case, being legally  married to her partner would probably help.

 

Good luck.

 

See. it's crazy ..she doesn't need employment she is fully financially supported by her partner who is retired with a pension of £40k p a. plus £100j+ in the bank and property assets of £250k.

[impulse]

When I helped a female Thai friend get her 10 year tourist visa to the USA, we hired a agent.  They suggested I keep my name completely out of the process.  I did, and she got approved first try.  She had a good Thai job and had gone to college in Aus, but no assets to speak of.

 

My takeaway...  Pay the experts to do what they do every day of the week.  I don't recall what it cost, but I didn't flinch.  And I'm a cheap bastard.

 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

11 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

See. it's crazy ..she doesn't need employment she is fully financially supported by her partner who is retired with a pension of £40k p a. plus £100j+ in the bank and property assets of £250k.

 

The issue isn't financial support or how much money her partner has in the UK. The issue is her ties to Thailand and how likely she is to return. 

 

Having a foreign partner who has a good UK pension and money outside Thailand would actually increase the doubt in the consular official's mind about her returning. Why would she return if she and her partner aren't employed in Thailand and her partner has his assets and pensions outside Thailand?

 

 

 

 

[hotandsticky]

7 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

The issue isn't financial support or how much money her partner has in the UK. The issue is her ties to Thailand and how likely she is to return. 

 

Having a foreign partner who has a good UK pension and money outside Thailand would actually increase the doubt in the consular official's mind about her returning. Why would she return if she and her partner aren't employed in Thailand and her partner has his assets and pensions outside Thailand?

 

 

 

 

 

Nonsense .

 

She couldn't have stronger ties to Thailand - and if there were sufficient reasons to return to satisfy UKVI then it should be good enough for the Yanks 

 

As it happens she hates America (no justifiable reason) abd they are only going for a week for a relatives wedding anniversary in Las Vegas. She can't wait to get back to the fields of Isaan.

 

 

[hotandsticky]

35 minutes ago, impulse said:

When I helped a female Thai friend get her 10 year tourist visa to the USA, we hired a agent.  They suggested I keep my name completely out of the process.  I did, and she got approved first try.  She had a good Thai job and had gone to college in Aus, but no assets to speak of.

 

My takeaway...  Pay the experts to do what they do every day of the week.  I don't recall what it cost, but I didn't flinch.  And I'm a cheap bastard.

 

 

 

It seems that being wealthy and not needing to work is no longer an advantage!! What a forked up world we livevin.

[impulse]

6 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

It seems that being wealthy and not needing to work is no longer an advantage!! What a forked up world we livevin.

 

I think you're missing the point of my post, which is that agents know what works, this week.  They keep up with the trends and intricacies, and even the stupidities.  That's my recommendation.  Pay someone who knows.

 

But I'd suggest that be plan A.  Once they've been declined, I don't imagine the odds go up on any 2nd try, unless there's some time in between.  (In fact, is there a waiting period before she can apply again?  I don't claim to know)

 

[Phillip9]

11 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

Nonsense .

 

She couldn't have stronger ties to Thailand

 

If you think she couldn't have stronger ties, you are really not understanding what that means.

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

14 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

Nonsense .

 

She couldn't have stronger ties to Thailand - and if there were sufficient reasons to return to satisfy UKVI then it should be good enough for the Yanks 

 

As it happens she hates America (no justifiable reason) abd they are only going for a week for a relatives wedding anniversary in Las Vegas. She can't wait to get back to the fields of Isaan.

 

 

 

It may not seem very fair, but that's how US visa issuance works.

 

Significant employment in Thailand or business ownership are factors that indicate a likelihood to return. This applies to the applicant and spouse/partner if there is one, especially if the spouse/partner isn't Thai.

[hotandsticky]

5 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

 

If you think she couldn't have stronger ties, you are really not understanding what that means.

 

 

Trust me, I most certainly do.

[Phillip9]

8 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

13 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

If you think she couldn't have stronger ties, you are really not understanding what that means.

 

 

Trust me, I most certainly do.

 

If she had kids in Thailand, aging parents to care for in Thailand, a Thai husband working in Thailand, a job of her own in Thailand that she needed to return to, any of that would be stronger ties--by strong ties they mean some reason that she must return to Thailand.

 

 A partner from the UK with all his money in the UK is the opposite of strong ties the Thailand.

