$480 Ripoff at US Embassy in Manila for Tourist Visa With NO Real Interview Given! Scam Report!

[Winston]

Final expanded version of my eloquent and passionate complaint letter to the US Embassy in Manila. Just got around to finally sending it. Btw, BBB does not handle complaints against government agencies it says, so I will have to find an alternative agency to file a compalint with, or at least post on RipoffReport.com.

Subject: Urgent Complaint about Unfair Tourist Visa *Interrogation* Last June! Please forward to Manager/Admin!

Dear US Embassy, Dept of Immigration:

In regards to the Tourist visa "interrogation" (not interview) of the following people:

***********************
***********************
***********************

Please forward this letter of complaint to your director and managerial staff, not just a lowly cleric or secretary. I would like a person of authority and influence to read my important complaint please, as I will be raising a public campaign about it.

I would like a logical point-by-point response please, from a real THINKING representative, and not receive a dumb useless form letter from a lowly clerical staff stating something like, “sorry you were disappointed, but that’s our policy” etc. This letter is also being sent to the Better Business Bureau, Amnesty International, RipoffReport.com, the Embassy headquarters in the United States (aka Dept of Foreign Services) and other government agencies.

I would like to file a complaint, dispute and violation of human rights about your embassy’s rude, horrid and unfair treatment of my girlfriend and her mother and sister during their very short interrogation process for the filing of their US tourist visa (B1/B2 nonimmigrant visa) back in June of 2019. (Their application ID numbers in PDF files are attached to this email) When they told me what happened, we realized how unfair, unreasonable and horrendous it was and how they were treated. Allow me to elaborate.

The so called “interview” lasted only two minutes, and they were NOT even allowed to speak one second unless spoken to, and NOT even allowed to present the material in their portofolio – which contained a list of documents that support their qualification for the visa – and which took me hours to put together for them (long nights in front of the computer and copy center to print out all the supporting documents). All for nothing! The interviewer – a mean cold white American woman who signed her initials as SS on the blue rejection slip (which was ironic since her behavior was exactly that of an SS Gestapo agent) – refused to see any of the supporting documents in their well organized portfolio, and refused to listen to any info they tried to volunteer.

Yet get this: They paid $160 USD per person for this? WTF? The three of them paid $160 each, which comes out to 160 x 3 = $480. Almost 500 dollars! All for a one or two minute interview in which they were not even allowed to speak unless spoken to, and treated like animals or slaves! WTF? No one would pay that much money for a one or two minute interview that’s unfair and bogus and which they aren’t even allowed to speak or present their case! Get real man. Would YOU (the person reading this) want to do that? Of course not. That’s friggin beyond ridiculous, unspeakable, and travesty of justice and human rights! It’s also a total SCAM too!

Everyone knows that during an interview, the interviewee is normally allowed to present his or her case to demonstrate why they are a good candidates for the position, in the case of a job interview for example. Because an interview is a two way street, not a one way interrogation. And in fact, even a police interrogation is more reasonable and fair than this was, because during an interrogation, the cops are glad to allow a suspect to present any material or info that would help them solve the case of course. But in this insulting tourist visa “interview” the candidates are not even allowed to do that! Geez.

For $160 per person, or $480 in this case, the interviewee should have at least have been given 5 or 10 minutes to present their case, supporting documents, portfolio, etc to try to prove why they should qualify to receive the tourist visa, and to prove that they have strong ties to their home country and would likely return from a trip or vacation to America without overstaying illegally. Gee whiz. Imagine paying nearly 5 hundred dollars and not even allowed to speak or present your case! Nothing could be more unfair or unreasonable than that. And not allowing someone to speak on their own behalf is an abuse of their civil rights, not to mention totally disrespectful, and treating them as though they were animals or slaves or something! Gee whiz. That’s so insulting and dehumanizing.

Now look. I don’t mind if they get rejected or don’t qualify according to the interviewer’s criteria. But for God’s sake, at least give them 5 or 10 minutes to present their case in a PROPER interview, and show their supporting documents to the interviewer (which I spent hours preparing for them). The supporting documents include proof of income, monetary transactions, home ownership, affidavit of support (form i-134), photocopies of many overseas passport stamps demonstrating a proven track record of not overstaying while traveling abroad, invitation letters that are well written and persuasive, etc. Then, if they still don’t qualify, then fine, at least they tried their best and presented all the material they could to support their case. But NO! They were not allowed to speak unless spoken to, and not allowed to present anything! Not even for a second! Instead they were put into a line of hundreds of Filipino applicants, like a mass cattle call, with impatient interviewers who were anxious to get them all out of the way as quickly as possible. How rude! Excuse me but for 160 dollars per person, they DESERVED to be treated far better and far more humanely than like cattle! Duh! Think about it please.

Furthermore, the blue rejection letter they received (see below) by the bogus “interviewer” is self-incriminating. By issuing it, the embassy shot themselves in the foot, because it is an Achilles heel that can be used against them. See the last paragraph in the blue paper. Notice how it says that one can “present new materials with the application” to justify their eligibility for the tourist visa, thus insinuating that this interview process allows the applicant to present material to support their qualification, when in REALITY, my party was NOT ALLOWED to present anything at all! GOTCHA! BUSTED! Thus this letter is self-incriminating, as the actual “interview” did NOT allow what it claimed to allow! Therefore I am including it below, as evidence to support my legitimate complaint. Please read it.

Obviously, we did NOT sign any contract nor did we ever agree to such a bogus “interview” in which we were not even allowed to speak or present material to present out case. Thus there is a BASIS of complaint here, regardless of your “policy”.

