Waiver application processing times

i194waiverposted 9 years ago

Got your I-194?

Reply here with how long it took. Months, weeks, days...

Replies (recent first):

There has to already be a moderator in place.

KSCOTT replied 5 years ago   #1482

#1500 I personally want people to ask the questions so they can get the proper information. I do not want anyone on here that will disrupt the flow. Yes, if someone is disruptive I would like them to not post anything. Yes if someone will just pick an argument with people for no reason then they should not post here. Don't know if that will qualify as a kickoff.

I want the bickering to stop as it is stupid. Setting up fake profiles is something that cannot be prevented on this forum so I do not know how this can be fixed.

People come here because they need and want good and factual information. Everything that I state can be shown in the government manuals, regulations, and statutes.

#1486 I will say that 5 years is the minimum waiting period to essentially get your waiver approved. This will mostly mean perhaps the simple cases as the complex ones may take longer. Also, proper rehabilitation has to be shown in any waiver case to get approved.

Now having said that....we have a client that received I believe 1 waiver denials and an appeal denial on his own for a couple of reasons. One big reason was that he filed before the 5 year period. He hired us to address the case and he recently told me that he has now got his waiver approved.

If you file before the 5 year period, then you will have to show major rehabilitation to account for the lack of time. I do not recommend it.

Also, note that CBP has a process in place to address people that are inadmissible and that have an urgent need to enter the USA. It is called Advance Parole and I won't go into detail here since it is something that has to be tailored to the specific case. I will only go into detail regarding it on the phone because caution is warranted in seeking a parole for a number of reasons.

KSCOTT replied 5 years ago   #1481

@HatsBootsHatsBoots

So you agree with @jm that a moderator would be a good idea?

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1480

@John Rogers

I am not Annoyed and never was. It just shows how much people are fed up with you. Stop being such a princess and grow a pair.

Enjoy your weekend Johnny Boy!!

HatsBootsHatsBoots replied 5 years ago   #1479

@Samuel - again, you make a lot of sense.

@jm - a moderator would make a lot of sense. Could we pick someone, even informally, and if they think a comment is "out of bounds" for whatever reason, the person would apologize, retract and delete the comment? I think it would return decorum.

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1478

#1487 - John Rogers

Apology accepted as you were gracious in calling out your own, in your estimation, "wishy washy" answer. I wasn't offended in case you may have thought so. I understand there are a number of "contingencies" to these things. It is all in the discernment of nuance.

I have visited this forum for probably about a year. I have most definitely seen it devolve into what appears to me to be random personal attacks. I'm not sure of the necessity of this as I view this forum as a space to ask questions and understand process as it pertains to the landscape of the waiver process.

I have never gotten any inkling that you discriminate on the basis of skin colour. If things were said that I wasn't privy to or missed here on the forum (as I haven't read the ENTIRE contents of the forum) then quite simply I missed them. Otherwise I can't recall that you said anything that would point to you "discriminating on the basis of skin colour".

Having spent a significant portion of my life in America and having travelled through 38 states and lived in 6 American cities there is no doubt that America has a "race problem". Anyone who cannot see that must be living with their head in the sand in Mayberry.

The cards are stacked, monumentally, against people of colour in America. Plain. Simple.

Statistically if you were to line up 12 white guys and 12 Black guys, for example in the state of California, and they all did the EXACT SAME offense as it pertains to marijuana then ALL 12 Black guys go to jail while ONE out of 12 white guys goes to jail.

There's a reason the state of California has more Black and Brown people in jail than the ENTIRE prison population of Western Europe. America has 5% of the world's population and yet 25%-30% of the world's prison population.

Carceral capitalism is what it is and it is at the expense of minorities.

So to expect that CBP (which is a law enforcement agency) to cut a person of colour a break is simply dreaming. There are obviously individual officers who are compassionate and empathetic but the AMERICAN SYSTEM was not set up to benefit anyone really except WHITE MEN. FACT.

So it is nonsensical to admit to something as minor as smoking weed, in the past, if you are white. It is downright INSANE to admit to it if you are a person of colour.

This is not a hard equation to square. The trope of "honesty is the best policy" is for fools and for those who have absolutely no discernment of nuance (which is generally the provenance of law enforcement).

Nota Bene -

Just because there was treaties and "amendments" doesn't preclude the fact that what we're dealing in is stolen land, stolen property and stolen labour.

Samuel replied 5 years ago   #1477

I have read a lot of these comments. Seems to be a theme. I have done 2 waivers, got a one year and a five. I am happy to do it myself. I'll take free advice as well.

If you read between the lines, it looks like some people are anxious to silence others ie get them off the forum....when people do that I ask myself...."why"?

michelle, john, ken hats, samuel, jazz, these people ask real questions or post real answers, but hats and ken seem to want people kicked out. Why? If you have nothing to fear, then let everyone post. I don't want to take a side here, but 2 people are trying to make trouble, that's pretty obvious.

