tetleystea

We have lived in the US for 7.5 years on an E2 visa. 3 years ago my husband was stopped for a DUI (first and only one) actually received Reckless Driving not Proven - no accident, etc.

We have recently gone back to London for our renewal and (after 2 months of waiting) were denied as he is considered a danger to American citizens/himself.

It was stupid to D&D, however, this seems very harsh as it is his only offence - not even a speeding ticket before or after. Our lawyer assured us this arrest wouldn't be a problem - but now says that London are enforcing the rules more than any other Embassy.

He is not even allowed back to the US to sell the business (valued at about $750k), homes (not easy where we live at the moment). I have just returned to the US on the VWP to try and set up someone to run the business and to try and sell everything (am I stressed - god I wish we had never moved here - however much I love it!!)

We have had 2 legal opinions:-

1. Forget about doing anything now just accept it and reapply in 2 years - you can't appeal a consulate decision; and the other lawyer has said:

2. Go for a Dept of State Legal Opinion - the Consulate don't have to take any notice but it carries a lot of weight.

I am in a quandry and don't know what to do.

I know this new drink consulate directive is new but has anyone else any experience.

Also, can we still go to Canada - as it was not proven - or will this flash up on their system too.

Thank you for any help.

Desperate!!

Tracym

Canada his been even more strict then the U.S. Someone with a DUI isn't even supposed to visit I believe. Unless you plan to lie to them.

While of course any DUI is not a good idea, I really and sorry about your situation. I'm afraid I don't have any idea what to do legally - except if yours isn't, find a lawyer who's an expert in the area.

Edit: I re-read - if it isn't really a DUI, maybe you're ok for Canada. I suppose you'd have to ask an immigration attorney for Canada.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

Something does not quite add up in your posting. However, if you wish to shoot me a PM, I can refer you to another attorney in my suite who does a lot of E-2 work in Europe, including London.

I'm of the opinion that you will NOT cogent and good advice on this board as nice as the people are here.

Good luck.

"The trouble is all inside your head she said to me. The answer is easy if you take it logically. I'd like to help you in your struggle to be free." Paul Simon

"Where is rpt where is task force thirty four? RR The world wonders." Chester Nimitz

Bob

What has Canada got to do with this?

Anyway, this is something beyond a forum, you need a lawyer experienced in this, and I'm sure someone might be able to recommend one, but till then, www.ailalawyer.com to seek a referral.

JAJ

DUI offences in the U.K. are normally dealt with in the court system - so was he convicted or not, and if so what was he convicted of?

Or did this all happen under the Scottish legal system?

crg

Did he deny ever being arrested on the visa application? Something doesn't make sense here. DUI does not have US immigration consequences by itself. There must be something else going on.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

I wouldn't say that with such certainty.

Marocco

To me it sounded like it happened in the US.

tetleystea

http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattor...migration.html


Above is a link showing AILA's take on the new drink law.

Basically it says that if you have been arrested for any type of drink offence in the past 3 calendar years - you have exhibited dangerous behaviour and have to go for a medical with the Consulate's approved doctor.

The medical consisted of a blood test - the blood test showed that my husband drinks more than the "average 2/3 beers a day" - and therefore they consider that the dangerous behaviour is still present. Hence the ban. If we had known about this before we went back - we would have waited until January - when the 3 years were up - and it wouldn't have been an issue. In the refusal letter they also said they would not consider a waiver.

Yes, the offence was in the US.

We are not keen on moving back to the UK - we are looking at Canada (hence the question), my husband has seen a business for sale in Toronto that he quite likes and wants to go and see. We are also
looking at Costa Rica.

ian-mstm

Canada doesn't much like DUI's either. My mom lives in Toronto... if you can guarantee me that your husband won't drive on the 401, Yonge Street, or Bayview Avenue... then you have my blessing to try.

Ian

Folinskyinla

Hi:

This is NOT a "new law" -- although it is a new practice in application of the law. You may want to buy a copy of "DSM-IV" and look up Alcohol Abuse and Alcohol Dependency. A couple of years back I had to get an expert report from a psychiatrist on this. If memory serves me correct, your husband would fit within the definition of "abuse" and maybe in remission -- maybe not.

I'm curious -- does he still drink 2/3 beers a day? Why do you say if "we" had known about the drinking...?

I am not an expert on this. But what happened now makes a lot more sense than what you posted at the lead of this string.

fatbrit

You are demonstrating those strange puritanical US views of ETOH!

Folinskyinla

Hi:

I'm not being "puritanical" at all. I did mention the DSM-IV, did I not?

fatbrit

799.9 is the most accurate the quacks ever come up with. Everything else is pure speculation IMVHO.

Tracym

Using DSM-IV, we do not know enough to confidently diagnose him with anything at all at this point.

In regards to the DUI, in order to meet the criteria for substance (alcohol) abuse he would have to exhibit:

A maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, as manifested by one (or more) of the following occurring within a 12-month period:

(2) recurrant substance use in situations in which it is physically hazardous (e.g., driving an automoobile or operating a machine when impaired by substance use)

(3) recurrant substance-related legal problems (e.g., arrests for substance-related disorderly conduct)


One episode is not enough for a diagnosis. Nor is continued heavy drinking. The diagnosis can only be made, if repeated problems occur because of the drinking (legal, social, interpersonal) and the person nonetheless continues drinking. Drinking heavily alone does not suffice.

If there were five DUI's, I'd say it was a strong possibility/probability that a diagnosis of alcohol abuse would be made. With one - many people without a drinking "problem" make a mistake and get behind the wheel after one too many. Which is a bad decision, but would not warrant any diagnosis. Unless of course, his wife reported he drove home drunk frequently, but avoided the police.

I believe the determination was that he drank MORE than the average 2/3 beers per day. 3-4 units (not beers) per day is the UK recommendation healthwise for number of units per day for a man. I don't know how much more he drinks.

Again, if there is no impact on functioning (job, marriage, family, social) from a diagnostic standpoint, a person can drink all they want. Their liver, however, might not agree.

While not experienced, I do have the training to interpret DSM-IV.