I hope for God’s sake, you don’t presume that because you are a government agency, that you are in an authority position and therefore can do anything you want and get away with it, including actions which are unfair, unjust, unreasonable, and mean-spirited - as in the case with this bogus improper “interview”. I hope you aren’t approaching this with a “might makes right” kind of attitude, in which you do not have to justify anything you do because you are “the law” and no one has any power over you except a higher governmental authority. Because that would really suck. It would be immoral, shameless and dishonorable if you think that you can do anything unjust or unreasonable and get away with it, simply because you are in a position of authority. I hate people with that kind of attitude. It’s immoral, unspiritual and ungodly, and disgusting as well. So I hope that is not your attitude here. You can’t just “shit on people” just because you can get away with it. That’s a horrid attitude and needs to be exposed and I hope karma comes to bite you on the butt for it, or the judgment of God is cast on such an attitude.

I’m sorry but this really takes the cake for being “beyond ridiculous”, so I gotta report it and let the world know about it. I can’t let this go unpunished and unexposed. No way. I’m putting this letter on my blog and forum, and sending it to the BBB, human rights organizations like ACLU and Amnesty International, consumer websites, RipoffReport.com, and other government agencies as well. I also plan to report your scam and unfair treatment of Filipinos to major newspapers in Manila too, which ought to be newsworthy to them. I gotta do that because if I sent this letter to your embassy only, I’m likely to receive a form letter stating something like “sorry but that’s our policy” only. Not justice. So I gotta involve as many third party authorities and agencies/organizations of influence, as possible, in the hopes that it may reach a sympathetic ear higher up, or a person who cares about fairness and justice. This totally unjust and insulting behavior of the US Embassy in Manila should be made public and exposed, so the right people can take action to remedy or correct their unjust and dehumanizing process.

Even if this letter doesn’t accomplish anything, at least it’s better than nothing and it sends you and the universe a message that YES! There are consequences for your negative actions, even if it’s only mere exposure. You see, if I did nothing, then I would be inadvertently condoning it, saying that what you did was ok and that you can do it again to others, treating anyone else like garbage too. That’s definitely NOT the kind of message I want to send. At least by exposing what you did publicly, I create a consequence for your actions, for the universe and all who find it, to see. Thus this letter of complaint, which will be posted publicly, is a matter of PRINCIPLE.

As a student of history, philosophy and a believer in KARMA, I see the big picture, and know that all your actions have KARMIC consequences, even if I’m powerless to do anything about it directly. Moreover, in my experience, when I’m fighting for what’s right and fair out of principle, the universe tends to give me a helping hand, as well as my guardian angels (or higher forces). Thus I do seem to carry some “cosmic weight” around, even if not any legal or political weight.

Also, if you think one man with no legal authority or political power can’t make a difference, think again. As a student of history, I can cite many great men with no power or legal authority, who made a difference in their historical era. For example: Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and even the Martin Luther of the Protestant Reformation, etc. Those men made a difference not because they had any legal authority or political power, but because the will of the universe, fate/destiny and masses of people were behind them. They were making changes in accord with the will of the universe and of the masses, thereby making them successful, effective and influential, even to this day. Therefore, my campaign does have some historical precedent, especially since I too, am a leadership type with vision and charisma and I believe, with higher forces backing me up as well. Therefore, I believe I speak with some cosmic and intangible authority from a higher law.

In summary:

Your interviewer was very improper, mean-spirited, unreasonable and did NOT give us a proper interview. My party was NOT even allowed to speak unless spoken to, and NOT allowed to present important materials (which I spent a lot of time preparing) to support their case. Nothing on your website warned us of the unfair, one-sided, unreasonable, mean-spirited nature of this interview. My party NEVER agreed to it, either orally or in any contract. They assumed, as everyone else did, that they would get a fair and reasonable interview in which they could present their case, which is how interviews are usually done. Thus we have a LEGIT case of COMPLAINT and DISPUTE here.

This letter will be posted online and sent to the BBB, Amnesty International, the ACLU, RipoffReport.com and other government agencies that handle complaints of this nature, as well as major newspapers in Manila. I hope you guys apologize and try to resolve this fairly and reasonably.

Proposed Resolution:

My proposed resolution would be one of the following:

1. Refund the $160 per person we paid for this bogus insulting “interview” that was nothing like a real interview, for the reasons stated above. And apologize for the rude improper conduct of the interviewer.

2. Allow them to retake the interview but this time have a PROPER interview with a reasonable interviewer (not the same one) willing to hear their case who will allow them to present all their supporting documents and portfolio (which I spent a lot of time preparing) and give them a REASONABLE amount of time to do so. Like a real interviewer would. Also if possible pay for their transportation and accommodation costs too, of course, since the previous bad unreasonable interview was not their fault, but the fault of the embassy staff. At $160 a person and hundreds of applicants, obviously someone is getting filthy rich off this, so covering their travel costs would of course be nothing to them.

3. Or do #2 but have the interview by webcam or phone, by a reasonable interviewer who is willing to do an honest PROPER interview.

Either way, I’d still like an embassy representative to reply to my letter of complaint point-by-point in a logical reasonable manner, and not just send me a dumb useless form letter that states “sorry but that’s our policy” like organizations are eager to do.

Thanks for your attention. I take full responsibility for this letter of complaint.

Sincerely,
Winston Wu

[Winston]

Just added this:

"Dear US Embassy in Manila:

I just published my complaint in my expat forum about your unfair, improper, unreasonable, horrid "interview" of my girlfriend and her mom and sister at the US Embassy in Manila last June, which was totally unfair and more like a quick interrogation and dismissal, in which they were NOT even allowed to present evidence and supporting documents in their portfolio that I put together for them, to support their case, which for $160 each person was totally UNFAIR, IMPROPER and a RIPOFF! Had they been able to present their evidence and documents, the outcome might have been DIFFERENT! An interview is a TWO way street of communication, not a quick interrogation and dismissal without review! Duh!

