70 to 100 days
#1
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 536
70 to 100 days
Those of us unfortunate enough to be in the black hole of NSC find it difficult to remain patient. It may well be that the volume of cases is simply too high for NSC to be able to process them quickly..........after all, they are highly unlikely to be holding them up deliberately! It occurs to me, however, that NSC do themselves no favours by adhering to the fictional "70 to 100 days" as their stated achievement for process times. We all know only too well thet 120 to 150 is a more realistic estimation of their current achievement levels. No commercial service organisation would hang themselves out to dry in this way, and, more than any else during this process, it seems to indicate to me that NSC really do have little or no consideration for their clients. Myabe this is an issue Mr Udall could pick up during his forthcoming visit to the centre. There is only upside for NSC in publishing something realistic, whilst, at the same time, less worry and aggravation would result in those held in this long wait. (1st NOA 27 June)
#2
Forum Regular
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 259
Re: 70 to 100 days
I agree with you on that. The waiting and worrying really is a bit much sometimes.
I guess I'm at an advantage over most in that my fiance couldn't move over this year anyway, so not having an approval isn't holding us up any for the holidays or anything. Still sucks not knowing though.
First NOA 06/18.
I guess I'm at an advantage over most in that my fiance couldn't move over this year anyway, so not having an approval isn't holding us up any for the holidays or anything. Still sucks not knowing though.
First NOA 06/18.
#3
Re: 70 to 100 days
Originally posted by abba48uk:
Those of us unfortunate enough to be in the black hole of NSC find it difficult to remain patient. It may well be that the volume of cases is simply too high for NSC to be able to process them quickly..........after all, they are highly unlikely to be holding them up deliberately! It occurs to me, however, that NSC do themselves no favours by adhering to the fictional "70 to 100 days" as their stated achievement for process times. We all know only too well thet 120 to 150 is a more realistic estimation of their current achievement levels. No commercial service organisation would hang themselves out to dry in this way, and, more than any else during this process, it seems to indicate to me that NSC really do have little or no consideration for their clients. Myabe this is an issue Mr Udall could pick up during his forthcoming visit to the centre. There is only upside for NSC in publishing something realistic, whilst, at the same time, less worry and aggravation would result in those held in this long wait. (1st NOA 27 June)
Those of us unfortunate enough to be in the black hole of NSC find it difficult to remain patient. It may well be that the volume of cases is simply too high for NSC to be able to process them quickly..........after all, they are highly unlikely to be holding them up deliberately! It occurs to me, however, that NSC do themselves no favours by adhering to the fictional "70 to 100 days" as their stated achievement for process times. We all know only too well thet 120 to 150 is a more realistic estimation of their current achievement levels. No commercial service organisation would hang themselves out to dry in this way, and, more than any else during this process, it seems to indicate to me that NSC really do have little or no consideration for their clients. Myabe this is an issue Mr Udall could pick up during his forthcoming visit to the centre. There is only upside for NSC in publishing something realistic, whilst, at the same time, less worry and aggravation would result in those held in this long wait. (1st NOA 27 June)
Fact: The processing times printed on the receipt notices "DO NOT" come from a service center itself! The service center does not determine what to list, nor does it have the authority to change the numbers listed on their notices. I received this information straight from two different Service Center Directors (and I’ll try to ask Terry Way this question when I tour the NSC on 10/30).
INS HQ tells each service center what to list. Since I've been practicing immigration law, I’ve seen the projected numbers change on the notices only a couple (perhaps a few) of times (its pretty rare, and they only modify the numbers every few years) however I've seen processing times at the service centers change dramatically many, many times since I've been practicing.
So why doesn't the service center change the numbers to match reality? Because they don't have the authority to do so! Simple as that.
Now, they "do" publish reports that they give to AILA, and AILA in turn gives those reports to AILA members. And some AILA members, such as myself, publish those numbers on our own sites. Now those numbers "do" come from the Service Centers themselves, and so are closer to what is actually going on at a particular service center at any given moment in time (but of course, now you have to temper that with the realization that if your case gets an IBIS hit, you can no longer go by the numbers in the AILA reports).
INS is "not" a private enterprise. It’s not a matter of any particular service center not having "consideration" for the people processing through it, but rather that they simply cannot go against INS HQ and change the numbers on their notices on their own volition. It just doesn't work that way.
But the service centers "are" aware of this, so to be considerate they do give somewhat more realistic numbers to AILA, who turns around and gives them to me, and I turn around and give them to you.