And lets stop making up fake handles. "Annoyed" etc. Your insulting everyone's intelligence. The people who should be banned are the ones making up 15 profiles, who criticize the SAME person and then disappear. Real posters are making an attempt to stay neutral, like I am, not going after the same person, again and again. Samuel and Jazzsax and a couple of others are pretty careful not to point fingers. I don't blame them. I don't want to point fingers either.

This forum has some great information. Lets keep the information flowing so people can get the help they need. If people make up fake profiles, I am going to point fingers. So lets stop it.

Stephen Stephen replied 5 years ago   #1476

The last 2 comments prove my point...

While having an forum such as this is very helpful for those of us trying to do something we don't understand, the bickering and immaturity make this impossible.

It is time for someone to either moderate this discussion or to set up a new forum. The good people who come here for support and advise deserve it.

jm replied 5 years ago   #1475

@KenScott

Yes, I never actually start trouble or arguments...but nor do I back down from troublemakers or trolls...I am the same way especially in person...so that is why I respond in kind.

Would you like some proof of the contrary?

I think its clear that I answer any question that is asked of me. I also post things that I think people will find interesting. If you need examples, I will cut and paste them. For example, Pearson Airport being closed. Remember, when I posted that, Ken actually tried to tell everyone I was wrong.

When people like HatsBootsHatsBoots says something derogatory, of course I respond. When Ken makes something up, of course I point that out. "Annoyed" is just HatsBootsHatsBoots. Obviously. They want me off the forum so they can not be called out when they give deceptive or misleading information.

Can anyone point out anything I have said that is inaccurate? Then the information is valid. And helpful. Would I like to simply post information and not argue? Yes. But HatsBootsHatsBoots has been upset for reasons I posted. Ken hates that I call him out.

I refuse to let people get deceived. And remember, this is my real name and identity. Anyone can make up a fake name/profile and whine. Put your real name and repuation on the line and then you can criticize.

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1474

I will just observe this recent dialogue. I will only say that I have spoken to people on the phone from here and it has always been a pleasant interaction. I come here for the reason that I do not like people getting the wrong info or being cheated. We deal with the aftermath in the Surrey BC office sometimes with the people that come in needing waivers from the less complex category as we have 2 categories that we bill under:

1. Less Complex.
2. More Complex. Serious convictions.

#1 people have often used cheaper waiver companies and ran into problems. They come to us afterward and it takes a lot of extra time explaining what happened to them and why. It is a big headache but usually, they are fine in the end. Sometimes(depending on the person or circumstances) I will tell the staff to just credit them the amount that they got cheated and to deduct it from our fee charged.

An example is that we have a woman that paid an Ontario DWC $500 and got cheated. They did nothing for her. I told her we will charge $1,000 on her case. Now everything is ready but she cannot afford the $500 balance remaining since she already paid $500 to the Ontario company. If she cannot really pay the balance then we will likely just give her the credit.

So my purpose here is to at least try and help people not fall into this trap and hopefully this will trickle down to fewer people in Category #1 from being apprehensive. Category #2 people never have this problem. I do not like seeing people ripped off as every dollar is important. Again, this has always been the people from Category #1.

Yes, I never actually start trouble or arguments...but nor do I back down from troublemakers or trolls...I am the same way especially in person...so that is why I respond in kind.

Anyway, #1489 just wanted to clarify my position here. I also do not like the bickering and wish it would stop. It has never been an issue as much until Mr. Rogers showed up as I personally rarely(if ever) argue with anyone here...However, I am not the kind of guy that backs down from an insecure bully or so.

Btw not everyone here will pay the fees that we charge and we understand this as such. Again, my main thing is that I do not want people getting ripped off and it often happens at these Discount Waiver Companies..esp in Ontario.

Anyone here can always call and chat with us for free for any questions as I have never tried to sell to anyone here. My bio and office locations are on our youtube channel and website.

usentrywaiverservices.com
1 888 908-3841
604 332-9213

Anyway, just my 2 Pence.

KSCOTT replied 5 years ago   #1473

@annoyed..

I agree. I came here looking for some guidance and help and this has devolved into something else entirely.

When I first found the site I appreciated the content and advice but it has now become untenable.

Fortunately I got my waiver last week...so don't need it anymore. However, feel sorry for those who are looking for real help. Hopefully there will be another resource soon...

jm replied 5 years ago   #1472

@HatsBootsHatsBoots

You made a stupid accusation here:

You call people idiots and discriminate offen most notably against the colour of the skin.

I actually never called you an idiot. I called you a Princess because you crave attention.

Remember when @Samuel said:

REAL world now... America has a "race problem" and particularly where any kind of law enforcement is involved. Theres LOADS of data to back this fact up. It would not surprise me that if there was data being kept on who was being asked by CBP about their past as it pertains to marijuana use you would see an inordinate amount of people of color specifically being asked that question.

Because in your white washed little world you told everyone they should "always tell the truth"?

