aksojern

Hi everyone,

(For the quick version, please scroll down to the bold part below)

In 2014 I had not done my homework before applying for a B2 visa. I barely knew about ESTA, and I did not realize that the embassy officers could suspect that a decent Swedish guy would even think about illegally overstaying in the U.S. At least that possibility had not crossed my mind. I was denied a visa due to insufficient ties to my home country.

Admittedly, I was sick and unemployed at the time, and I intended to stay for several months; so in retrospect I can see that the decision made sense to the officer.

Anyway, I’m in a different place now. I am employed and have several other factors tying me to Sweden. Now I would like to go back to the Bay Area, California, for six weeks or so, just for vacation and to see some friends I made there when studying in the area in 2008/2009. I also want to refresh my memories for a novel project I’m working on, inspired by those 2008/2009 experiences.

I recently submitted an ESTA application, but it was rejected. So what I’m looking at now is a new visa application where I make a case that both my situation and my travel plans have changed significantly since last time.

And here’s my question to you guys:

To maximize my chances of getting a B2 visa, would it be wiser to

1) say that I would be staying with a single mom with a kid and poor finances (which is what I probably would do, and so this would be closest to the truth. Our relationship is platonic, but I guess there’s a risk that the embassy wouldn’t believe me.)

2) say that I would be travelling alone, staying in this and that hotel, and that I primarily want to see Disneyland and Yosemite and whatnot (this would be farthest from the truth but perhaps arouse least suspicion)

3) say that I would be staying with a male friend with solid finances working with electronics in Silicon Valley, willing to write me a Letter of Invitation (he is also a very distant relative of mine, born and raised in the U.S.—should I leave out or include this fact if pursuing option 3?)

4) say that I would be staying with a retired Ph.D. psychologist (and his family) whom I’m acquainted but not close friends with, and who could probably also write a nice Letter of Invitation?

Lastly, would it hurt or support my case if I mentioned my sincere intention of gathering writing material for my novel? (I’m an aspiring novelist, unpublished but with ”a foot in the door” at a reputable publishing house after submitting another manuscript last year, so I’m serious about the work.)

* * *

I want to stress that I have the best of intentions with my planned trip. I only want to go there for six weeks and then go back. That’s it. I can’t leave my job, friends, family, apartment, etc. in Stockholm. But I learned the hard way last time that sometimes you have to be street smart in the visa business.

Extremely grateful for any input! Namasté.

MidAtlantic

On your latest ESTA application what was your answer to the question, "Have you ever been denied a visa?" I hope it was "Yes" ie truthful.

Others will be along to give specific advice, but you are already suggesting you give less than truthful information in your new B2 application. The ONLY thing you should do is give truthful answers. Anything else means you are risking being on the road to longer term problems, including never getting a visa.

Nutmegger

Which of your 1, 2 3, and 4 is the truth? That is what you will put. And if you only recently submitted an ESTA application that was refused, you should give it some time before you try again. I believe six months or more has been mentioned in the past.

deadshoppingmalls

Which of your options is the truthful one? Choose that one. Always go with the truth with US Authorities...in fact always go with the truth in general. If you get caught out in the lie, it will look MUCH worse for you than if you had told the truth in the first place.

ian-mstm

I have to agree with the others. Anything other than the truth is likely to bite you in the arse.

Consider this: 1) you tell the truth that you'll be staying with a friend and the officer may deny the visa; or 2) you say you're travelling alone and staying in a hotel and after further questions the officer decides you're lying and permanently bans you from the US (which, by the way, can and does happen).

Now... which scenario would you rather? Bottom line: Tell the truth. No one here will help you lie to gain an immigration benefit.


You recently have a denied ESTA and you now need to apply for a visa. That's not good. It makes you look desperate... and desperate people make very poor decisions. Case in point, your questions about which story to tell.


We all believe you... but, in all honestly, you can't prove it... insofar as it's impossible to prove a negative. So where does that leave you?

If I were you, I'd wait at least 6 months before applying for the visa and probably 12 months.

Ian

Noorah101

Yep, I agree with everyone. Always tell the truth.