See http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/sctimes.htm
Good luck with your case.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
#4
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 536
Re: 70 to 100 days
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
I've been posting information about this very issue (the bogus processing times listed on receipt notices) for over a year now, but perhaps you are a new member or new to immigration in general and have not seen this information posted by me before. So I'll say it again (and please do me a favor, and next time you see an opportunity to do so, please pass this along to the next person with the same concerns).
Fact: The processing times printed on the receipt notices "DO NOT" come from a service center itself! The service center does not determine what to list, nor does it have the authority to change the numbers listed on their notices. I received this information straight from two different Service Center Directors (and I’ll try to ask Terry Way this question when I tour the NSC on 10/30).
INS HQ tells each service center what to list. Since I've been practicing immigration law, I’ve seen the projected numbers change on the notices only a couple (perhaps a few) of times (its pretty rare, and they only modify the numbers every few years) however I've seen processing times at the service centers change dramatically many, many times since I've been practicing.
So why doesn't the service center change the numbers to match reality? Because they don't have the authority to do so! Simple as that.
Now, they "do" publish reports that they give to AILA, and AILA in turn gives those reports to AILA members. And some AILA members, such as myself, publish those numbers on our own sites. Now those numbers "do" come from the Service Centers themselves, and so are closer to what is actually going on at a particular service center at any given moment in time (but of course, now you have to temper that with the realization that if your case gets an IBIS hit, you can no longer go by the numbers in the AILA reports).
INS is "not" a private enterprise. It’s not a matter of any particular service center not having "consideration" for the people processing through it, but rather that they simply cannot go against INS HQ and change the numbers on their notices on their own volition. It just doesn't work that way.
But the service centers "are" aware of this, so to be considerate they do give somewhat more realistic numbers to AILA, who turns around and gives them to me, and I turn around and give them to you.
See http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/sctimes.htm
Good luck with your case.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
I've been posting information about this very issue (the bogus processing times listed on receipt notices) for over a year now, but perhaps you are a new member or new to immigration in general and have not seen this information posted by me before. So I'll say it again (and please do me a favor, and next time you see an opportunity to do so, please pass this along to the next person with the same concerns).
Fact: The processing times printed on the receipt notices "DO NOT" come from a service center itself! The service center does not determine what to list, nor does it have the authority to change the numbers listed on their notices. I received this information straight from two different Service Center Directors (and I’ll try to ask Terry Way this question when I tour the NSC on 10/30).
INS HQ tells each service center what to list. Since I've been practicing immigration law, I’ve seen the projected numbers change on the notices only a couple (perhaps a few) of times (its pretty rare, and they only modify the numbers every few years) however I've seen processing times at the service centers change dramatically many, many times since I've been practicing.
So why doesn't the service center change the numbers to match reality? Because they don't have the authority to do so! Simple as that.
Now, they "do" publish reports that they give to AILA, and AILA in turn gives those reports to AILA members. And some AILA members, such as myself, publish those numbers on our own sites. Now those numbers "do" come from the Service Centers themselves, and so are closer to what is actually going on at a particular service center at any given moment in time (but of course, now you have to temper that with the realization that if your case gets an IBIS hit, you can no longer go by the numbers in the AILA reports).
INS is "not" a private enterprise. It’s not a matter of any particular service center not having "consideration" for the people processing through it, but rather that they simply cannot go against INS HQ and change the numbers on their notices on their own volition. It just doesn't work that way.
But the service centers "are" aware of this, so to be considerate they do give somewhat more realistic numbers to AILA, who turns around and gives them to me, and I turn around and give them to you.
See http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/sctimes.htm
Good luck with your case.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
#5
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 536
Re: 70 to 100 days
Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves as an irritant?
Since it seems that INS locally has no locus in the matter, then my accusation of "lack of consideration" applies to INS HQ. It may not be a "commercial organisation" (unsurprisingly I was aware of this, as i thought my post made clear) but Governments and Government Depts still have a responsibilty to those whom they serve... at least that is so in a democratic society.
I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves as an irritant?
Since it seems that INS locally has no locus in the matter, then my accusation of "lack of consideration" applies to INS HQ. It may not be a "commercial organisation" (unsurprisingly I was aware of this, as i thought my post made clear) but Governments and Government Depts still have a responsibilty to those whom they serve... at least that is so in a democratic society.
#6
Re: 70 to 100 days
Mr. Udall;
How appropriate that you are touring the NSC the day before HALLOWEEN!! I would imagine it's a very scary place!!