Please forward this to your boss, admin or managers so they can review it and reply to me. I would like a personal reply from a thinking person please, not a robot who can only send form letters. Thanks.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=40447

If I don't hear back from you or get a personal reply and explanation (not a form letter), I'm gonna file a complaint with the Dept of State Attorney General at: https://www.stateoig.gov/ And also file a report at RipoffReport.com too. If you think about it, my complaint is legit and justified, especially since your "interview" did not even fit the definition of an interview, which is a two way communication street, not a quick interrogation and dismissal without even reviewing the evidence or case. Duh!"

[Winston]

Btw. The embassy didn't give an exact reason for the rejection. Just gave them a blue form letter saying they did not qualify. M told me it's mostly about the income level, so if their income level isn't good enough, they fail. Usually the interviewer already made up their mind before the interview and the interview is just a formality. However, Dianne has a charm that is very likable and had she gotten a male interviewer, things might have been different. Men tend to bend the rules for her and give her an extra helping hand.

The blue rejection letter said they can reapply but only if their circumstances, like income, change drastically. However, some girls get approved if the interviewer likes them. So it can be subjective. Some Filipino bloggers said they got the US tourist visa simply by making a good impression (because they were cute charming females), not by having a good income. That's what I was hoping for.

Another problem was that the interviewer lady kept asking Dianne's mom the questions, not Dianne, and her mom does not understand English. Had it been a male Dianne's vibe and personal charm and magnetism and likability could have persuaded him approve her. Because Dianne has a charming aura and men tend to give her extra help when they meet her.

[Winston]

Just sent this to the Office of Inspector General, US Dept of State:

https://www.stateoig.gov/hotline-form

Yes. Please tell the Embassy that their interview was highly unfair and improper. They did not allow us to present our portfolio of evidence and supporting documents to support our case and eligibility for the tourist visa. The lady interviewer did not even let my girlfriend speak.(isn't an interview supposed to be two way communication, hence this did not even fit the definition of an "interview") She quickly dismissed her without even seeing our evidence and case. For a total fee of $480 (3x160 for all three) that was a total ripoff for sure! If they had seen the portfolio I put together for them, they might have approved her application because I made a strong case that they were eligible for the tourist visa. Yet the case was not even reviewed!

Can you tell the Embassy to give us a proper interview and waive the fees since the last interview was improper? Also they should reimburse their travel costs to Manila and give us an apology too. Please investigate and let me know if you can help resolve this. It is better to email me at my email address above, because I am an expat and US citizen but do not reside in the US. Thanks.

[Winston]

Whats the name of the 3 biggest newspapers in manila? I can try to contact them too. Maybe they can do a story about my complaint about the unfair treatment of filipinos at the US embassy. Something like that would be newsworthy.

My dad said government agencies only care if they get bad press in major media.

[Winston]

Should I send my complaint and story to the major newspapers in Manila and give the US Embassy bad press? They may deem a story about how filipinos are mistreated at the US Embassy to be newsworthy right? I mean newspapers and TV stations like these:

Manila Bulletin
Philippine Daily Inquirer
The Manila Times
The Philippine Star
Rappler.com
GMA News
ABS-CBN News
CNN Philippines

[Winston]

Draft of shorter letter of complaint to US Embassy:

Subject: $480 Ripoff at US Embassy - Should I report to Manila newspapers and media?

Dear US Embassy,

In regards to the Tourist visa interviews of the following 3 applicants:

* paste application ID's

I have a major complaint. Can you forward it to your director or supervisor please?

Last year me and my girlfriend's sister in the US paid to send my girlfriend, her mom and her other sister to apply for a US Tourist visa. When the interview came in June, it was very unfair and improper and could hardly be called an interview. They got a 2 minute interrogation where they were NOT even allowed to speak! The lady said "Do not speak unless spoken to" and did not even examine the evidence and supporting documents I put together for them to show proof that they will return to their own country after a visit to the US, which is what the interview is supposed to be all about right? For $160 each person, which totals $480 for all three of them, that is a total RIPOFF! How would YOU feel if that happened to you and you were in their shoes? Think about it. Be empathetic for a moment. You'd feel it was a ripoff too, right? Be honest.

Furthermore, the woman interrogator kept trying to speak to my girlfriend's mom, who doesn't speak good English and is too shy and unconfident to talk to her, instead of my girlfriend, who was the spokesperson for them. WTF? It was like she was trying to prey on their weakness by insisting that the one least able to speak be the one to reply. That was very lame and low down. Everyone knows that the one best able to speak English (my girlfriend) should be the representative to answer all questions. It was like this bad lady was trying to trip them up on purpose and taking advantage of their weak point. That's not nice or reasonable.

So all three were dismissed in two minutes without a real proper interview where my girlfriend could present her case and evidence and portfolio of supporting documents. For $480 they definitely should have at least gotten a fair hearing. I'm sure if you were in their position, you'd feel the same way.

So this is very unfair and I strongly request that you give them another interview, on the house, with a more reasonable interviewer that's willing to see the big picture and examine all the evidence presented. For $480, they definitely deserve at least that. Or at least allow them to have a phone interview or email interview with a more open minded assessor? You guys OWE them at least that, especially for a high price like $480. It's not right for you to take that much money and NOT even give them a fair interview or fair hearing. Right? Think about it. I'm sure your conscience and common sense agrees with me. This is a MORAL issue, not just a technical one. In your heart, you know that (if you have a heart that is).

You see, some of the evidence they had could have led to an approval of their tourist visa. For example, my girlfriend has many stamps in her passport to show that she has been to other Asian countries - such as Hong Kong, Cambodia, Thailand, and Taiwan several times - and back without overstaying. I printed out a photocopy of her passport stamps as proof, which she had along with her passport that she brought to the interview. This was MAJOR evidence, because a solid track record of going abroad and back several times establishes credibility and likelihood that the person will likely do the same under a US Tourist Visa. Had the interviewer seen this, it may have changed the decision and outcome. You see what I mean? This was one of several supporting pieces of evidence I prepared for them, which may have led to their approval if they had been properly examined.

