Lawyer or No Lawyer for K-1
Peter Foltz
asked before. I intend to marry a young lady from the Ukraine (I have been
there 3 times now to see her, and we decided to tie the knot!). Is it
feasible or reasonable for me to make the application for a Fiance Visa on
my own? Is it better to hire a lawyer? Bear in mind that I was divorced 4
years ago, so that may ad a tangle! :)
Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!
Alvena Ferreira
> Hello All! I am new to this group and I am sure this question has been
> asked before. I intend to marry a young lady from the Ukraine (I have been
> there 3 times now to see her, and we decided to tie the knot!). Is it
> feasible or reasonable for me to make the application for a Fiance Visa on
> my own? Is it better to hire a lawyer? Bear in mind that I was divorced 4
> years ago, so that may ad a tangle! :)
I was divorced twice, my now-husband was divorced once, and we had no
problems submitting this petition on our own or obtaining the visa.
IMHO, you should be able to do this by yourself without the dubious help
from an attorney. Most of the posts I have read involving persons who
have attorneys are regarding things that the attorney did incorrectly,
quite frankly. If you do it yourself, you will give it the time and
attention necessary to accomplish it right the first time, and probably
get it done more speedily as a result. All that is required is reading
the forms and filling them out accurately. It does take a little time
and carefully filling out the forms, but it is certainly within the
realm of what I would call "doable" by the average person, this coming
from someone who won't even try to tackle her own tax forms each year! hehehehe
alvena
Fiance Visa pages at: http://www.apex.net/users/thehydes/I-129F.html
Rete & Jim
Divorce is not a tangle in the K-1 visa process. Most of us have
successfully negotiated the K-1 process although we have been previously
married.
As for an attorney, unless they are special circumstances, such as
a criminal record for drug possession or dealing, overtly communist
activity you can handle the process on your own. In fact attorneys, at
least the NG has discovered, know little if anything about the process
as most of their practice is geared to the I-130 (Immediate Relative
Visa), deportation cases, etc. Read the FAQ for this visa and come back
with any questions you might have.
http://www.txdirect.net/users/mike38/k1faq.htm
Rita
In article <6ar73.1315$ll5....@server1.news.adelphia.net>,
"Peter Foltz" <pfo...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> Hello All! I am new to this group and I am sure this question has
been
> asked before. I intend to marry a young lady from the Ukraine (I have
been
> there 3 times now to see her, and we decided to tie the knot!). Is it
> feasible or reasonable for me to make the application for a Fiance
Visa on
> my own? Is it better to hire a lawyer? Bear in mind that I was
divorced 4
> years ago, so that may ad a tangle! :)
> Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!
>
>
--
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Leonette
We retained an 'Immigrations Attorney'...and he doesn't know squat..
or..if he did, he hasn't given me any clues that he knows more than I,
and i've learned it all right here in this NG.
Do it Yourself, and use the extra $1000.00 on your honeymoon!
Wish we had of...
Leonette (PA) & Claude (Ottawa, Canada)
In article <6ar73.1315$ll5....@server1.news.adelphia.net>,
"Peter Foltz" <pfo...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> Hello All! I am new to this group and I am sure this question has
been
> asked before. I intend to marry a young lady from the Ukraine (I have
been
> there 3 times now to see her, and we decided to tie the knot!). Is it
> feasible or reasonable for me to make the application for a Fiance
Visa on
> my own? Is it better to hire a lawyer? Bear in mind that I was
divorced 4
> years ago, so that may ad a tangle! :)
> Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!
>
>
--
Our Destiny awaits, just beyond the Border Of INSanity.
http://www2.gdi.net/~skye/destiny.html
Kramer
There is a man in Cailf. who does an excellent job.
His fee is about $450 + the $95 INS fee. If you want to
contact him, send me an email message and I will give
you his contact information. I used him and was very
satisfied.
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
Leonette
lawyer?
In article <9292026...@www.remarq.com>,
--
Kramer
yourself, I can suggest a person for you. He is located
in San Jose. Everything is done by mail. His fee is $450.
Was very satisfied with the results. If interested, send
email and I will furnish you with his contact info.
FYI: My K-1 visa is for a woman from Ukraine! :-)
jin...@my-deja.com
DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT use a lawyer, believe me, it will only screw up
and delay the approval of your application and give u high blood
pressure to boot! Ours was delayed by 2 weeks bec. the darned lawyer
didn't know his head from his arse about K-1 visa processing. All u
need to know is in this NG or the K1 FAQ page. If u have a question,
just ask and someone will be sure to give u an answer.
Save yourself the money and the aggravation, do it yourself...
Jeff(NY)/Jing(Manila)
Greg Cramer
first embarked on the K-1 process back in October 98. The average cost was
$2,500. With diligence and common sense, you can do the paperwork yourself
and use the savings to take a honeymoon. The FAQ is a great resource for
getting started. Good luck! - The other CRAMER
Kramer wrote in message <9292026...@www.remarq.com>...
>If you do NOT want to go it alone, forget the lawyer.
>There is a man in Cailf. who does an excellent job.
>His fee is about $450 + the $95 INS fee. If you want to
>contact him, send me an email message and I will give
>you his contact information. I used him and was very
>satisfied.
>
>
>
Targetmedi
From personal experience... if you have the time to chase down everything and
don't mind gettting multiple requests for clarification or told by INS that you
have inadequate documentation, then yes, do it yourself. IT CAN BE DONE-but
what you pay for (and yes, the fee is about right, which should take you all
the way through the obtaining of a green card) is his experience and the
assurance (provided you have the right guy) that you will get everything right
the first time.