Sal
How appropriate that you are touring the NSC the day before HALLOWEEN!! I would imagine it's a very scary place!!
Sal
#7
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: 70 to 100 days
Originally posted by abba48uk:
Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves as an irritant?
Since it seems that INS locally has no locus in the matter, then my accusation of "lack of consideration" applies to INS HQ. It may not be a "commercial organisation" (unsurprisingly I was aware of this, as i thought my post made clear) but Governments and Government Depts still have a responsibilty to those whom they serve... at least that is so in a democratic society.
Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves as an irritant?
Since it seems that INS locally has no locus in the matter, then my accusation of "lack of consideration" applies to INS HQ. It may not be a "commercial organisation" (unsurprisingly I was aware of this, as i thought my post made clear) but Governments and Government Depts still have a responsibilty to those whom they serve... at least that is so in a democratic society.
Matt's answer is an excellent one. But allow me to make some additions. I've been at this for over 25 years now and I have the opportunity to form an historical prespective on some things.
What happens quite often is that regulations, procedures, instructions, forms, etc. will be introduced which make perfect sense under the circumstances AT THE TIME of introduction. However, as time moves on, what made sense at the time makes sense no more.
Most applications used to be done at the local districts. In the interests of effeciency, the INS established 4 "Remote Adjudication Centers" to take the workload off the districts. The RAC's eventually changed over to today's "Service Centers" [INS's joke, not mine].
For many years, the SC's actually worked quite efficiently. At first, the I-797 notices did not have the processing times noted on them. In response to public requrests, they were added.
The notices are generated by the TIERS software. This is a specialized program. I understand that INS has had many many problems with the private contractors who designed and installed TIERS. Furthermore, the system is now on the old side. [Note the file numbers in the cases -- CSC used to be known as the Western Adjudication Center or "WAC" -- the case numbers reflect the obsolete names -- VSC was Eastern, NSC was Northern and Texas was Southern]. Not only is it old, it is clunky from what I'm told. Hence the difficulty in updating that notice on the receipt NOA.
I think they should just eliminate the damn thing. But vestigial items have a life of their own.
#8
Re: 70 to 100 days
Originally posted by abba48uk:
Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves as an irritant?
Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves as an irritant?
But now that "you" know this (that you cannot rely on the projected processing times on the notices), you don't have to be irritated by it any more. Knowledge, in this case, helps you to give up that anger or irritation. And as I mentioned before, you can do a service to the do-it-yourself immigration community if you pass the message along to the next do-it-yourselfer you run across who is complaining about what he or she perceives as "lies", or an unrealistic time quote on the receipt notices. Just give them my site (or another AILA members site that publishes the numbers) and tell them what I told you... that these numbers come from INS HQ, INS HQ doesn’t change the numbers often, and those numbers quite often do not reflect the reality of processing times at any given INS office at any given time (Oh, you might also add that any quotes you see on a receipt notice is not a “promise� by the INS, nor is it “binding� on the INS). Also tell him or her what Folinskyinla told us, the historical perspective.
Again, my page where I post the numbers is located at, http://members.aol.com/MDUdal/sctimes.htm
Good luck with your case.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall3/1ins.htm
#9
Re: 70 to 100 days
Originally posted by saledevo:
Mr. Udall;
How appropriate that you are touring the NSC the day before HALLOWEEN!! I would imagine it's a very scary place!!
Sal
Mr. Udall;
How appropriate that you are touring the NSC the day before HALLOWEEN!! I would imagine it's a very scary place!!
Sal
Before touring the CSC for the first time (I’ve toured it many times now), I had a mental image of what I thought the size and scope of the operation would be. When I toured the facility, I found out that I had "tremendously underestimated" the size and scope of their operation.
I think the INS should offer virtual tours of all of the Service Centers on their websites (Sort of a, "Here is Johnny's file, and here are the steps Johnny's file takes along the way at the Service Center). If you could see what I've seen, you might look at what they do in a different light (or at least realize that they are processing a hell of a lot of work as quickly as they can [not sitting around the water cooler all day talking about how they are hurting couples who just want to be together :-).
Good luck with your case, Devo.
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/ltryinfo.htm
#10
Forum Regular
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Spain
Posts: 144
Re: 70 to 100 days
ok thats all well but perhaps you could ask them why,, then dont bother to change or update the message as the other centre seem to do.. and why they emply such rude people.... ok I call to the centre and I am told that I DONT COUNT.. excuse me I am a person and that is my further,, how am I expected to know that I am not allowed as the benificary to call them,, and manners cost nothing.. the rule is suc a stupid one.. heck I am the one that has time to sit here and press that redial button Ken has to work and normally longer hours than they do.. and heck they have every personal detail of my life and I dont count.. something has to change there surely...
