Henry

My brother-in-law rang me last night to tell me of the nightmare in
which he has just found himself.

He is a citizen of a non-English-speaking Visa Waiver country. Last
October he drove into the US from Canada and drove out a week later.
Later, he noticed that on his return to Canada the Immigration officer
had not removed the American visa waiver stub from his passport, as they
normally do. However, he was not unduly concerned, because this has
happened twice before in the past ten years or so (once it was an
airline check-in clerk at O'Hare and the other time was also at the
Canadian border). What he did the other times was, once he got home, he
sent the I-94W stub to the US Consulate in his country with a note
explaining what had happened, and that was the end of it. So, that's
what he did this time too, when he got home in November--six weeks after
leaving the US, but still well within the 90-day limit of the Visa
Waiver admission.

Yesterday, three months to the day since he wrote to the Consulate, he
found an envelope from them in the post when he got home from work. It
contained the I-94W stub from last autumn, along with his note and a
sheet explaining (in English only) that situations such as his can now
only be rectified by a new bureau in Kentucky. Three months it took the
Consulate to send him this. And now, of course, he is 'illegal' --since
the 90-day visa waiver period expired in mid-January and as far as La
Migra knows, he is still there!

I said he was lucky that he hadn't needed to go back to the US in the
past six weeks (from mid-January to the present), or they may well have
shackled him, held him incommunicado overnight, and then kicked him out,
never to return. Not funny. It turns out that he is booked to go back,
in about ten days' time.

Even if he sends Kentucky all his documents (apparently you need to
submit a raft of photocopies along with the stub and your explanation)
by overnight DHL, what are the chances that this is going to be cleared
up within ten days? Ha ha. I advised him to cancel (or, at least,
reschedule) his trip, since the risk is so very high that he would just
walk into trouble if he went now. He is angry, as the upcoming trip is
important.

Why couldn't the US Consulate in his country at least have date-stamped
his letter, or something, when they got it, back in November, to
document the fact that he had tried to sort this out in a timely manner?
And, I ask again, why did it take them _three months_ to open his
letter, see what it was about, type his name and address on an envelope,
put his letter and I-94W into it, along with their new fact-sheet, and
send it back? Why? Especially when they _know_ full-well the conditions
of the visa waiver programme and the ramifications that 'non-compliance'
can have? This is really outrageous. Is it incompetence, or arrogance,
or what? It is certainly not the way to win friends and influence
people.

Henry

PS: I also wonder what the reaction would be if an American wrote, in
English, to one of my brother-in-law's country's Consulates in the US
and received in reply a handout containing such important information as
in this case, but only in their own national language!

Sjoerd

"Henry" <> schreef in bericht
news:1g9rbnf.ppg9021xnfcusN%...
    > My brother-in-law rang me last night to tell me of the nightmare in
    > which he has just found himself.
    > He is a citizen of a non-English-speaking Visa Waiver country. Last
    > October he drove into the US from Canada and drove out a week later.
    > Later, he noticed that on his return to Canada the Immigration officer
    > had not removed the American visa waiver stub from his passport, as they
    > normally do. However, he was not unduly concerned, because this has
    > happened twice before in the past ten years or so (once it was an
    > airline check-in clerk at O'Hare and the other time was also at the
    > Canadian border). What he did the other times was, once he got home, he
    > sent the I-94W stub to the US Consulate in his country with a note
    > explaining what had happened, and that was the end of it. So, that's
    > what he did this time too, when he got home in November--six weeks after
    > leaving the US, but still well within the 90-day limit of the Visa
    > Waiver admission.
    > Yesterday, three months to the day since he wrote to the Consulate, he
    > found an envelope from them in the post when he got home from work. It
    > contained the I-94W stub from last autumn, along with his note and a
    > sheet explaining (in English only) that situations such as his can now
    > only be rectified by a new bureau in Kentucky. Three months it took the
    > Consulate to send him this. And now, of course, he is 'illegal' --since
    > the 90-day visa waiver period expired in mid-January and as far as La
    > Migra knows, he is still there!
    > I said he was lucky that he hadn't needed to go back to the US in the
    > past six weeks (from mid-January to the present), or they may well have
    > shackled him, held him incommunicado overnight, and then kicked him out,
    > never to return. Not funny. It turns out that he is booked to go back,
    > in about ten days' time.
    > Even if he sends Kentucky all his documents (apparently you need to
    > submit a raft of photocopies along with the stub and your explanation)
    > by overnight DHL, what are the chances that this is going to be cleared
    > up within ten days? Ha ha. I advised him to cancel (or, at least,
    > reschedule) his trip, since the risk is so very high that he would just
    > walk into trouble if he went now. He is angry, as the upcoming trip is
    > important.
    > Why couldn't the US Consulate in his country at least have date-stamped
    > his letter, or something, when they got it, back in November, to
    > document the fact that he had tried to sort this out in a timely manner?
    > And, I ask again, why did it take them _three months_ to open his
    > letter, see what it was about, type his name and address on an envelope,
    > put his letter and I-94W into it, along with their new fact-sheet, and
    > send it back? Why? Especially when they _know_ full-well the conditions
    > of the visa waiver programme and the ramifications that 'non-compliance'
    > can have? This is really outrageous. Is it incompetence, or arrogance,
    > or what? It is certainly not the way to win friends and influence
    > people.
    > Henry
    > PS: I also wonder what the reaction would be if an American wrote, in
    > English, to one of my brother-in-law's country's Consulates in the US
    > and received in reply a handout containing such important information as
    > in this case, but only in their own national language!

Was his passport stamped on entry to Canada? If so, he has proof that he
left the US within the 90 day period.

Sjoerd

Henry

Sjoerd <> wrote:

    > "Henry" <> schreef in bericht
    > news:1g9rbnf.ppg9021xnfcusN%...
    > > My brother-in-law rang me last night to tell me of the nightmare in
    > > which he has just found himself.
    > >
    >
    > Was his passport stamped on entry to Canada? If so, he has proof that he
    > left the US within the 90 day period.

Oh, he has plenty of proof that he left in time and he fully expects
that this will eventually be sorted out.

The reason for his anger is that it took the Americans at their
consulate in his country three months to even tell him that there was a
problem. There were six weeks between the time his 90-day period ended
and the day they told him that the rules had been changed, and if he had
tried to go back to the US during that time they could well have locked
him up--through no fault of his own.

It's good, of course, that he has finally found out now--before leaving
on his next trip Monday week. But it's a pain in the arse to have to
re-juggle all his arrangements at such sort notice.

cheers,

Henry

Dennis P. Harris

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 09:34:41 +0200 in rec.travel.usa-canada,
(Henry) wrote:

    > I advised him to cancel (or, at least,
    > reschedule) his trip, since the risk is so very high that he would just
    > walk into trouble if he went now. He is angry, as the upcoming trip is
    > important.

this is what bush's homeland insecurity dept. has done to us,
totally screwed it up.

i know a retired coast guard helicopter pilot, a former admiral's
aide who had a top secret clearance. his ethnic heritage is
sicilian, but someone back in the 1500s probably was a north
african named mussara, because every time anyone in his family
tries to fly, they discover they are on the idiotic "no-fly"
list, and there is no way to have their name removed, and it can
take 2 or 3 hours before he's allowed to board an aircraft.

even our senior us senator, chair of the appropriations
committee, couldn't get his name removed. he has now joined a
lawsuit over the stupid no-fly list.