Being self-employed, I wouldn't even dream about doing my taxes without an
accountant; I think that the INS is the same kind of animal. If you can afford
to use an attorney, do so. I am in a position where I can both pay the
attorneys and take a nice honeymoon, so I did. It's basically a business
decision.
Frank
Frank
Leonette
beneficiary are the ones to track down, obtain, search, and pay for the
documents you need to supply. The lawyer does not. All the lawyer does
is complete the few forms (which one can do themselves) that is
submitted with the petition and sign his name to it and charge you big
bucks to do it.
We retained an immigrations lawyer due to the fact that my fiance has a
criminal record (dui) from 6 years ago and figured we needed the help of
the attorney. Bah. He has done nothing to help track down the court
records, police certificate or even call the RCMP after we waited for 10
weeks to get them. He told us we did NOT need to have anything other
than the I-134 affidavit of support document, and has NOT told me that a
letter of invitation is needed, copies of tax returns, employer letter,
or anything else...all he said is needed for the interview is his
passport and the originals of what was sent in the I-129
packet...He could not even tell me that Montreal was the consulate to
use. He argued with me that the consulate we would use is in Ottawa.
I've asked many times about which POE to use to be assured the EAD upon
entry, and he has yet to give me an answer or even discuss anything
about it. He has not told us we needed other photo's, nor could he tell
us what vaccinations were needed. And this is an "Immigrations Law
Firm" only, and has been in business for over 15 years serving the PA
area, of which this law office is only one of three in the whole state.
He did nothing to help with the past dui offense, he only told us WE
were to the ones to get the documents...WE are the ones to fork out all
the long distant phone calls, letters, money and many trips to different
places trying to track these things down.
All he did was sign his name that he was our lawyer and he submitted the
I-129 petition packet to VSC, which he sent by certified mail instead of
Overnite which I had requested. I was the one to continue to call VSC
only after getting the correct phone number as well as ALL the other
information needed to do everything else from this NG...and I was the
one to find out that VSC had misdirected our paperwork, and I was the
one to deal with all of that crap...and I knew before he did when we
were approved.
So in essence...I paid $1000.00 for this attorney to sign his name and
mail the packet. And that fee was ONLY for the K-1....the AOS would be
an additional $500.00...Thanks but no thanks....we'll do it ourselves.
MY PERSONAL OPINION: This was a waste of very needed money and time.
If it wasn't for this NG, we'd have been up shit creek with a high price
atty. as the *MIS*-guide...not much comfort from me....sorry.
Leonette (PA) & Claude (Ottawa, Canada)
In article <19990613191804...@ng-fq1.aol.com>,
--
Our Destiny awaits, just beyond the Border Of
INSanity.
http://www2.gdi.net/~skye/destiny.html
ig...@idir.net
> >...Is it better to hire a lawyer? Bear in mind that I was divorced
4
> > years ago, so that may ad a tangle! :)
>
> problems submitting this petition on our own or obtaining the visa.
> IMHO, you should be able to do this by yourself without the dubious
help
> from an attorney. Most of the posts I have read involving persons
who
> have attorneys are regarding things that the attorney did
incorrectly,
> quite frankly. If you do it yourself, you will give it the time and
> attention necessary to accomplish it right the first time, and
probably
> get it done more speedily as a result. All that is required is
reading
> the forms and filling them out accurately. It does take a little
time
> and carefully filling out the forms, but it is certainly within the
> realm of what I would call "doable" by the average person, this
coming
> from someone who won't even try to tackle her own tax forms each
year! hehehehe
>
> alvena
> Fiance Visa pages at: http://www.apex.net/users/thehydes/I-129F.html
>
- I agree. I think MOST of immigration forms do not require
lawyers (true, some complex situations do require their expertise).
Some time ago I decided to take this point to the next level --
and developed the Web Site: http://www.formsassistant.com
Almost for free it helps you with filling out those empty PDF
form files so widely available on the Internet. The result -- filled
out form, ready to be printed, signed, and sent to INS (it's like on-
line tax filing with a twist :-) )
Check it out!
Igor Dvoeglazov
Owner, http://www.formsassistant.com
Stacey & Nic
$1500.00 up front!!! So we decided to do it on our own... we ordered a
fiance packet(cost 75.00) We didnt know about the NG at the time..it came
with all the forms for the k1 application and AOS *BUT* it only came with 1
of everything...we needed a co sponser so we needed two 1-134's. We had no
idea we could get them any other way...nor did we know they were
downloadable. The packet told us about the adits but nothing about cover
letters, piks together ect... THANK GOD we found this place in time!!
Stacey & Nic(U.S) off to be married in less than 24 hours!!!!!!
--
_________________________________
Come See Our Homepage
http://zap.to/Nic_and_Stacey
<ig...@idir.net> wrote in message news:7l3f5h$7f1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
MDUdall
I agree that the actual completion of the forms is not that difficult, and
resources such as this news group help many persons do it themselves. I think
this news group is a great thing.
I am an attorney who practices solely in the area of immigration law, and the
fiancee visa constitutes the bulk of my practice. None of my petitions have
been denied and most sail right on through the service centers within the
projected processing times. Of course each case is different, and some cases do
go beyond the processing times due to Service Center backlogs. Over the years
of preparing fiancee petitions, I have refined my procedures and have come up
with some of my own techinques to help the process go as quickly as possible.
The thing I bring to the process is that it eliminates the homework a
petitioner would need to do in order to do the job, and it gives them assurance
knowing their case is being prepared and handled by someone who has prepared
many fiancee petitions before. I remember my first fiancee petition; even
though I had spent the hours of homework necessary to feel assured I was doing
everything right, I still could not be 100% positive that I had not overlooked
something.