Rene

Pulaski

If you are potentially ESTA eligible but have been denied an ESTA then IMO it is highly likely that another B-2 visa application will also fail, and another fail visa application will likely postpone even further into the future the time when you will be able to get an ESTA.

By most accounts, people who are ESTA eligible are frequently denied a B-2 visa even if they have an unblemished personal history.

Twinkle0927

A promising and talented novelist you may be, but leave your story-telling behind at the visa interview and stick to the facts. If you are staying with an unemployed single mother then, if asked, say so.

Letters of invitation are meaningless and not required. If anything they can count against you when they make wild promises of you returning home (no one can guarantee that you will actually board a plane) and the writer bearing the cost of your trip and providing you with free bed and board (in other words saying you have no means to support yourself).

aksojern

This is all very helpful. Thanks for the prompt feedback.

The one and only reason I started even considering polishing my story is the fact that being completely transparent and candid got me nowhere with my first B2 application, even though I only had good intentions back then. Personally I’m much more comfortable with telling the truth, so I’m actually somewhat relieved that your recommendations point in the same direction.

@Twinkle0927: Why would I want to leave out my novel material research when asked for my intentions with the trip, if that’s part of my actual plans?

@Midatlantic: Yes, I answered truthfully to the ”Have you ever …” question. Hence the ESTA denial.

* * *

I learned from your kind feedback in 2014 that it was wise to wait 6—12 months after a visa denial before applying for an ESTA. But I didn’t know that it worked the other way around, too. Thanks for highlighting that.

All in all, I’m leaning towards waiting six months or so before submitting a new B2 application. Most likely I will be even more grounded in the Swedish community by then, and, as you point out, I will not look that desperate.

Do you think it would it make a significant difference odds-wise if I waited even longer (i.e. 12 months or more)?

Feel free to fill me in if I’ve gotten anything wrong.

tom169

In my opinion, leaving a longer period of time will only work positively in your favor. Leave long enough and you may find that an ESTA will be approved.

aksojern

@tom169:

I applied for an ESTA right after my first B2 denial in 2014. It was rejected. Following your line of thought, I then waited almost two and a half years (!) before my next ESTA application (a few weeks ago); but that one didn’t go through either. I don’t know what to make of that.

I guess what I’m wondering is:

Given that each failed attempt—be it ESTA or visa—forces me to wait for another X months before trying again, which would be the better, safer choice next time I apply: ESTA or visa?


My understanding is that going for a visa would be smarter because of the personal interview, where I can present my credibility in a way the online ESTA application doesn’t leave room for. But it seems you’re hinting at the opposite.

Pulaski

Generally speaking, if you are ESTA-eligible, the US doesn't want you to apply for a B-2. The ESTA/VWP program was introduced to reduce the number of visa applications for low risk visitors to the US, and the pattern is that, generally, B-2 applications have a high probability of being denied where the VWP is available. I don't think your "credibility" is a huge issue - as with most applications for most visas, IMO the decision has already been taken before you show up at the interview - "DENIED".

The only notable area of exception is for people who are retired who want to spend longer periods in the US than the VWP allows.

Be thankful that the VWP exists and that you are eligible, because the vast majority of people are not, and still get their B-2 applications denied.

aksojern

Thanks, @Pulaski. That makes sense. I take it that I’ll be better off waiting another 6—12 months and than submit a new standard ESTA application. It annoys me not being given room to explain the cause for the previous visa denial and how circumstances have changed since, but I guess I’ll just have to chew it up and hope for the best.

By the way, am I even VWP eligible after one visa and two ESTA denials? I thought I was technically disqualified, even though exceptions are made by the accidental mercifulness of reviewing officers.

Pulaski

Contrary to the oft-repeated myth, a visa denial does not make you VWP ineligible

albanks2542

But in this case maybe he is ineligible when you consider that more than 2 and a half years passed between b2 visa denial and the esta application? Have you ever heard of such a long period of time. If the denial was instant then it would suggest to me he is on some type of list. If the denial was after processing than ok perhaps more time is need before it will be approved.