And I said:

@Samuel is asking a smart question. The most prudent approach is reveal only what you have to reveal. "Honesty is the best policy" is a convenience for people like HatsBootsHatsBoots who is obviously a white male who has never been arrested in his entire life and probably grew up in nice circumstances. You can see it in his derision for everyone else. And in his case, its easy to lecture and say "always be honest". This is where his lack of practical experience and dealing with clients who have grown up in difficult circumstances shows.
When you are a minority, and feel like the cards are stacked against you, and feel like the game you are playing is not "fair", why are you playing by rules set by the very people who would use your honesty against you? I see the inequities in sentencing everyday. I see the difference between a black man and a white man in sentencing. I see how people with no money are brutalized by the justice system.
When the system is just, honestly is always best. When you are dealing with an unjust system, and rules that are not always fair, its smarter to do what is best for YOU.

Now, please explain who anything I said is consistent with "discriminate offen most notably against the colour of the skin."

@Samuel, whats your opinion?

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1471

@HatsBootsHatsBoots

"Gutless moron" would be the guy who hides behind his keyboard. That would be you. Feel free to visit me at my office anytime.

You have been posting all year since this:

I was looking around for info about waivers and stumbled on this forum. Reading posts from you and Ken Scott are quite entertaining to say the least. That's why I come back from time to time. I rather put many posters on here on guard from charlatans.
In fact, many posters have left this great forum because of you two.
I am no expert in the domain and nor I am a lawyer. I have read extensively about US immigration law because of my significant other's situation. As you and Ken Scott mentioned, some people can be permanently cleared. That is all I am looking to do, clear someone's name which was ruined on false accusations.

But then you started to claim you DO waivers for a select group of people, but not as your job, no that's beneath you. You are actually the main source of the trouble now, so congratulations princess, you now have the bulk of the attention. Too bad about your significant other. From all the time's I have had to correct you, I would say she picked the "wrong man for the job". Bring her up to my office. I'll fix it for you.

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1470

@John Rogers

By the way, if I'm an idiot you must be a bigger imbecile because you choose to fight with me. That makes you look like garbage.

Nobody gives a blind about your useless free information. Start treating posters with respect because the way you treat us here surely gives a bad impression about you. Nobody wants to be your customer, get that through your small peanut brain of yours.

Keep making yourself look like a gutless moron.

HatsBootsHatsBoots replied 5 years ago   #1469

To the individual named John Rogers, please do us a favor and disappear alteady. You call people idiots and discriminate offen most notably against the colour of the skin. Nobody cares about your opinions. Nobody cares about you period. Stop making yourself like a moron.

HatsBootsHatsBoots replied 5 years ago   #1468

@Annoyed you don't need to spend 10 minutes. What do you need to know? I am an open book.

Like a Republican voter, you can't seem to differentiate between me defending myself and outing a scammer, and people posting things to deceive others.

Here is my cell, feel free to call me and vent. I will listen, and we won't waste anyone's time on the forum. Or continue to anonymously complain, but please make it all one post.

416-843-131

The forum IS good. Ignore the things you don't like. You would prefer a forum where someone is telling you WRONG information and no one is correcting that? Or you would prefer where someone is PRETENDING to get unsuspecting people September Letters?

I brought forward the notion that if you SEAL your record, you may not need a waiver. You think I should keep that to myself, and have unsuspecting Canadians do waivers they don't need? Isn't that what this forum is all about? Correct FREE information?

Explain to me exactly WHAT I did wrong here?

Cell phone. More than happy to listen.

416-843-1371.

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1467

I agree with annoyed! These posts are not helpful at all!!

Also Annoyed replied 5 years ago   #1466

I think I will spend 10 minutes of my day searching you fools out online to post true reviews of your personalities. It's sad if you have clients. Do they also have to deal with you being so dumb? I'd assume you have no clients since you sit on a free forum bashing people and posting dumb crap. Maybe mcdonalds is hiring boys.

Annoyed replied 5 years ago   #1465

Does anyone else remember when this forum was good. When it was used to help one another? Jesus these 2 idiots have taken it over to hell. None of us would even call either of you! The maturity level on the 2 of you is that of toddlers or possible 13 year old school girls. Stfu! No one cares about you guys. Get off the forum and stop making yourselves look so dumb.

Annoyed replied 5 years ago   #1464

@Samuel

Let me apologize for the wishy washy answer. When you get idiots like HatsBootsHatsBoots and scammers like KenScott, it almost makes you TOO careful sometimes.

I wear two hats. My sales guy hat was on there, and sometimes I try to be a little too careful, because I am gambling with YOUR money. But when it comes to seeing someone who is 96, even a one year waiver is worth it.

If you want some help, I promise to put on my expertise hat and make sure I give you the best possible chance to get a waiver. If you are at 4.5 years, I am 85% certain you can get a waiver.

John Rogers replied 5 years ago   #1463