 

 

[hotandsticky]

56 minutes ago, Phillip9 said:

 

If she had kids in Thailand, aging parents to care for in Thailand, a Thai husband working in Thailand, a job of her own in Thailand that she needed to return to, any of that would be stronger ties--by strong ties they mean some reason that she must return to Thailand.

 

 A partner from the UK with all his money in the UK is the opposite of strong ties the Thailand.

 

 

 

 

You really do not understand.

 

Having assets overseas and income from abroad does not weaken the evaluation of a flight risk.

 

This applicant is an Isaan rice muncher who is fortunate to have a de-facto partner of financial standing who fully supports. Never been out the country until she met him and now has visited 4 countries. Owns land and property worth 5m+ Baht and can't wait to get back to rice fields after every trip away.

 

If you suggest that someone with a job at a PTT gas station who is married to an abusive alcoholic Thai man, has 4 kids, 200k of debt with local money lenders, owns nothing  BUT shows 120k Baht in a bank account, is a lesser risk of flight then you are delusional.

Edited Saturday at 02:01 AM by hotandsticky

[Phillip9]

52 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

You really do not understand.

 

Having assets overseas and income from abroad does not weaken the evaluation of a flight risk.

 

It's not just me.  Everyone else who replied here is trying to explain the same thing to you.

 

[theoldgit]

20 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

A partner from the UK with all his money in the UK is the opposite of strong ties the Thailand.

But neither do they have strong ties to the US that should give the Consular Officer concerns that they would stay in the US following the visit with their British partner.

 

The British partner could not remain in the US either.

 

There have been numerous reports of spouses and partners of US Citizens being refused visas, but this is the first time I’ve seen an example like this, though l assume there must have been some over the years.

[Phillip9]

1 hour ago, theoldgit said:

But neither do they have strong ties to the US that should give the Consular Officer concerns that they would stay in the US following the visit with their British partner.

 

The British partner could not remain in the US either.

 

The US starts by assuming  that you will stay in the US permanently, and it's up to you to prove otherwise by showing strong ties to your home country.  An unmarried British partner doesn't help with that.

 

The US does not consider defacto relationships when issuing visas.  The British partner and his assets are at best meaningless to her visa application.

 

As a single woman she will need to qualify for the visa on her own.

 

Edited Saturday at 11:35 PM by Phillip9

[hotandsticky]

3 hours ago, theoldgit said:

But neither do they have strong ties to the US that should give the Consular Officer concerns that they would stay in the US following the visit with their British partner.

 

The British partner could not remain in the US either.

 

There have been numerous reports of spouses and partners of US Citizens being refused visas, but this is the first time I’ve seen an example like this, though l assume there must have been some over the years.

 

 

I don't like the USA system. The UK process, for example, is much better; all the evidence to support the application is uploaded and the ECO has everything they need to make a decision. With the USA process the online submission is basically just static data collection - nothing to support financial adequacy or reasons to return - just about enough to establish a genuine reason to visit.

 

It would appear that everything rests on the 'interview'. Having now spoken with the applicant she seemed to indicate that they didn't even look at her folder of supporting information. Whilst I find that incredible, if true, it is what she said.

 

The arrogance of the system is highlighted by the published assumption that all applicants want to be 'immigrant' applicants and their application has to first prove that is not the case.

 

If this lady was a British citizen, with EXACTLY the same financial situation and same ties to the UK, she would get an online visa  the same day. But because she is Thai she has to go through this farcical subjective process - that is as close to modern day discrimination/racism that you can get.

 

2 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

 

The US starts by assuming  that you will stay in the US permanently, and it's up to you to prove otherwise by showing strong ties to your home country.  An unmarried British partner doesn't help with that.

 

The US does not consider defacto relationships when issuing visas.  The British partner and his assets are at best meaningless to her visa application.

 

As a single woman she will need to qualify for the visa on her own.

 

 

That is bull<deleted> - not from you but from the USA authorities. She is not single (that bit was bull<deleted> from you) but in a domestic relationship akin to marriage for 10 years. She is a 50+ year old Thai citizen who will never live anywhere but Thailand. 

 

If UKVI consider her suitable for the granting of a visa then that is more than good enough for the USA authorities.

 

My friend will give it one more shot but I fear that the applicant will not have the confidence or skills to do well at the interview. To me that says more about the USA than the applicant.

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 02:00 AM by hotandsticky

[theoldgit]

15 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

 

The US starts by assuming  that you will stay in the US permanently, and it's up to you to prove otherwise by showing strong ties to your home country.  An unmarried British partner doesn't help with that.

