exthree

Thank you, and great point. I'm going to bring this up and discuss further before my next trip. As far as I'm aware everyone I know from my company that has travelled short term to the USA for work has done so on the VWP.

Noorah101

Nope, they do not encourage visiting the USA. Each and every time you visit the USA, they inspect the scenario surrounding your visit. Having a USC fiancee does not help your visit. By the time you have begun the K-1 visa process, it is assumed that you have visited enough to know you want to be married.

Because it shows a tie to the USA which may give you the idea to remain in the USA, marry, and then apply for adjustment of status. Yes, even though you have a K-1 visa in process. People have dropped that process in order to simply remain in the USA on that particular visit...which is what the POE officer is trying to prevent. That said, tons of people DO visit their fiance(e) without any problem at all. It's just a risk you take at the POE.

The whole K-1 process only takes 6 - 8 months, sometimes even less. You'd probably only be able to fit one VWP visit in there anyway. I know you're trying to minimize the time apart, but really 6 months or so is not that long to wait, in my opinion.

Rene

exthree

This is what I'm trying to understand, I appreciate that every case is evaluated individually but on the other page one lady put:

Which implies that the fact he had a K-1 application in progress was beneficial to his entry?

meauxna

All: There is a reason that I didn't jump down OP's throat with my first reply and tell him what he is doing is "wrong" or "illegal" or "without the correct visa" in my reply. I DON"T KNOW. And I would submit that none of you do either.

There are two components to the VWP just as there are for the B visa: VWT and VWB--tourist admission and business admission. I've read lawyers here say that whatever activities are allowed on a B visa admission would also be allowed under a VW admission.

It's very dangerous IMO for us to draw such firm conclusions with such little information. When we do not know the answer, the best service we can provide to our fellow visa applicants is to ask questions that cause them to ask questions, and hopefully seek more information. The purpose of this group has been to assist people in researching their own cases, not do the case for them.

Yes, OP "should" ask his company's lawyers if his activities are in line with the type of admission he's been seeking. He should also bear in mind that they are the company's lawyers, not his, and any immigration consequence will be HIS to bear. The company doesn't always care or want to know.
The distinction should also be made IMO that the admission is changing this time, in wanting to stay longer and with a primary purpose (unclear) of visiting his USC fiance.

There is misinformation posted in this thread as fact and part of the beauty of the forum format is that misinformation can be corrected so that individuals don't go astray. What some people have posted is flat out wrong. I'd ask you all to keep in mind how high the stakes were for you personally when filing and remember that to the OP, his are just as high. Misinformation that you give can impact someone's life long term; that is a big responsibility.

IMO, and you all can certainly disagree, this person should consult with a lawyer about his work question. People here can help him understand forms, the order of events etc. And hopefully he will share information and the rest of us can learn about something we may not be familiar with.

This has always gone on in the forums and probably always will, but I'd ask you to keep your own limitations in mind when answering people's posts, especially as it seems you don't want to actually read professional's opinions.
Read More, Post Less.

Elvira

What you said!

Noorah101

Could be. As I said, it's up to the POE officer. He could see it either way. The only way to know how the POE officer at your visit will see your case, is to try it.

Rene

jeffreyhy

The number of people who enter the USA to visit their fiancee and then suddenly decide they're going to stay. (which is perfectly OK, by the way) This forum is littered with threads started by people who had such a change of mind, including more than a few who had a premonition before entering that they just might change their mind ....

People from VWP countries tend to be given the benefit of the doubt on this, and are usually granted enty. But some have been turned away. People from many non-visa waiver countries don't have a snowballs chance in hades of getting a B visa if they have an American fiance(e).

Regards, JEff

[EDIT: to point out that 'probable cause to deny' does not mean 'will probably be denied'.