I also discuss the case with my clients to evaluate and identify any special
issues that could be trouble down the line. Of course, this news group helps
petitioners identify some tricky issues, but it is also never a bad idea to
have your own individual fact pattern evaluated by an attorney with experience
in this area who can spot potential problems and answer your questions about
the process.
Also, even though the forms appear very easy to complete (and they are) I have
found that quite often clients will make unwarranted assumptions about some of
the answers they list on my questionnaire (which has the same questions that
appear on the immigration forms), and sometimes they simply don't give a
complete answer. For instance, I have found that it is common for someone to
fail to go back the full 5 years for their residence and employment history for
both fiancees. Another common incorrect assumption clients make is by listing
the addresses they think are OK even though they or their fiancee actually did
not live there during the time listed (using parents address instead of school
address, for example). I always make sure I discuss all of the details with the
client to make sure the information submitted is indeed complete and accurate.
Through the American Immigration Lawyers Association, I always have the most up
to date new materials from the Service Centers. For example, the California
Service Center has their own pink colored cover sheet to help route the
paperwork to the family product line, and the CSC also has a special K-1 Cable
Format Form that I submitt with every case to that center. The CSC also has
their own special cover sheet that should be used with all correspondence sent
to the Center about a case already on file. I make sure all of the correct
materials are used with each of my submissions.
But probably the greatest benefit (as I see it) of hiring an attorney is that
you are also hiring someone to zealously advocate your case with the Service
Center and/or Consulate if needed. As a member of the American Immigration
Lawyers Association I can utilize the AILA attorney who has been designated as
the liaison for your service center if there is ever a reason to do so.
In my opinion, the INS and Consulates should treat all people the same,
attorney or not; but after reading the horror stories in this news group about
difficulties with the Service Centers and Consulates I can only speculate as to
the reasons my petitions typically go through without these same sort of
difficulties.
As far as the cost of hiring an attorney; I agree that some attorneys fees seem
shockingly high. Somebody who just came in this week to hire me told me they
had been given a quote from another attorney of $5000 to do the fiancee
petition and the subsequent adjustment of status (with no children).
I believe my fees are reasonable in light of the amount of time I must spend on
each case. My attorney fee is $750.00 for what I call the first filing phase
(the fiancee petition and consular issuance process), and $600.00 more for the
adjustment of status process if the client hired me to do the 1st fiancee
phase. These attorney fees do not include the INS filing fees or Consular visa
fees, nor attendance at the consulate or INS interviews, nor the preparation of
a waiver if needed. Those services require an additionl fee.
I also do not charge a consultation fee for fiancee visa callers who are
interested in hiring me to prepare and file their petitions with the INS.
Please feel free to visit my website for more information about the services I
provide, located at http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
(415)431-7657
LisaDtoo
>difficulties with the Service Centers and Consulates I can only speculate as
>to
>the reasons my petitions typically go through without these same sort of
>difficulties.
Mr. Udall: I think that the nearly anyone in this newsgroup would agree with
me that the VERY large majority of people who go through this process end up
with no problems or relatively minor ones at the very most...therefore
comparing how successfully your own cases are approved to only the horror
stories one hears in this newsgroup (usually related to issues that most of us
would agree and advise should be handled with an attorney's help...i.e. past
arrest record, overstay, etc.) is misleading. I have a very hard time
believing that had my husband and I filed with an attorney's help, we wouldn't
have had a request for additional information for my husband's EAD application.
I say this because we were asked for a copy of Mike's birth certificate
(already provided with the entire original AOS package that we sent and not
requested or required for the EAD application in the first place) because the
employee said that the birth dates on Mike's EAD application differed from INS
records (the birth date on *all* of the forms that we submitted were
correct...we double checked when we got the request for information).
Apparently the mix-up occurred because some INS or Department of State employee
along the way didn't know the difference between the European method of giving
dates and the American method. No attorney's help would have prevented that
mix-up. It was purely a mistake on the part of the INS or Department of State.
I was a paralegal for six years at a large firm in Cincinnati. We represented
employers in workers' compensation cases. I don't know if you're familiar with
the way workers' compensation differs in Ohio compared to most other states,
but one difference (in a very brief summary) is that Ohio wanted to make the
workers' compensation system more accessible and more comprehensible to the
workers. So, there is a state-run adminstrative agency (The Bureau of Workers'
Compensation) that basically administrates workers' compensation in the state.
The Industrial Commission is the "adjudicating" arm of the process, where
claims on appeal are heard before what amount to ALJ's. I explain this to come
to this point: what is now wrong with the Ohio workers' compensation system
(or at least was when I left there four years ago) is that lawyers are becoming
involved again...and driving costs up. Employers hire them because they don't
want to pay what they're being asked to (and often they're correct not to want
to--there's a lot of cheating that goes on)..so the employees feel like they
won't get a fair shake if they don't hire one too. Then the employees have to
share a portion of whatever compensation they are finally awarded, if any
(which is already always less than they were making as a working employee, of
course), with the attoney who represented them.
So, as someone who worked in the legal field for many years, I believe that
even though attorneys can get good results when representing people, there are
many situations where they just ought not to get involved...and further, there
are a lot of situations where "regular Joe's" like me, my husband and many of
the other members of this newsgroup are just as capable of that "good result"
in this process.
I enjoy your postings to this newsgroup, and moreover I appreciate your
willingness to share your knowledge with us. You serve a great purpose for
those who don't want to be bothered with the process. Unfortunately, many of
your brethren are responsible for a lot of the "horror story" messes that
people have come to this newsgroup recounting...and that only through this
newsgroup have been able to resolve...problems caused by attorneys who ought
not to be practicing immigration law, since their real expertise is in personal
injury or tax law or whatever. That's why a lot of people on this newsgroup
have a very jaded view of attorneys. Personally, I have a very jaded view of
injured employees...because all I ever saw were the cases where employers
thought they were being "had" and therefore hired our firm to represent their
interests. None of us are correct...and yet at the same time, we're all
correct.