 

The US does not consider defacto relationships when issuing visas.  The British partner and his assets are at best meaningless to her visa application.

 

As a single woman she will need to qualify for the visa on her own.

 

Yes, I’m well aware that Consular Officials are required to start from the position that an applicant intends to stay in the US permanently, illegally, unless they could show strong ties to their home country.

 

Maybe if the lady concerned could could have provided evidence that she owned a house on her land and had done so for in excess of thirty years which, along with her history of international travel, the decision maker may have issued the visa.

 

It would seem that it wasn’t necessary to even read the supporting evidence before refusing the ladies application.

[hotandsticky]

15 hours ago, theoldgit said:

Yes, I’m well aware that Consular Officials are required to start from the position that an applicant intends to stay in the US permanently, illegally, unless they could show strong ties to their home country.

 

Maybe if the lady concerned could could have provided evidence that she owned a house on her land and had done so for in excess of thirty years which, along with her history of international travel, the decision maker may have issued the visa.

 

It would seem that it wasn’t necessary to even read the supporting evidence before refusing the ladies application.

 

Exactly. 

 

She presented her chanote duly translated as part of the package of evidence of strong  ties to Thailand. There was also a specific page headed Reasons to Return to Thailand.

 

This is mid 50's has never had children and has no family in the area because she was born in Cambodia and pushed into Thailand during the Khmer Rouge era.

 

However, she is a perfect applicant for a tourist visa and the trip is only a week (I know that is irrelevant if dome absconds). UKVI understood that; the USA embassy was not interested apparently.

[connda]

On 10/18/2024 at 2:44 PM, hotandsticky said:

A friend's partner got knocked back with her USA visa application - declined under section 214B on the grounds that she hadn't evidenced sufficient ties to Thailand.

Easier to have a Mexican coyote take her across the US border where she'll receive a phone, bus or plane ticket to wherever she wishes to go, a monthly stipend, and free housing until she can hook back up with your friend.  Just stay in a Blue state/city and all will be fine.  Eventually she be granted citizenship.

Try to work within the system?  She'll never get in. 

[Sheryl]

There is no quota.

 

UK and US visa issuing procedures have nothing to do with each other. 

 

As others have said, introducing information about her partner would have been seen as negative, not a positive. Though I suppose unavoidable if she has no income of her own.  If they were legally married and the partner resident in Thailand on long term visa that would have helped. Non-marital  partners hold no weight in visa decisions.

 

Lack of a job and lack of spouse or dependents staying behind  in Thailand would be a significant negative in the eyes of consular officer. 

 

The other unknown is of course how she replied to questions in the interview. 

 

My guess is that her odds of success in a repeat application are very low  unless her circumstances change (e.g she marries her partner). 

[Celsius]

39 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

Exactly. 

 

She presented her chanote duly translated as part of the package of evidence of strong  ties to Thailand. There was also a specific page headed Reasons to Return to Thailand.

 

This is mid 50's has never had children and has no family in the area because she was born in Cambodia and pushed into Thailand during the Khmer Rouge era.

 

However, she is a perfect applicant for a tourist visa and the trip is only a week (I know that is irrelevant if dome absconds). UKVI understood that; the USA embassy was not interested apparently.

 

How is she a perfect applicant when she is fully supported by someone else?

[Celsius]

On 10/18/2024 at 5:40 PM, impulse said:

When I helped a female Thai friend get her 10 year tourist visa to the USA, we hired a agent.  They suggested I keep my name completely out of the process.  I did, and she got approved first try.  She had a good Thai job and had gone to college in Aus, but no assets to speak of.

 

My takeaway...  Pay the experts to do what they do every day of the week.  I don't recall what it cost, but I didn't flinch.  And I'm a cheap bastard.

 

 

"had a good Thai job" 

 

Nothing to do with agent, but she proved she would return to Thailand because of her work. In these instances the employer will usually provide a letter that she will return to work. Most tourist visas are approved this way. My wife got US, AUD, CAD and Schengen visa without ever using an agent. 

[Phillip9]

5 minutes ago, Celsius said:

we hired a agent.  They suggested I keep my name completely out of the process.  I did,

 

5 minutes ago, Celsius said:

Nothing to do with agent, but she proved she would return to Thailand because of her work.

 

The agent gave her some great advice--to keep him completely out of the process.  She may not have gotten the visa if she mentioned him (especially if he is American).