Also, while doing research online about the US Tourist visa interview for Filipino citizens, I noticed that there is no consistent pattern to who gets approved or not. Some people with low income get approved, and some people with high income and big assets who are wealthy do not get approved. This means that it's not all about the income or job history. There must be some SUBJECTIVITY involved in this interview process, in that the assessor must look at the applicant's character, look for red flags, clues, etc. Whatever they were trained to look for. Or they may be going by their gut intuition and judge of character too. This means that sometimes, low income people can get approved for the US Tourist visa if they make a good impression, are likable, and look trustworthy, according to the reviewer's judgment. Therefore, what this means is that had my girlfriend gotten a BETTER interviewer, one that was nicer (not as mean as the one they got), more reasonable and open minded and willing to examine their case and evidence and portfolio of documents, etc, the outcome may have been different right?

That's why I ask you to re-interview them with a more fair and reasonable interviewer, not like that mean spirited lady that dismissed them and seemed to already make up her mind from the start. So I ask that you appeal their case. I know this may not be your standard procedure but you owe it to them, morally speaking, for the $480 that me and the sister in America paid. If you were in my shoes, you'd agree I'm sure.

Otherwise, I will be contacting all major media newspapers in Manila and forwarding this letter of complaint and case to them. I'm sure the unfair treatment of Filipinos and the big ripoff at the Embassy, in which you take a lot of money from people and do not even give them a real two-way fair interview, may be deemed newsworthy by the Manila major media. You'd get bad press from it, and of course, it would not be my fault, because I am simply telling the truth, and God knows it. You have a responsibility to do what's right. Remember that.

Thank you for listening. Please consider my request. If you would like, you can contact my girlfriend and talk to her about it. She feels the same way. I can give you her email or cell phone number in the Philippines. She would love to talk to you about this case too. I am authorized to represent her, since I sponsored her application and would be her sponsor/supporter in America if she went there, so you may discuss this case through me as well. As we all know, the one sponsoring the case has a major say. So I take full responsibility for this complaint, not them. They are nice humble people and not as skilled in complaints and writing as I am. I am also a US citizen and native English speaker, and good in communication and am articulate, as you can see. And I also run a large major expat website at HappierAbroad.com so I am sort of a public figure too.

I await your reply. Please have a director or supervisor review my case and this letter and reply to me. Not a lowly clerk who only knows how to send dumb form letters. Thanks for your attention.

Sincerely,
Winston

[Winston]

Reply to me from Manila US Embassy. What do you think @CannedHam? At least it's polite and tactful and not a form letter and tries to address some of my points. I edited out the names in it.

"Dear Mr. Wu:

We are writing with regard to your emails about the visa applications of *****, ****** and ********

Thank you for all the information in your letter along with the copies of invitation letters that you wrote and the letter that ******** and ********* wrote for them. We understand that the outcome of their visa applications is disappointing to you. Regrettably, we are constrained by U.S. law in our ability to respond to you in detail regarding their case due to the confidential nature of visa records (this includes visa applications), in compliance with section 222(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The United States Embassy will respond to visa inquiries from the applicant or from the applicant’s legal representative with a signed Form G-28 (Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative). Should the visa applicants have more questions about their previous visa applications or any future application, they may send an e-mail to ConsManilaNIV@state.gov directly.

You mentioned in your letter that ********, ******* and ********** were only asked a few questions and that they were not given a chance for discussion. The consular section sees well over 1,200 visa applicants each day and the interview process is necessarily fast paced. Given the volume of visa applicants interviewed here at the embassy, visa evaluations must be made quickly and that can be misconstrued and misinterpreted by an applicant. The sheer volume of daily visa applications precludes lengthy interviews or discussions. The information presented on the nonimmigrant visa application form coupled with the interview provides sufficient information to allow the interviewing officer to make a determination as to whether an applicant qualifies for a visa. Consular officers may not look at supporting documents, unless there are points in the application form or in the interview that need further clarification; it is for this reason that we do not require or even suggest that applicants bring supplemental papers like invitation letters with them.

We would also like to let you know that a visa refusal is not a reflection on the reputation or integrity of the party recommending the applicant, or on the ability of a sponsor to provide financial support. Rather, the decision simply reflects the visa applicant’s inability to qualify for a visa at the time of application.

While a disappointment, it is worth noting that a refusal under Section 214(b) (as indicated on the blue paper that was provided the applicants after the interview) is not permanent. **********, ******** and *********** are welcome to reapply when there are significant changes in their circumstances or when there is new, material, and verifiable information that might affect their eligibility for a nonimmigrant visa. On this point, it is worth noting that adult applicants for visas must qualify in their own right and we do not and cannot issue visas based on the assurances of any third parties. Although there is no guarantee that a new visa application will be successful, rest assured that like all applicants they will be given full and judicious consideration.

Sincerely,

CONSULAR COMMUNICATIONS GROUP
Consular Section | U.S. Embassy in the Philippines"

[Winston]

My reply to the Manila US Embassy's letter to me:

Dear Manila US Embassy and Consular,

Thank you for replying to my complaint letter and addressing some of my points, and not sending me a form letter. I have a few further questions for you.

First you said: "Regrettably, we are constrained by U.S. law in our ability to respond to you in detail regarding their case due to the confidential nature of visa records (this includes visa applications), in compliance with section 222(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The United States Embassy will respond to visa inquiries from the applicant or from the applicant’s legal representative with a signed Form G-28"

But I am authorized to represent them, because I and my girlfriend's sister, paid for their application and would be their benefactor should they go visit the US. Obviously, a sponsor or benefactor can represent the sponsoree or benefactoree and speak on their behalf. What do you mean a signed Form G-28? How do I get that? Is it easy to fill out? All it requires in the applicant's signature?