Ok so perhja
Ok so perhja
Originally posted by Matthew Udall:
I've been posting information about this very issue (the bogus processing times listed on receipt notices) for over a year now, but perhaps you are a new member or new to immigration in general and have not seen this information posted by me before. So I'll say it again (and please do me a favor, and next time you see an opportunity to do so, please pass this along to the next person with the same concerns).
Fact: The processing times printed on the receipt notices "DO NOT" come from a service center itself! The service center does not determine what to list, nor does it have the authority to change the numbers listed on their notices. I received this information straight from two different Service Center Directors (and I’ll try to ask Terry Way this question when I tour the NSC on 10/30).
INS HQ tells each service center what to list. Since I've been practicing immigration law, I’ve seen the projected numbers change on the notices only a couple (perhaps a few) of times (its pretty rare, and they only modify the numbers every few years) however I've seen processing times at the service centers change dramatically many, many times since I've been practicing.
So why doesn't the service center change the numbers to match reality? Because they don't have the authority to do so! Simple as that.
Now, they "do" publish reports that they give to AILA, and AILA in turn gives those reports to AILA members. And some AILA members, such as myself, publish those numbers on our own sites. Now those numbers "do" come from the Service Centers themselves, and so are closer to what is actually going on at a particular service center at any given moment in time (but of course, now you have to temper that with the realization that if your case gets an IBIS hit, you can no longer go by the numbers in the AILA reports).
INS is "not" a private enterprise. It’s not a matter of any particular service center not having "consideration" for the people processing through it, but rather that they simply cannot go against INS HQ and change the numbers on their notices on their own volition. It just doesn't work that way.
But the service centers "are" aware of this, so to be considerate they do give somewhat more realistic numbers to AILA, who turns around and gives them to me, and I turn around and give them to you.
See http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/sctimes.htm
Good luck with your case.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
I've been posting information about this very issue (the bogus processing times listed on receipt notices) for over a year now, but perhaps you are a new member or new to immigration in general and have not seen this information posted by me before. So I'll say it again (and please do me a favor, and next time you see an opportunity to do so, please pass this along to the next person with the same concerns).
Fact: The processing times printed on the receipt notices "DO NOT" come from a service center itself! The service center does not determine what to list, nor does it have the authority to change the numbers listed on their notices. I received this information straight from two different Service Center Directors (and I’ll try to ask Terry Way this question when I tour the NSC on 10/30).
INS HQ tells each service center what to list. Since I've been practicing immigration law, I’ve seen the projected numbers change on the notices only a couple (perhaps a few) of times (its pretty rare, and they only modify the numbers every few years) however I've seen processing times at the service centers change dramatically many, many times since I've been practicing.
So why doesn't the service center change the numbers to match reality? Because they don't have the authority to do so! Simple as that.
Now, they "do" publish reports that they give to AILA, and AILA in turn gives those reports to AILA members. And some AILA members, such as myself, publish those numbers on our own sites. Now those numbers "do" come from the Service Centers themselves, and so are closer to what is actually going on at a particular service center at any given moment in time (but of course, now you have to temper that with the realization that if your case gets an IBIS hit, you can no longer go by the numbers in the AILA reports).
INS is "not" a private enterprise. It’s not a matter of any particular service center not having "consideration" for the people processing through it, but rather that they simply cannot go against INS HQ and change the numbers on their notices on their own volition. It just doesn't work that way.
But the service centers "are" aware of this, so to be considerate they do give somewhat more realistic numbers to AILA, who turns around and gives them to me, and I turn around and give them to you.
See http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/sctimes.htm
Good luck with your case.
Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 70 to 100 days
MUdall,
Being a voice of reason I appreciate your insights and always look forward
to your reports. I do not believe anyone at the Nebraska service center is
standing around a water cooler or not doing their job. The frustration is
with a system that on the surface appears to be serving the public and its
clients (us) but is just an apperance. I would be happy if I could just
get some service, satisfaction or effect some change with this agency.
Letters of inquiry go unanswered. The INS website solicits input on how
they are doing but no one ever responds. Our representatives in congress
receive the same information we receive which amounts to nothing.