You may see our wedding web page at the following URL:
http://members.aol.com/lisamiky/index.html
Rete & Jim
You have heard from a variety of people on this subject ...
the bottom line is an attorney is not needed or warranted
for this type of visa. It is simple and straightforward
and not at all complicated if the beneficiary (foreign
fiancee) does not have a criminal record. And even if that
is the case the US Attorney will not be of much use to them
in getting clearance records from the courts if that is the
case or an I192 Waiver if that is needed. The US Attorney
has no jurisdiction in a foreign country and has to *hire*
an attorney who is admitted to bar in that country to do
the work needed there. I work for a New York City law firm
of 85 attorneys and when we have legal work to be done in
Canada, Mexico, Europe, etc. we have to hire an attorney
from that country to perform it. Even the attorney I sort
advice from before the start of our petition, told me flat
out I didn't need his services as this type of visa is a
"nothing to it" visa. And yes, I paid the consulation fee
of $35 even though the consulation was a "cursory" one.
Personally, and please I speak only for myself on this, we
have had attorneys here before and a self proclaimed
retiree from the INS who does private work in completing
INS applications, but the end result was always that their
postings were general in nature and that if a NG poster
went to them for assistance there was a fee for a
consulation even if it were only a phone conversation.
Their presence on the NG is welcome and of course it is a
public forum but please keep in mind that they are here
voluntarily and are looking for clients. After all, they
have to make a living as well.
The use of your intelligence, your common sense, the FAQ
pages and the experiences of those who have walked the path
before you will do as much good, if not more, than any
"professional" assistance you have made good money for.
Rita
MDUdall
First let me start out by identifying myself as an attorney who practices in
the area of immigration law. I also prepare and submit a lot of fiancee visa
petitions for my clients.
>an attorney is not needed or warranted
>for this type of visa.
I agree with this poster's sentiment that an attorney is not absolutely
necessary when preparing a fiancee petition. Most petitions are approved and
most fiancees obtain their visas at the Consulate. This news group provides a
lot of useful information to help get the job done without the aid of an
attorney; however if you don't want to have to do the work yourself then hiring
someone with experience is another viable alternative.
In mid June, I attended the national conference for the American Immigration
Lawyers Association in Seattle. At a meeting with James Burzynski (director of
the TSC), Dona Coultice (director of the CSC), Paul Novak (Director of the
VSC), and Natalie Vedder (Director of the NSC) each announced the percentage of
cases submitted to their centers which did not have attorney representation.
Each center had a different number, but I recall that it seemed to me the
average was only around 30% of the cases are filed with attorney representation
(all types of cases). At the meeting, the directors discussed in detail factors
they each considered important in helping a case move through their service
center as quickly as possible, and gave examples of things not to do and things
that should definately be done to help the examiner quickly process the
petition or application. At a different meeting, instructions were given by
other AILA attorneys about how they successfully obtain expedited processing
through the Service Center mailrooms and quick adjudication.
Most of my clients hire me because they are busy people who don't want to have
to spend the time it takes to learn how to submit something more than a
"bare-bones" submission. More importantly, they want the assurance of knowing
their case is being handled by at attorney who will first evaluate their
individual situations, do the work for them making sure the information
submitted is complete and accurate, fully document the case, and to have an
attorney zealously advocate their case with the Service Center and Consulate if
needed.
Hiring someone who has successfully prepared and processed many fiancee
petitions gives the petitioner the reassurance of knowing the job will be done
correctly (Yes, I know there are attorneys who don't do many of these and have
bothced the job. If you ever hire an attorney for anything, it's always a good
idea to ask them how many similar cases they have handled). I remember my
first fiancee petition; even though I had spent the hours necessary to feel
assured I was doing the job correctly I still couldn't be 100% sure that I had
thought of everything. Over the years of preparing fiancee petitions I've
learned what works and what doesn't and have refined my procedures accordingly.
But even when the petition materials are prepared correctly and well
documented, sometimes the Service Center will make mistakes or fail to act on
the petition within a reasonable time. Thats when having an attorney act as
your advocate with the Service Center would come into play. Most of my cases
don't need this type of intervention, but I won't hesitate to immediately
contact the service when needed. Also, as a member of the American Immigration
Lawyers Association, I can utilize the AILA attorney who is the liaison contact
attorney assigned to your particular service center to make sure they are aware
of and acting on your case. The AILA liaison attorney has a working
relationship and easy access to the top staff members of the service centers to
help AILA attorneys with problem cases when needed.
I agree with the poster that the completion of the forms themselves is not that
difficult; however having your case evaluated by an experienced immigration
attorney plus attorney representation with the INS and Consulates if needed is
what an attorney can do for you besides doing the actual work and making sure
the forms are prepared correctly.
>Even the attorney I sort
>advice from before the start of our petition, told me flat
>out I didn't need his services as this type of visa is a
>"nothing to it" visa. And yes, I paid the consulation fee
>of $35 even though the consulation was a "cursory" one.
If I'm reading this correctly, the poster telling you that you probably don't
need an attorney consulted an attorney before doing the job herself. Of course,
not every couple's circumstances are the same. Unlike the attorney she went to,
I do not charge a consultation fee for fiancee visa callers who are interested
in hiring me to prepare and submit their petitions and to advocate for them
with the INS and Consulate if needed.