If you want, I can have my girlfriend email you too, if you prefer to speak to her or have details about her case that you cannot share with me. Her email is *************. You can send her any relevant details that you could not share with me. Or you can call her too if you want. I can give you her mobile number. It may be on her application file.

Second, you said that you get 1200 applicants a day and don't have time for any lengthy interviews. Even if that's true, you could hire more staff so that you can give better interviews and listen to their case and evidence for their qualifications. For $160 a person, you ought to give them a fair hearing at least and treat them better, don't you think? Let me ask you this: How would YOU feel in their shoes? Wouldn't YOU want a fair interview and chance to present your case, if YOU paid $160? Think about it.

Furthermore, since all three were interviewed at the same time, they should have been given TRIPLE the amount of time that's usually alloted for one applicant, don't you think? Not just the 2 minute time alloted for one applicant, as if they were all one. Don't you agree? So I ask that you give them another interview with triple the allotted time like you should have. And let my girlfriend speak this time, rather than press her mom who is shy and not confident about speaking English. I'm sure you could if you really wanted to.

Regardless, the interviewer should have at least given them at least a few minutes to present their case and evidence of their qualifications. That's not a lot to ask for right? Instead, they were told "do not speak unless spoken to". How would you feel if you were treated like that? Can you be empathetic for a minute and put yourself in their shoes?

Thirdly, you said: "Consular officers may not look at supporting documents, unless there are points in the application form or in the interview that need further clarification"

But if the objective is to prove that the applicant will "return to their country after visiting the US" as your website says, then some supporting documents are CRUCIAL in establishing that. Let me give you one example. My girlfriend has been to several other Asian countries and has passport stamps to prove it - from Taiwan, Cambodia, Thailand and Hong Kong. See attached PDF image of them. I photocopied those passport stamps and included it in her portfolio for the interview. Obviously this is good hard evidence that she will return to her country since these stamps represent a real track record of her having left her country and returned, without overstaying, many times. Right? Don't you agree? Hence, had it been been shown to the interviewer and taken into consideration, the outcome might have been different right? Moreover, on the online application, there was nowhere to list her travel record or travel history either, so there was nowhere for me to include this crucial evidence. Hence no way for the interviewer to know about it, unless of course, she allows my girl to show her this evidence, which she did NOT of course. Do you see my point? This kind of evidence could have let to a different result or decision, right?

That's just one example. In her portfolio, I put together several documents that support her eligibility. None of them were looked at of course, which is unfair, especially for $480. How would YOU feel if you were met? Think about that for a minute, rather than only focus on "rules and regulations by the book". Be a human for a moment.

Btw, can you track down who their interviewer was and send her my letters of complaint and get her response? Thanks.

Fourth, while doing research online about the Tourist visa interview for Filipino citizens, I noticed that there is no consistent pattern to who gets approved or not. Some people with low income and are college students get approved, and some wealthy people with high income and big assets who are wealthy do not get approved. This means that it's not all about the income or job history of the applicant. There must be some SUBJECTIVITY involved in this interview process, in that the assessor must look at the applicant's character and appearance for red flags, clues, etc. whatever they were trained to look for. Or they may go by their gut intuition and judge of character too. This means that sometimes, low income people can get approved for the US Tourist visa if they make a good impression, are likable and look trustworthy, according to the reviewer's judgment. Therefore, what this means is that had my girlfriend gotten a BETTER interviewer, one that was nicer (not as mean as the one they got), more reasonable, open minded and willing to examine their case, evidence and portfolio of documents, the outcome may have been different right?

That's why I ask you to re-interview them with a more fair and reasonable interviewer, not like that mean spirited lady that dismissed them and seemed to already make up her mind from the start. So I ask that you appeal their case and give them another hearing, on the house of course, to compensate on the improper and incomplete "interview" that they got, which was NOT a true interview at all. I know this may not be your standard procedure but you owe it to them, morally speaking, for the $480 that me and her sister paid. If you me, you'd agree I'm sure. Right?

One more question for you. Some of my advisors told me that it would have been better if my girlfriend and her mom and sister, had applied separately and been interviewed separately, rather than all together, and getting dismissed all together after 2 minutes, and the interviewer only wanting to talk to one of them, which was weird and awkward. Is that true? Does getting interviewed separately improve their chances of getting approved and considered individually? Is that better overall? Do you recommend that?

Either way, the interviewer lady that they got should have let my girlfriend speak since her English was best and she was the one supposed to represent all of them. Based on this alone, the interview was obviously BOTCHED and done IMPROPERLY. Don't you agree? Their interviewer did a BAD JOB it seems. If I'm right, can't you try to REMEDY that? Remember that your interviewers are human too, and not infallible. They can make mistakes too or do a bad job or be mean and unfair to others, right? You should not treat them like infallible computers. They're only human and can make mistakes and do wrong things too you know?

Therefore, you ought to REDO this interview again with a proper interviewer who lets the best qualified person speak, or interview them all separately. I'm sure any private sector company would redo such an improper interview, but since you are a government organization, you act like everything has to be "by the book" and follow strict protocol and no exceptions can be made. I hate that, and you would too if you were me. Can't you be human and reasonable for once? If not, can you ask someone higher up who has the authority to do so, who is more reasonable, and is capable of reason and rationality?

Anyway, thank you for listening. Can you look at the big picture and consider my points and arguments and think about it? If not, can you send my case and letters to someone higher up who can consider it and give my applicants another chance to try to fix the improper unfair interview they got? I hope you are a reasonable person who can be reasoned with and will look at the big picture, from both my perspective and yours, like a good judge or leader can. And not just a "do everything by the book" kind of automaton. Hope you are considerate and able to see things from our side too.

Thanks for your time and consideration. I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,
Winston

PS - My girflriend and I have a son too, who last year became a US citizen and now has a US passport. Can he apply for her mom to get a tourist visa or any visa? Will his US citizenship up the odds of her being approved? If so, how do I leverage that if the interviewer doesn't even let them speak?

