Warsaw, INS, etc.

[Charles]

... in response to Dan, LP, Charles, posted by Jack on Dec 15, 2002

The key to speeding up the process is to bypass "Packet 3" by sending them your approval notice with your fiance's basic information.  Once the FBI name check is cleared, you can set up your interview.  In my case, my wife never got a single piece of paper from the Warsaw embassy.  However, we received a quick interview because I had an e-mail record of what occurred.

[LP]

... in response to Dan, LP, Charles, posted by Jack on Dec 15, 2002

....Not sure of your point. Fwiw, my former girl was never sent packet three also. We prefiled all those docs in advance. I did receive a push on the INS side where an inside connection put my petition on a fast track, but The Dept of State side was unchanged other than as you describe. Still not sure what the argument is all about as I've not paid much attention to the thread.

[Jack]

... in response to Jack...., posted by LP on Dec 15, 2002

I think we are all (well, most of us) in agreement here. If you can by-pass packet 3 you can save anywhere from 2 to 3 weeks. What does it take to by-pass packet 3? Have the required documents in your original petition (duhh!) and upon being approved here in the states by the INS call the Embassy in Warsaw to request an interview date and leave a paper and electronic trail via e-mail and fax.

[Charles]

... in response to What a nicely inflamatory post Charles.., posted by Oscar on Dec 15, 2002

Why do you have to take it personally every time someone disagrees with you.  Far from being "inflammatory", I was making an observation that Mark's carefully planned process proves that following the embassy procedures, including the use of e-mail, produces a good result.  As I've said before, if everyone called on a regular basis as you have repeatedly recommended, the process would grind to a halt(that's why the embassy recommends e-mail) and, in addition, the e-mail provides a written record that could be helpful in the event of problems, as it was in my case when my wife received no mail from the embassy regarding interview dates, etc.  As in my case, Mark appears to have had his e-mails promptly responded to as have many others.  I was quite pleased with the timeliness and quality of their responses and, while I don't doubt that in some instances a phone call might be necessary, most problems can be resolved via e-mail, which sure beats sitting on the phone early in the morning waiting to get through.  I don't why it took them six days to answer your e-mails.  Maybe they were tired of your phone calls or maybe the reason you didn't get answered for six days was that your e-mails were "inflammatory" like your poster wars on this board - Wars that you like to start just because someone has an honest disagreement with you.

[Oscar]

... in response to Re:  Get a Life , Oscar., posted by Charles on Dec 15, 2002

Your post was not a "jab"?  C'mon Charles, if you want to say- "I disagree with Oscar in that I do not feel people should call the Embassy", great, no problem.  But this is not what you did Charles and you know it, why try to deny it?  You talk about "starting" things?  This is a good example of your doing exactly that.  I don't think anyone likes being treated rudely Charles.
 
You are more than allowed to have a differing viewpoint Charles, but am I?  You think one should only use email, and you have pounded that point adnauseum.  I feel when it is necessary to call, there is absolutely no problem in calling and that is AGAIN why there are specific hours alotted to fiance calls, so it IS within the "Embassy procedures" or they would not allot these hours for exactly that purpose!  With this in mind, there is no leg to stand on with this argument from a "procedural" viewpoint.  They DO allow calls Charles and of the men I have spoken to, every single one of them called at some point.

Although I disagree with your stand on calling the embassy, I can respect your position.  Can you do the same and leave out the jabs?  Is that fair enough?

[Globetrotter]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

Good Show!  Good luck to you this time.  We had our differences in opinions, but I always liked your enthusiasim
in the venture.

Best of luck.  Maybe we'll have that drink some day.

[Rags]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

Thanks for taking the time to spell it all out. Best wishes to you and your new family.

[Pordzhik]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

Until Victoria has an American passport, she will need a visa for France (The Shengen Visa, also good for travel to other EU countries, except Ireland and the United Kingdom).

In the case of Ireland and the United Kingdom, either countries visa will be good for the other, but not continental EU.

Hope to hear more from you soon.

[Pordzhik]

... in response to French Visa, posted by Pordzhik on Dec 15, 2002

http://ambafrance.heb.fr.colt.net/asp/service.asp?SERVID=101&LNG=en&PAGID=143

It's about the nationality of the visitor, not where resident.

[mender]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

Mark covered the whole process, quite well. The only thing I would add is; American's need only show their passport, at American Embassies, to go to the front of the line, every time, every where, at any window. You only have to wait behind earlier American passports. When we went to Warsaw, there was a line a 100 or more deep. I escorted my wife to the front door and waved my passport. Another couple (AM-UW) came and asked us why we went to the front of the line ? I explained why, and they mentioned they wish they had known this, before waiting in the line for over an hour. And joined us, at the front.

[Richard]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

Mark:

Thanks for taking the time to post.  I wish you and Victoria the best.

Richard

[Stan]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

Good post Mark,,,
Did all of this 1 1/2 years ago and 1 bit of advice for the future with the Russian/ Ukrainian translations. We had Tanya's son, Vladimir, in both forms of translation at INS in Millwaukee and was asked at our interview how we wanted his name? We chose to keep his name as the Russian translation; Vladimir, not the Ukrainian version; Vlodomir.
Hope this maybe will help if ya need it
Steve

[ChrisNJ]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

n/t

[Griffin]

... in response to You've done a MANS job sir...Now get bac..., posted by ChrisNJ on Dec 14, 2002

[tfcrew]

... in response to Warsaw, INS, etc., posted by MarkInTx on Dec 14, 2002

..one is the "letters of intent". I didn't submit these in Apr 2000. This was not on the requirements list that I had obtained.
New required document? Sounds logical. Our love letters here are still filed...everywhere!!
The visa fees have gone up..REALLY gone up !!
Our being at the interview w/ fiances is black and white evidence to the interviewer as to the validity of seriousness and intent.
As I have written before..what would I think if I were the interviewer?