>It is simple and straightforward
>and not at all complicated if the beneficiary (foreign
>fiancee) does not have a criminal record.
>and when we have legal work to be done in
>Canada, Mexico, Europe, etc. we have to hire an attorney
>from that country to perform it.
I think this analysis is a little simplistic. First, if the foreign fiancee has
a criminal record, depending on the offense, the foreign fiancee may not be
able to get a fiancee visa no matter what he or she does to clean up the
criminal record with the help of a foreign attorney. Next there are many other
reasons to be denied a fiancee visa other then a criminal record.
After your fiancee enters the U.S. and marries you, she will want to file for
permanent resident status with your local INS office. The attorney who already
worked on your finacee petition will already have the background information
and documentation about you and your spouse to make sure this job is done
quickly and correctly as well.
Peter, give me a call and I'll be happy do discuss your case and my services
with you in more detail. I'll need to talk to you for a little while to make
sure I don't spot any issues that may need special attention. I look forward to
your call.
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
(415)431-7657
Qtsood
An off-topic discussion from my end.
I think that the INS should be required to submit a list of incompetent lawyers
that exist in the United States. The INS knows which lawyers are well-versed in
their field and which ones suck. Is it not our right to find out from the INS
rather than from experience? What's your view on this?
FYI, I mostly agree with your post.
DS Sood.
MDUdall
>lawyers
>that exist in the United States. The INS knows which lawyers are well-versed
>in
>their field and which ones suck. Is it not our right to find out from the INS
>rather than from experience? What's your view on this?
>
>
Mr. Sood,
Thanks for your reply. Yes, it would be nice if there were a way the INS could
flag attorneys and others who are not qualified to practice immigration law;
however the logistics of doing this would be daunting.
First, the INS employees are have not studied immigration law, so it may be
difficult for them to identify a bothced job. Your suggestion does have merit
though; and perhaps some sort of INS review board should be in place for the
most obvious cases and to address complaints from petitioners and applicants.
I personally would welcome such a system. There are far too many people
practicing immigration law who aren't attorneys. I hear of the "Notario" (I
think that's how they spell it) cases all the time from callers who paid money
to someone who either botched the job or simply disappeared. (Of course I'm
sure there are notarios who don't mess up a case).
You can also check with the bar association for the state in which the attorney
is registered to see if they have any history of disciplinary action taken
against them. I have a handy link right on my page that can be used to check my
record with the California Bar Association.
Also, attorneys who have joined and participate in the American Immigration
Lawyers Assocation have made a commitment to the practice of immigration law
and are sure to have access to the latest INS policy decisions and memos and
should understand the new harsh immigration laws.
But the best way to evaluate an attorney is by spending time talking to him or
her. Ask them how many other cases they have processed that are similar to
yours, ask him or her to explain the entire process to you. You will probably
want to also know about the process for your spouse's application for permanent
resident status, and you should get a pretty good idea about the attorney's
abilities after going through this process.
One more thing, hiring an attorneys isn't going to make an un-winnable case
approveable; however hiring an attorney is more then just hiring someone to
complete your forms and file the petition. It requires getting to know the
clients situation and interviewing to make sure any problem issues are
identified and dealt with from the beginning. Even if a problem does not
prevent the fiancee from getting the fiancee visa, it could cause problems if
it is discovered during the application for permanent resident process. A good
immigration attorney will be able to help you all the way through the process
(not just the fiancee stage).
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
LisaDtoo
fashion described. The INS has a hard enough time handling what *is* their
job...I'd hate to see what they'd do with something that *isn't* their
job...lol
Seriously, the idea of government agencies "rating" attorneys in any way gives
me chills. I already don't like the idea that attorneys have the right to
"privileged" information such as described by Mr. Udall, simply because they
are attorneys. The sort of information described by him ought to be public
knowledge, not information shared only with those capable of charging clients
exhorbitant (or even reasonable) fees in order to have access to it. *That*
would go a much longer way toward making the INS people-friendly, in my
opinion.
Helen Parsonage
lisa...@aol.comsafe (LisaDtoo) wrote:
> I already don't like the idea that attorneys have the right to
> "privileged" information such as described by Mr. Udall, simply because they
> are attorneys. The sort of information described by him ought to be public
> knowledge, not information shared only with those capable of charging clients
> exhorbitant (or even reasonable) fees in order to have access to it.
Lisa,
All the information refered to by Mr. Udall *is* public information -
check the INS web-site and other sites, where every single regulation is
available. Members of AILA don't have special access *because* they are
attorneys - but because they pay membership dues to a professional
organization which uses that money to research and disseminate information
on the latest changes in law and proceedure. All professional
organizations do the same.
I have found that the same information is usually accessible on the web -
sometimes even faster. And I do quite a lot of research on immigration
case law and regulations as an Immigration Paralegal.
If you want to do the work yourself - fine, its quite possible for any
intelligent, literate person to do a good job. But that doesn't mean that
everyone can, or wants to.
Regards,
Helen
Alena Carroll
you want to spend the time to research everything. I have
several friends who happily paid lawyers as they can afford
it and prefer not to spend their free time researching
immigration issues. The problem is to pick a good one,
which is not always easy. My husband wanted us to get a
lawyer but I was against it as I believed I could fill out
the forms myself. So we did not get one but I almost wish
we did. I never thought that I-130 at the consulate was a
good possibility, and it turns out that I could have had my
green card before my H-1B expired had we done I-
130/consular processing instead of I-130/I-485. A good
lawyer would have told me that.
So while I definitely believe that any reasonably
intelligent person can navigate the INS process, using a
good lawyer can be an advantage, especially if the case has
some complexity and you have the financial resources to do
it.