[Winston]

Blog post about this issue:

https://blog.happierabroad.com/2020/06/ ... pinos.html

[Winston]

New reply from US Embassy in Manila. What a nice tactful way to brush me off huh? lol

"Dear Mr. Wu:

Thank you for your reply.

I have reviewed your correspondence and the decision of the officer. I do not find that there was a mistake in the application of the law in the adjudication of their cases. I have also considered the other issues you allege that occurred. Being denied a visa is a stressful event, and while we take all allegations regarding a lack of courtesy towards applicants seriously, it is worth noting that under the stress of such circumstances comments or language may be misunderstood or incorrectly remembered, the interview room is a noisy crowded environment with many people speaking at one time. Nevertheless, I have taken the opportunity to remind interviewing officers of our service expectations and standards. Please note that visa applications are adjudicated based on individual merits, consistent with criteria specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and the federal regulations issued pursuant to it. Consular officers are required to deny visas to applicants who do not qualify under the law, and to issue visas to applicants who do qualify. As mentioned in our first reply, consular officers cannot issue visas based on the assurances and endorsements of family members, relatives, or interested third parties, on the reputation and integrity of the party recommending the applicant, or on the ability of a sponsor to provide financial support. The applicant's refusal simply reflects the visa applicant’s inability to qualify for a visa at the time of application.

American immigration law presumes intent to immigrate on the part of all applicants, and to qualify for a visa an applicant must overcome this presumption. This is possible when an applicant can sufficiently establish to the consular officer during the interview that an applicant has strong ties outside the United States that would compel departure after a temporary trip. Given the volume of applicants interviewed here at the Embassy, these difficult judgments must be made very briefly and that is oftentimes misconstrued as rudeness. Nevertheless, consular officers know that they must maintain the highest standard of fairness and politeness and to ensure that all applicants are treated respectfully.

Reconsiderations of prior refusals are properly done in the context of a reapplication for a visa and any such reapplication will be subject to our normal adjudication process. Renewed applications are most likely to succeed if there are material changes in applicant circumstances or when there is new, credible, material, and verifiable information that might affect the eligibility for a nonimmigrant visa. As visa applications are adjudicated on its individual merits, it does not matter if the applicants apply again on different dates or at the same interview date and time. We reiterate that although there is no guarantee that a new visa application will be successful, you can be assured that all visa applications are given full and judicious consideration. As a final point, I would like to very specifically address a statement you made in your recent letter. As U.S. consular officials we MUST “go by the book” as you put it in your message. We are required to issue a visa when an applicant demonstrates that they qualify and must refuse a visa in all other cases. To do otherwise would be to violate U.S. law as well as turn the visa application process into a game of chance. I very much appreciate your interest in this matter and understand the disappointment in the outcome.

Should the visa applicants have more questions about their previous visa applications or any future application, they may send an e-mail to ConsManilaNIV@state.gov directly.

Sincerely,
Martin L. Lahm, III
NIV Unit Chief
United States Embassy, Manila"

My reply I just sent to them:

"Dear Mr. ***** *****

Thanks for your reply. Hope it wasn't a total form letter, it sounded like a hybrid because you referred to some specific statements I made. Are you a manager? A unit chief sounds higher up.

First of all, you keep mentioning that you interviewer went by the book, and that my applicant was "not qualified according to the criteria". I assume you meant income, job and banking savings criteria. Those are probably the major issues right? If so, can you specify like how much exactly her income has to be to qualify, or her savings or job tenure? Are you allowed to divulge that info?

Are you saying this process is 100 percent objective? Isn't there leeway for the interviewer's personal judgment? For example a nicer interviewer might find the applicant more trustworthy than a mean cynical interviewer right? All interviewers have to make a judgment call. Nothing is 100 percent objective. I'm not stupid, you know? Politics is not technical or machine like, it is subjective and influenced by image, bias and opinion. You know that I'm sure. We all do.

Also I don't understand why the interview has to be in English. Why not Tagalog? You can't claim that English is required for a tourist visa, because any Taiwanese or Japanese citizen who knows zero English can easily get a US tourist visa upon arrival. So that excuse isn't going to hold water. I ain't stupid you know, and such inconsistencies are obvious. Isn't it just an excuse to weed out more people with an extra barrier just to "be a dick"? lol

You said your staff try to be fair. However, do you remember what I said? The chubby lady kept picking on Dyan's mom, who could not speak English, when Dyan was the one who spoke English and was their representative. That was a bit mean-spirited and bully-ish behavior, don't you think? Why would the interviewer pick on the one in the group least likely to speak English? That sounds like she is trying to take advantage of their weakness by picking at their achilles heel. WTF?! Isn't that mean spirited? As if she is trying to fail them on purpose? You see what I mean? Why not let Dyan speak since she is the designated spokesperson? Wasn't that F-ed up? Think about it. Did that interviewer have something personal that she needed to try to pick on the least able person? You should ask her and make her apologize for that.

If she had an agenda shouldn't that invalidate and disqualify her decision?

One important thing you didn't address. You mentioned that a new interview would only receive a different outcome if there is any new info. Well again, how can new info be presented if the interviewer refuses to see the new info? This was a CRITICAL question in my previous letter, which you didn't address. Can you address it now? If the lady says "Do not speak unless spoken to" then how can new info be presented? It's a catch-22, right?

Is there a way to present any new info in the online application? For example, I see your application has changed, it now allows one to list the applicant's international travel history. That wasn't in the application we filled out before. Had that been in the application before, then Dyan's application would have shown a solid travel history with many entry/exit stamps in her passport, thus demonstrating her track record of returning to her country from overseas trips. Right? Isn't this evidence of intent to return? If so, what if it was presented during the interview? Would it have made a difference? I asked you this several times already. You guys have NOT addressed it yet. Can you answer this now?