TimNiceBut

Definitely get the advice of a disinterested 3rd party immigration lawyer on this. My understanding - and I'm not an immigration lawyer, but I've worked for companies with a presence in the US where business travel between the UK and the US wasn't uncommon - is that you are allowed to enter the US for certain types of tasks (like training, attending meetings etc) on a business VWP. Sometimes companies are sailing a little close to the wind here, but it's you and not the company how will be hit hardest by a violation of US immigration law.

You really don't want to be in a position where you're banned from entering the US for a long time due to someone not arranging for an appropriate visa...

BritishGuy36

You're not listening (as expected). You still want to believe what's convenient for you, rather than what's factual.

It's irrelevant that your employer is in the UK. It's irrelevant that you get paid in £ to a UK bank account. What is relevant that you are physically present in the US and working.

It really not a difficult concept to grasp, so, having heard it a number of times in this thread, I can only assume that you have no interest in the facts and will believe whatever you want.

You've been made 'aware' of the facts. If you choose to ignore them and it blows up in your face, you've nobody else to blame.

As you don't appear to be interested in listening, I don't see the point in contributing further to this thread.

Over and out.

P.S. Meauxna: I take your point but it seems clear to me that the OP came on here happy to publish the fact that they were performing their normal job/work when in the US as it would be in the UK.....which most certainly is not allowed on the VWP. When we raised this as an issue, then the OP backtracked and started to change the story. But it's too late, the info was out there. Hence the content of this post.

exthree

Wow, I really hadn't expected to get into such a heated debate on this. I think it's unfair to say that I'm not listening.

Here is a piece of cold hard information for you based on my own personal experience.

Last year I went to the US on business for 6 weeks. I filed my ETSA online and went ahead on the VWP as I have done a number of times previously. I arrived at immigration and they asked the purpose of my visit. I said I was visiting and working with my extended team based in the USA. I explained how there was a new employee that I was intending to train up and had a number of clients and co-workers to meet in my time over there. On request I then showed him my work pass. He said that was perfectly fine and stamped my passport and sent me on my way. No intense questions, no interrogation, just a smile and wave goodbye.

Now, I was perfectly honest about my visit. I didn't lie. I explained calmly and clearly the purpose of me being there as I simply as I have to you above.

I certainly don't mean to sound like I am not listening but I'm just having a hard time correlating the two pieces of information. One hand everyone here is saying what I did then and possibly intend to do again in the future is against the rules of the VWP and should not even be attempted. If that's the case why would the official at the POE not question me further, why would he listen to my story and stamp my passport with only minimal questions?

I certainly understand the difference between 'working' and 'business travel' and I regret possibly confusing the two terms in my original post. However, I do think it's unfair to state that I'm being obtuse in my opinions. In fact I would spin it on it's head and request that you listen to my story more clearly before making sweeping judgements on my activities. I haven't as yet gone into any detail on what specifics there were surrounding my previous visits and I don't really intend to apart from the information I offered above.

Think about it realistically, thousands upon thousands of people travel every single day 'on business' of which there are so many different reasons for doing so. All these people are technically 'working' if you define 'work' as 'performing tasks on behalf of an employer'. Do all of these people lie when they get to immigration and say they're just on holiday or do they simply explain - as I did - that they are out on business?

The VWP information explains it as clear as day:

exthree

Ok, that seems to be the biggest problem in this situation. I certainly wasn't backtracking I just didn't feel it necessary to begin explaining to everyone the ins and outs of my job. When I say that my employer 'allows' me to work in the US it is with specific purposes and tasks in mind, they're certainly not just a company who is willing to let me wander off around the world without a good reason for doing so. My choice of wording was poor.

I'm sorry for being slightly unclear in my original post and hope you understand that. I think the issue here is understanding the definition of 'work' and I'm certainly well aware that it's a broad definition.

meauxna

Actually, it IS a difficult concept to grasp and I am disappointed that you completely disregarded my post despite answering it.

BritishGuy36

I'm disappointed that you're disappointed.

But let's not fall out about it.