The excuse of security seems absurd when one can easily see that other
visas are being adjuncted before fiance, spousal and family visas. It seems
very unusual for an administration that promotes 'family values. I think
all visas should be processed equally but I feel for those who have to
endure the hardship of being apart from loved ones. No one has yet answered
my question of why we receive an IBIS check at the NSC and then another
security check is done after packet #3 is returned to the consulate.
Anyway, look forward to your report. Hopefully it will provide some
satisfaction that we are not all being ignored on purpose.
J
"Matthew Udall" wrote in message
news:445855.1034801460@britishexpats-
.com...
> Originally posted by abba48uk:
> > Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
> > I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local
> > office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of
> > publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves
> > as an irritant?
> I don't think there is "any" point in publishing numbers that often are
> not based on the reality of what is going on at a particular service
> center at any given moment in time. I've stated publicly in posts
> before, that I wish they would just eliminate the projected processing
> times on the receipt notices.
> But now that "you" know this (that you cannot rely on the projected
> processing times on the notices), you don't have to be irritated by it
> any more. Knowledge, in this case, helps you to give up that anger or
> irritation. And as I mentioned before, you can do a service to the
> do-it-yourself immigration community if you pass the message along to
> the next do-it-yourselfer you run across who is complaining about what
> he or she perceives as "lies", or an unrealistic time quote on the
> receipt notices. Just give them my site (or another AILA members site
> that publishes the numbers) and tell them what I told you... that these
> numbers come from INS HQ, INS HQ doesn't change the numbers often, and
> those numbers quite often do not reflect the reality of processing times
> at any given INS office at any given time (Oh, you might also add that
> any quotes you see on a receipt notice is not a "promise" by the INS,
> nor is it "binding" on the INS). Also tell him or her what Folinskyinla
> told us, the historical perspective.
> Again, my page where I post the numbers is located at,
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdal/sct-
> imes.htm
> Good luck with your case.
> Regards,
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall3/1i-
> ns.htm
> --
Being a voice of reason I appreciate your insights and always look forward
to your reports. I do not believe anyone at the Nebraska service center is
standing around a water cooler or not doing their job. The frustration is
with a system that on the surface appears to be serving the public and its
clients (us) but is just an apperance. I would be happy if I could just
get some service, satisfaction or effect some change with this agency.
Letters of inquiry go unanswered. The INS website solicits input on how
they are doing but no one ever responds. Our representatives in congress
receive the same information we receive which amounts to nothing.
The excuse of security seems absurd when one can easily see that other
visas are being adjuncted before fiance, spousal and family visas. It seems
very unusual for an administration that promotes 'family values. I think
all visas should be processed equally but I feel for those who have to
endure the hardship of being apart from loved ones. No one has yet answered
my question of why we receive an IBIS check at the NSC and then another
security check is done after packet #3 is returned to the consulate.
Anyway, look forward to your report. Hopefully it will provide some
satisfaction that we are not all being ignored on purpose.
J
"Matthew Udall" wrote in message
news:445855.1034801460@britishexpats-
.com...
> Originally posted by abba48uk:
> > Thank you for your response Mr Udall.
> > I would simply comment that, whether authority resides with the local
> > office or INS HQ, the central question remains. What is the point of
> > publishing information that is patently inaccurate and simply serves
> > as an irritant?
> I don't think there is "any" point in publishing numbers that often are
> not based on the reality of what is going on at a particular service
> center at any given moment in time. I've stated publicly in posts
> before, that I wish they would just eliminate the projected processing
> times on the receipt notices.
> But now that "you" know this (that you cannot rely on the projected
> processing times on the notices), you don't have to be irritated by it
> any more. Knowledge, in this case, helps you to give up that anger or
> irritation. And as I mentioned before, you can do a service to the
> do-it-yourself immigration community if you pass the message along to
> the next do-it-yourselfer you run across who is complaining about what
> he or she perceives as "lies", or an unrealistic time quote on the
> receipt notices. Just give them my site (or another AILA members site
> that publishes the numbers) and tell them what I told you... that these
> numbers come from INS HQ, INS HQ doesn't change the numbers often, and
> those numbers quite often do not reflect the reality of processing times
> at any given INS office at any given time (Oh, you might also add that
> any quotes you see on a receipt notice is not a "promise" by the INS,
> nor is it "binding" on the INS). Also tell him or her what Folinskyinla
> told us, the historical perspective.
> Again, my page where I post the numbers is located at,
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdal/sct-
> imes.htm
> Good luck with your case.
> Regards,
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall3/1i-
> ns.htm
> --