Amy & Guido
news:hparsonage-28...@slip-32-100-44-38.nc.us.ibm.net...
> In article <19990627194849...@ng-ch1.aol.com>,
> lisa...@aol.comsafe (LisaDtoo) wrote:
>
> > I already don't like the idea that attorneys have the right to
> > "privileged" information such as described by Mr. Udall, simply because
they
> > are attorneys. The sort of information described by him ought to be
public
> > knowledge, not information shared only with those capable of charging
clients
> > exhorbitant (or even reasonable) fees in order to have access to it.
>
> Lisa,
> All the information refered to by Mr. Udall *is* public information -
> check the INS web-site and other sites, where every single regulation is
> available. Members of AILA don't have special access *because* they are
> attorneys - but because they pay membership dues to a professional
> organization which uses that money to research and disseminate information
> on the latest changes in law and proceedure. All professional
> organizations do the same.
Helen,
I believe the information Lisa was referring to were things such as fax and
phone numbers for INS Service centers or district offices; names of people
who deal with certain types of cases, so that inquiries can be correctly
addressed; and things such as the JIT reports that Mr. Udall has referred
to.
Immigration law and policies are public information, and people may have to
search for it, but it is normally available.
Most of us find it upsetting that attorneys have access to fax numbers where
they can question about the status of a case, while people without attorneys
have no such information, and if there are delays with our case, we are
limited to US mail, which may take months to be opened or seen by INS
personnel.
Amy Schlabitz
LMWarnock
>intelligent person can navigate the INS process, using a
>good lawyer can be an advantage, especially if the case has
>some complexity and you have the financial resources to do
>it.
>
I agree, but what I have heard time and time again from NG members is "My
lawyer sent the wrong fee" or "My lawyer sent the wrong form" or "My lawyer
wasn't up to date with INS procedure". I guess the best question to ask a
prospective lawyer is "How many I-130/K-1 visas do you handle a year? a
month?" and "How many get turned down?" and "Why?" Not that they will tell you
the truth if they are turned down due to incompetance of the atty.
Laura
LisaDtoo
>intelligent, literate person to do a good job. But that doesn't mean that
>everyone can, or wants to.
Helen:
It's nice to see a paralegal on our newsgroup. I hope to see you more often
and contributing all of the great information that I'm sure you have to
contribute.
As for your response to my post, I beg to differ. Mr. Udall speaks of
information that he has obtained at AILA conferences *from INS employees* (as
opposed to other AILA members, which is obviously their prerogative to keep
secret if they choose to), numbers (both phone and fax) that only attorneys may
use, etc. In fact, Mr. Udall has even had the pleasure of speaking directly
with Service Center directors...if only the "regular Joe" could even get
through on the phone in less than three days to simply speak to a lowly call
center employee. If the INS can provide that information to AILA members, they
can certainly provide it to "regular people". I have read the INS web site, as
have many other people, and most of the information provided by Mr. Udall is
not available directly from there, or from the INS...and it would be VERY easy
to do. Our newsgroup is full of enough people who have looked on their web
site; I think *somebody* would have found the particular information in
question. We are, therefore, extremely grateful for the information that Mr.
Udall shares with us. My only wish is that I'd heard it directly from the INS.
After all, what part of the INS regulations says "First, hire an
attorney...Then..."? There is too much information that the general public has
no knowledge of unless they get it from the "privileged few" (read:
attorneys). *That* is my problem. It has nothing to do with the attorneys
themselves (remember, I was a paralegal myself for six years)
>But that doesn't mean that
>everyone can, or wants to.
I never said anything to the contrary. These are two very separate issues.
What I said is that the public has the right to hear the same information
*directly from the lips of the INS* that the attorneys hear. Whether the
information is available elsewhere on the Internet (as in thanks to the
goodwill of one of the attorneys who heard the information from the INS, like
Mr. Udall) is irrelevant. Everyone who knows about doing *good* research on
the Internet knows that every site you see that purports to know something must
be taken with a grain of salt...unless it's the official site of the entity in
question...in this case the INS. If it's not located there, the information is
automatically suspect and is only proven non-suspect through verification of
the source in question.
MDUdall
>information that he has obtained at AILA conferences *from INS employees*. In
fact, Mr. Udall has even had the pleasure of speaking directly
>with Service Center directors...if only the "regular Joe" could even get
>through on the phone in less than three days to simply speak to a lowly call
>center employee. If the INS can provide that information to AILA members,
>they
>can certainly provide it to "regular people".
>What I said is that the public has the right to hear the same information
*directly from the lips of the INS*
In one of my earlier postings I refered to keeping up with the latest INS
policy decisions and memos. I believe INS and State Department memos can be
obtained by the public at large through the Freedom of Information Act. All you
would have to do is submit a FOIA request detailing what you want, and it
should be provided to you. Also, there is always the option of subscribing to a
service such as the "Interpreter Releases" or Matthew Bender's or West Law's
immigration libraries to keep track of the latest INS and Department of State
information (of course this would cost money to subscribe). You might even be
able to go to your local law library to read these publication at no cost.
As far as hearing information at the AILA conferences from the INS and
Department of State staff members; those INS and Department of State officials
were invited to attend the conference by the American Immigration Lawyers
Association. The INS and Department of State did not set up the conference;
rather it was organized by the AILA Seattle chapter and partly paid for by the
membership dues I pay each year to maintain my membership with AILA. I assume
my membership dues also helped to pay for the travel expenses of the INS and
Department of State officials (next years conference will be held in Chicago,
Boston the year after). In addition to my AILA membership dues, I spend around
$3000 per year attending the conferences plus another 2 to 3 thousand to
maintain my immigration library, not to mention the countless hours I must
spend digesting this information. Also, some of the information I post is
simply gained through experience with immigration law.