Furthermore, you mentioned "strong ties" below. Well if Dyan has a son in the Philippines, isn't that a strong tie and reason to return? What constitutes "strong ties"? What could be more of a strong tie than a child? Did you consider that? What do you want, a corporation in her name? LOL. You gotta be specific about such things, not vague and arbitrary. If you don't have any specific criteria, then how could you say that this decision is purely technical and "by the book" and nothing personal? Isn't that a contradiction? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If there is specific criteria, then what is it? If there is not, then it's arbitrary and subject to interpretation right? Meaning a dick is gonna be more harsh and a nicer interviewer is gonna be more lenient right? Do you see my point? I've pinned you into a corner here. (haha gotcha!) So be honest please and tell the truth. You know it's wrong to lie right? Honesty is the best policy. Stop trying to play politics and tactfully dismiss these critical points please.

Can you try to be empathetic and consider how you would feel if you were me? Do the things above matter or not? That's my key question.

You should also investigate the beahvior of that chubby interviewer lady. What if Dyan reapplies? Can you make sure she doesn't get her again? If she is unlucky enough to get her again (due to Murphy's Law which we have all experienced), can she tell the staff managing the line that: "I already interviewed with her last time and got a bad experience before. Please give me another interviewer." and insist on it? The applicant has the right to choose a different interviewer right? They should. Wouldn't you if you were Dyan? Of course you would! Come on. Admit it.

Look forward to your next response. Hope it specifically addresses my key points and questions above. Not just a "tactful form letter to try to brush me off politely please". Thanks.

Sincerely,
Winston"

LOL. Aren't I killing them with my logic and pinning them into the corner? LOL. They are probably surprised that my logic is so ruthless and efficient. LOL

[Winston]

@hypermak , @Spencer , @CannedHam , @Contrarian Expatriate , what do you think of their reply above? Isn't that a typical canned government reply that is tactful and designed to "brush you off" politely? lol

[Yohan]

Visa fees, regardless if you receive the visa or not, are a well-known rip-off especially in USA and UK.
In USA they take the money and you are kicked out within a few minutes, they will not even tell you why and what is missing in your application.

In Japan the situation is different, the way how to apply is totally different, but in your case I guess the visa for the mother of your son would also be refused, but free of charge. Japan does not charge anything as a principle if the application is rejected.

However if you are a Japanese or Japanese resident, you can bring only your child into Japan, but not the mother if you are not legally married with her or if the marriage and the birth of the child are not registered in Japanese ward office where the father has his residence.

USA might have similar rules. Canada too. Tourist visa is always tricky, as they suspect you after arrival you will not leave the country again on time but overstay it and live with your boyfriend and try to settle down or do at least some illegal work during your stay.

My own daughter (Japanese passport) was legally married with a Canadian citizen and had even a worse experience - both were living in Japan and had the intention to spend some holidays together in Canada - her tourist visa was refused with the argument she has been in a college in Vancouver before and they suspect her now to look for a job and not to travel back to Japan. Canada is even refusing a tourist visa to the wife of a Canadian citizen!

OK, my daughter and husband took it easy and travelled to somewhere else for vacation - to Vietnam, Thailand and Nepal....

There are similar stories too about UK, total rip-off of visa fees - even no interview - all has to be done by an agent, paid in advance and receive a letter after a few weeks in return - refused....and nobody really knows why.

[Yohan]

@hypermak , @Spencer , @CannedHam , @Contrarian Expatriate , what do you think of their reply above? Isn't that a typical canned government reply that is tactful and designed to "brush you off" politely? lol

I think writing letters to any US-immigration/consulate will bring you to nowhere... Likely waste of time.

Maybe complain to some newspapers in the States, makes more sense.
You can even play the race-card, as all of you are not 'white' - not a very nice way to go, but media often like to run after such stories.

But really, I do not understand why to bring them to the States. Let them in the Philippines and travel with them somewhere in Asia, of course only possible after the corona-virus gets away. Might take up to next year I guess...

[Spencer]

New reply from US Embassy in Manila. What a nice tactful way to brush me off huh? lol

"Dear Mr. Wu:

Thank you for your reply.

I have reviewed your correspondence and the decision of the officer. I do not find that there was a mistake in the application of the law in the adjudication of their cases. I have also considered the other issues you allege that occurred. Being denied a visa is a stressful event, and while we take all allegations regarding a lack of courtesy towards applicants seriously, it is worth noting that under the stress of such circumstances comments or language may be misunderstood or incorrectly remembered, the interview room is a noisy crowded environment with many people speaking at one time. Nevertheless, I have taken the opportunity to remind interviewing officers of our service expectations and standards. Please note that visa applications are adjudicated based on individual merits, consistent with criteria specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and the federal regulations issued pursuant to it. Consular officers are required to deny visas to applicants who do not qualify under the law, and to issue visas to applicants who do qualify. As mentioned in our first reply, consular officers cannot issue visas based on the assurances and endorsements of family members, relatives, or interested third parties, on the reputation and integrity of the party recommending the applicant, or on the ability of a sponsor to provide financial support. The applicant's refusal simply reflects the visa applicant’s inability to qualify for a visa at the time of application.

American immigration law presumes intent to immigrate on the part of all applicants, and to qualify for a visa an applicant must overcome this presumption. This is possible when an applicant can sufficiently establish to the consular officer during the interview that an applicant has strong ties outside the United States that would compel departure after a temporary trip. Given the volume of applicants interviewed here at the Embassy, these difficult judgments must be made very briefly and that is oftentimes misconstrued as rudeness. Nevertheless, consular officers know that they must maintain the highest standard of fairness and politeness and to ensure that all applicants are treated respectfully.

