ian-mstm

With respect, no - it doesn't. Why? Because immigration is like dice... it has no memory. Someone else's experience, even in the exact same circumstances, could yield a different result.


What rules? There are none. There are no rules deliberately - because it allows the CBP officer the widest-possible latitude to do his job - which, as previously mentioned, is to keep non-US citizens out of the US.

Ian

miltones

It's not like dice because the chances of each outcome occurring are not precisely equal. Horse race, maybe, dice no.

We can all agree that certain time gaps between entry, (assuming the same story and situation) render refusal more or less likely.

If I wait 100 days, reentry is more likely, based on reading this forum, I'd say, over 80%. if I wait 1 day, reentry is much much less likely. Again, based purely on this forum, I would say 10% maybe less. Maybe 1%.

On average, I mean.

It's not completely random. I could say with some confidence, that if you return after only one day, the risk is high. If you return within 100 days the risk is low.

I'm only trying to figure out if the 50% is an actual guess, or just an expression of complete ignorance. If the latter, fine. But it's confusing to dress it up as the former. Why bother posting, if it's the latter?

If two people in the same situation post a letter, there could be two different outcomes. Does that mean it's impossible to assess risk? Of course not.

So I've accepted that noone here can answer my question. And perhaps it was naive of me to think anyone has done this exact situation enough times to give a large enough sample to give an answer. I'm just a little bugged by the reasoning.


It's not completely random.

AdsUK

You've edited and deleted several times now that I will just say the following:

In reply to your deleted post of "Why do you bother contributing?" I want to help you see that no-one anywhere is going to be able to give you the figures/reassurance/facts that you are seeking. The data isn't freely available. You're becoming obsessed with statistics.

If you can show you have strong enough ties to the UK, money to support yourself and a reasonable plan for your stay in the US, you'll be let in. Generally if you stay out of the US longer than you've been in previously you should be ok, but a POE officer if having a bad day and wants to dig deeper might not let you in. Why? Because he/she can.. It might not seem fair or right, but as you are not a US Citizen, the USA does not care one bit. It's their country and their right to do what they want when you arrive.

I had a trip to the US and was sent to secondary inspection. My next visit was 6 months later and I was let straight in. My next visit was 18 months later and I was sent to secondary again. Any logic? No. Do I understand or was told why? No. If I was given a reason are the US Government allowed to lie to you? Yes.

The VWP or B2 visa are there for tourist purposes. The US believe you can do your tourism in 90 days (for VWP), and you will probably be denied a B2 if you qualify for the VWP - although if the officer dealing with your application is happy with what you present you could be granted a B2 (and it would need to be compelling evidence of needing 180 days rather than 90). We just cannot say.

My posts may be winding you up, but you need to understand very quickly how frustrating and exasperating US Immigration law is.

The reality is the US take the view that if you don't like it, travel somewhere else.

Good luck with your travels.

miltones

Thanks, that's a really useful post. I apologise for letting my anxiety creep in to the discussion.

I also agree that sufficient data isn't freely available to draw conclusions. Thought it was worth a try though. Have created a poll elsewhere, on the off chance but yeah I agree it's unlikely.

Thanks again for your time.

S Folinsky

I'm laughing a tad because I just renewed my P/P and California driver's license. The P/P was 10 years old and the physical description on the D/L was 15 years old [CA allows renewal by mail for two extension if one has a clean record]. Neither picture on the P/P and D/L and the physical description on the D/L matched me.

Getting back to OP's initial question, I'm no longer in practice [other than "of counsel" to a firm], but if I was, there are many more questions I would pose in a consultation. Maybe a B-2 will be possible. Maybe not.

Noorah101

Even if a bunch of people have the same personal situation (which is going to be VERY rare anyway), and they all post here that they were successful in entering the USA, yours could still be the one that gets denied. So really, no one else's first-hand experience can help determine your own outcome.

Rene

scrubbedexpat099

You want to go to Florida for a couple of weeks to see the mouse, 99.998% chance of being OK.

You want a B2 to spend 6 months bumming around, a lot less.

All we know about you is the very little information posted. From a B2 application perspective much of it seems contradictory.

miltones

No it can't determine the outcome, but it can give an estimate of risk.

I agree it's super rare and naive of me to think that I would get many responses. But that naivety aside, given enough data points, it's a valid method, imo.

If 100 people were all successful and all of them posted here, with my exact circumstances. I would take that evidence on board. Yes i know this is less likely than god existing, but still, it would contribute to my decision on whether to risk the trip or not.

Dorothy

Ok, so if 100 people post that they were successful and 101 posted that they were turned away would that make any difference?

miltones

Of course, that would give me confidence that there is about a 50% chance of success. That kind of sample size would be robust. The extra 1 person who voted no would not be statistically significant to push it either way though.

That is very different to having two outcomes.

scrubbedexpat099

I see you have moved on but I would comment that the BoilerApp takes into account that those declined are much more likely to post.