Perhaps the INS and Department of State officials would attend if there was a
similar invitation for discussion from another group (such as this NG). Maybe
if the NG organizes such a meeting they will attend. I can only guess.
The only time I've ever had the opportunity to talk directaly to the center
directors is at the annual conferences and the California Service Center tour;
however I suppose I (or anybody else) could write to a center director and
request that an appointment be scheduled to meet in person. Like I said, I've
never tried this before so I'm not sure if it would work. Has anybody in the NG
ever tried to set up a personal meeting with a center director?
>There is too much information that the general public has
>no knowledge of unless they get it from the "privileged few" (read:
>attorneys).
I disagree. All the information I have access to can be obtained by
non-attorneys if they are willing to spend the time and money to dig it up.
There are also many non-profit legal organizations that are members of the
American Immigration Lawyers Association which attend the conferences. One does
not necessairly have to pay an attorney to have access to qualified immigration
advice. I too do my share of free legal work to those who can not afford an
attorney. I've volunteered my time for the San Francisco Bar Association HIV
project; representing persons with HIV with their immigration problems with the
INS; and I've volunteered with the S.F. Bar Associations Homeless Advocacy
Project providing free representation to those who can not afford it. I also
sometimes provide free representation on my own to those who need it and can
demonstrate they are financially unable to afford an attorney (Please don't
confuse this with persons who can afford an attorney but would rather not have
to pay for an attorney).
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
LisaDtoo
>non-attorneys if they are willing to spend the time and money to dig it up.
The point is that much of the information could very easily be made available
on the INS web site...where the government is required to post *free*
information for the public. I don't see what's so controversial or odd or
"asking too much" about that.
(Also, as an aside: I think many of us would have paid for attorneys had we
really felt it necessary because being with our loved ones is the most
important thing; we just didn't feel it necessary. Personally, I wouldn't
change anything about our decision..not even in retrospect.)
I'm happy that you do all of those good works for those who can't afford
attorney services. Unfortunately it doesn't address the crux of my point.
The public is not kept informed enough when it comes to INS policies, etc.
There is something very wrong with that. That the information is made
available to attorneys and others simply proves the point that it is possible
to make the information available. Instead, the INS chooses not to in yet
another example of it's non-public friendly policies.
I don't know what's got you and Helen so upset/defensive/whatever about my
viewpoint...making the information more readily available wouldn't put you out
of business...there would still be plenty of people out there who wouldn't want
to have to deal with the whole thing and would prefer that an attorney take
care of it. But, for those of us who can't/won't hire an attorney, the process
would be made easier. Heck, it might even make it easier for *you* to practice
your chosen profession...and cheaper too.
I repeat...I have nothing against attorneys. We choose not to have one handle
our immigration issues because we don't need one. We'd rather save the money
for a house and, eventually, children. I have never said someone else
shouldn't hire an attorney; the most I've said is they don't need one. Big
difference. My beef is with an INS that is supposed to be serving the public
and that is falling far short of that mark.
MDUdall
>There is something very wrong with that. That the information is made
>available to attorneys and others simply proves the point that it is possible
>to make the information available. Instead, the INS chooses not to in yet
>another example of it's non-public friendly policies.
Yes, you have a valid point; however the INS doesn't call up AILA and say,
"this is the latest information". Instead, the American Immigration Lawyers
Association maintains a national office in Washington D.C. and their staff does
all of the investigating and legwork to make sure this information is
discovered and made available to AILA members. AILA also lobbies Congress to
help change the harsh immigration laws, and has recently started an AILA
litigation team to help AILA attorneys file law suits compelling the INS to
act. I agree, if the INS made all infromation easily available (a mouse click
away) I wouldn't need to be a member of my bar association (AILA) and could
save my membership dues; however a lot of this information is in the form of
INS inter-office memos and memos from the Secretary of State to the Consulates
(so although this information can be discovered by the public, it was not
created for the public or AILA). AILA has no monopoly on this information; it
can be discovered by anybody, and the INS and Department of State certainly
don't do out of their way to help AILA. AILA helps AILA members.
Another point is that it is very difficult to know what the INS policy is from
day to day as it does shift from time to time. Congress passes a law and
directs INS to implement regulations; however there are many examples where the
INS has not implemented the regs even years after Congress passes the law. If
there were regulations to follow in "black and white" groups such as AILA
wouldn't be as necessary.
>I don't know what's got you and Helen so upset/defensive/whatever about my
>viewpoint
I'm not upset; and because I deal with the system every day I can certainly
appreciate the frustration that is experienced due to INS and DOS delays (its
frustrating for me too).
>We choose not to have one (attorney) handle
>our immigration issues because we don't need one.
I agree that most petitioners obtain approval of their petitions and most
foreign fiancees get their visas; however it never hurts to run the situation
by a qualified immigration attorney who can spot any problem issues that may be
present for the fiancee process or the later application for permanent resident
status process. The odds are that any given case won't have any problem issues,
but in my opinion the best way to make this determination is thourgh an
evaluation by a qualified immigration attorney.
I believe the news group is a wonderful way for petitioners and beneficiarys to
learn about this process, but just reading the postings is not equivalent to an
evaluation of a specific case from an attorney who deals with these issues
daily, who has access to the latest INS and DOS policy decisions and memos, and
who understands the harsh new immigration laws.
MDUdall
very nice! Congratulations on your marriage. I too was married recently to my
lovely bride Lisa. (Oct. 16th).
Targetmedi
I used an attorney for our K-1 and was very satisfied. He was an INS
specialist who worked for INS for 12 years before going into private practice
17 years ago. The good news also was that his offices were not in downtown LA
but 5 minutes from my house in a suburb, with realistic fees!