Reconsiderations of prior refusals are properly done in the context of a reapplication for a visa and any such reapplication will be subject to our normal adjudication process. Renewed applications are most likely to succeed if there are material changes in applicant circumstances or when there is new, credible, material, and verifiable information that might affect the eligibility for a nonimmigrant visa. As visa applications are adjudicated on its individual merits, it does not matter if the applicants apply again on different dates or at the same interview date and time. We reiterate that although there is no guarantee that a new visa application will be successful, you can be assured that all visa applications are given full and judicious consideration. As a final point, I would like to very specifically address a statement you made in your recent letter. As U.S. consular officials we MUST “go by the book” as you put it in your message. We are required to issue a visa when an applicant demonstrates that they qualify and must refuse a visa in all other cases. To do otherwise would be to violate U.S. law as well as turn the visa application process into a game of chance. I very much appreciate your interest in this matter and understand the disappointment in the outcome.

Should the visa applicants have more questions about their previous visa applications or any future application, they may send an e-mail to ConsManilaNIV@state.gov directly.

Sincerely,
Martin L. Lahm, III
NIV Unit Chief
United States Embassy, Manila"

My reply I just sent to them:

"Dear Mr. ***** *****

Thanks for your reply. Hope it wasn't a total form letter, it sounded like a hybrid because you referred to some specific statements I made. Are you a manager? A unit chief sounds higher up.

First of all, you keep mentioning that you interviewer went by the book, and that my applicant was "not qualified according to the criteria". I assume you meant income, job and banking savings criteria. Those are probably the major issues right? If so, can you specify like how much exactly her income has to be to qualify, or her savings or job tenure? Are you allowed to divulge that info?

Are you saying this process is 100 percent objective? Isn't there leeway for the interviewer's personal judgment? For example a nicer interviewer might find the applicant more trustworthy than a mean cynical interviewer right? All interviewers have to make a judgment call. Nothing is 100 percent objective. I'm not stupid, you know? Politics is not technical or machine like, it is subjective and influenced by image, bias and opinion. You know that I'm sure. We all do.

Also I don't understand why the interview has to be in English. Why not Tagalog? You can't claim that English is required for a tourist visa, because any Taiwanese or Japanese citizen who knows zero English can easily get a US tourist visa upon arrival. So that excuse isn't going to hold water. I ain't stupid you know, and such inconsistencies are obvious. Isn't it just an excuse to weed out more people with an extra barrier just to "be a dick"? lol

You said your staff try to be fair. However, do you remember what I said? The chubby lady kept picking on Dyan's mom, who could not speak English, when Dyan was the one who spoke English and was their representative. That was a bit mean-spirited and bully-ish behavior, don't you think? Why would the interviewer pick on the one in the group least likely to speak English? That sounds like she is trying to take advantage of their weakness by picking at their achilles heel. WTF?! Isn't that mean spirited? As if she is trying to fail them on purpose? You see what I mean? Why not let Dyan speak since she is the designated spokesperson? Wasn't that F-ed up? Think about it. Did that interviewer have something personal that she needed to try to pick on the least able person? You should ask her and make her apologize for that.

If she had an agenda shouldn't that invalidate and disqualify her decision?

One important thing you didn't address. You mentioned that a new interview would only receive a different outcome if there is any new info. Well again, how can new info be presented if the interviewer refuses to see the new info? This was a CRITICAL question in my previous letter, which you didn't address. Can you address it now? If the lady says "Do not speak unless spoken to" then how can new info be presented? It's a catch-22, right?

Is there a way to present any new info in the online application? For example, I see your application has changed, it now allows one to list the applicant's international travel history. That wasn't in the application we filled out before. Had that been in the application before, then Dyan's application would have shown a solid travel history with many entry/exit stamps in her passport, thus demonstrating her track record of returning to her country from overseas trips. Right? Isn't this evidence of intent to return? If so, what if it was presented during the interview? Would it have made a difference? I asked you this several times already. You guys have NOT addressed it yet. Can you answer this now?

Furthermore, you mentioned "strong ties" below. Well if Dyan has a son in the Philippines, isn't that a strong tie and reason to return? What constitutes "strong ties"? What could be more of a strong tie than a child? Did you consider that? What do you want, a corporation in her name? LOL. You gotta be specific about such things, not vague and arbitrary. If you don't have any specific criteria, then how could you say that this decision is purely technical and "by the book" and nothing personal? Isn't that a contradiction? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If there is specific criteria, then what is it? If there is not, then it's arbitrary and subject to interpretation right? Meaning a dick is gonna be more harsh and a nicer interviewer is gonna be more lenient right? Do you see my point? I've pinned you into a corner here. (haha gotcha!) So be honest please and tell the truth. You know it's wrong to lie right? Honesty is the best policy. Stop trying to play politics and tactfully dismiss these critical points please.

Can you try to be empathetic and consider how you would feel if you were me? Do the things above matter or not? That's my key question.

You should also investigate the beahvior of that chubby interviewer lady. What if Dyan reapplies? Can you make sure she doesn't get her again? If she is unlucky enough to get her again (due to Murphy's Law which we have all experienced), can she tell the staff managing the line that: "I already interviewed with her last time and got a bad experience before. Please give me another interviewer." and insist on it? The applicant has the right to choose a different interviewer right? They should. Wouldn't you if you were Dyan? Of course you would! Come on. Admit it.

Look forward to your next response. Hope it specifically addresses my key points and questions above. Not just a "tactful form letter to try to brush me off politely please". Thanks.

Sincerely,
Winston"

LOL. Aren't I killing them with my logic and pinning them into the corner? LOL. They are probably surprised that my logic is so ruthless and efficient. LOL

Wiseton that man writing letter cover own ass for everyone knowing same person but diferent person interview maybe diferent decide depend also mood of person if they feel good and they making big money every day say no no no for law not so clarity very vagueness

if man face you in debate you kill him but he can hide behind form leter and vaugeries and waist time for excuse say no if feel no and yes if feel yes nothing with law all subjectivities and america hi status system for scamman poverty province so we see wiseton you corect they scaming and cover ass all day everyday