Like anything-can you do it yourself-YES-however, I don't have the time to mess
with it, especially to get it wrong. When hiring ask questions about his
background (the first day I was in his office the client before me was a
K-1)....make sure that he has a knowledge of INS procedures (see if he can ask
obvious questions like at which consulate in Mexico do they process K-1's-if he
says Mexico City HE IS WRONG-all Mexican K-1's are in Ciudad Juarez)....
So far it has been real smooth....
FRank
MDUdall
>lawyer sent the wrong fee" or "My lawyer sent the wrong form" or "My lawyer
>wasn't up to date with INS procedure".
The examples you gave above, knowing the correct fee and form are the very
basic of concepts and steps to be taken in doing an immigration case. If an
attorney can't get these right, then obviously the attorney has not practiced
in the area of immigration law. He or she probably got a call from an
immigration law client, thought the job would be easy and got their hands on
some outdated INS materials and instructions (old fee list for example).
Choosing an attorney who has demonstrated a committment to the practice of
immigration law is important. Attorneys who have joined and participate in the
American Immigration Lawyers Association have made such a committment. AILA has
been an influential National Bar Association since 1946, and provides its
members with up to date information about the ever changing landscape of
immigration law.
Rete & Jim
association, i.e. ACFA for commercial attorneys. They serve
a purpose as a networking, educational and social system. I
have full access, without charge, to WestLaw, Lexis, etc. as
well as to Matthew Bender & Co. as I work directly for an
author of a four volume Asset Based Financing Guide
published by MB. I have unlimited access to the firm's law
library. So even without the web I can research INS until
the cows come home. But researching the rules and
regulations of the INS can only do so much good if the INS
and the US Consulates do not adhere to them. That is why
this NG was started to assist those that come after us by
sharing our experiences with them from the local INS level,
to the Service Center level to the US Consulate level. We
are not know-it-alls, nor have I heard anyone here profess
to be. As an immigration attorney you have access to phone
numbers and fax numbers that we, as lay people, might not
have. But your experience is no more valid than ours. Your
quotes of what and how the INS should run and what was said
at a convention is not relevant to those people that are
trying to get their petitions completed and approved. INS
is a government run entity with many problems whether it be
human or mechanical. And I will standby my belief that as a
whole this NG has helped more people navigate the INS system
correctly and efficiently than a host of lawyers that have
taken money for their services and done nothing but have a
clerk in their office fill out the forms and mail them in.
I have nothing against lawyers. I make my living working
for them. I have a nephew in his second year of law school
at George Washington University and who this summer is
working for the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. I
am proud of him and his chosen profession and if he does run
for politics as is his ambition perhaps then I will have an
"inside" lead on helping to change the system.
But for now please stop lauding your profession over us. You
have completed your education and worked for a few years in
your chosen field and are a member of an legal association
relevant to your field. Your first hand knowledge is no
better than ours. You can quote from the text; we can text
from experience.
Rita
zdr...@my-deja.com
attorney for our K-1 and was very satisfied. He was an INS
> specialist who worked for INS for 12 years before going into private
> practice 17 years ago. The good news also was that his offices were
> not in downtown LA but 5 minutes from my house in a suburb, with
> realistic fees!
Just out of curiosity, where abouts is this attorny? I have been in
contact with an Ex-INS agent in Chino Hills regarding my upcoming K1
filing (going down to Colombia in August for proposal purposes).
The gentleman that I spoke to immediately gave me any and all
information that I ask over the phone with no consultation fees.
Actually a nice thing is that even though he did ever work in the
Laguna Niguel office, the current head of that office use to work for
him a few years back.
I read through this newsgroup with some trepedition as to my upcoming
K1 filing (assuming she says yes ;) There is nothing else that I can
think of that could bring out the amount of loyalty and love than
bringing your spouse/fiance(e) to you.
Anyways, cheers...
Nick
MDUdall
>That is why
>this NG was started to assist those that come after us by
>sharing our experiences with them from the local INS level,
>to the Service Center level to the US Consulate level.
I agree that this news group is a wonderful way for petitioners and
beneficiarys to learn about the system and to identify problem issues from the
stories of those who have gone through this process before. However not every
case or every petitioner and beneficiary's life circumstances are the same.
Even if a reader of this news group identifies a problem issue in their case,
there might still be another problem issue that either was not dealt with in
the news group or is unique to their particular situation. Therefore it is
never a bad idea to run the case by an immigration attorney who can ask
questions and evaluate the case to point out all of the potential problems.
Your advice that nobody needs to consult with an attorney unless there is a
past criminal problem is just plain wrong and you are doing a disservice to the
readers by stating so. Not everybody's case has the same facts that yours did,
and I don't understand why you always get so upset with me for pointing out to
benefit of seeking legal advice before enbarking on a path that carries such
important life changes such as marriage.
>But your experience is no more valid than ours.
I agree, but my experience is different that yours in that I take steps to make
sure I'm up to date with the latest INS inter-office memos and policy decisions
and Department of State memos to the Consulates. I also have access to AILA
mentor attorneys when I run up against a case with an issue for which I don't
know the answer.
>Your
>quotes of what and how the INS should run and what was said
>at a convention is not relevant to those people that are
>trying to get their petitions completed and approved.
I disagree. The talks from each of the service center directors with tips about
what makes up a well documented petition versus and tips about processing at
the center is very relevant to the issues discussed in this group. There were
also officials from the Department of State discussing tips and the procedures
at the Consulates. How can you say this is not relevant?
>And I will standby my belief that as a
>whole this NG has helped more people navigate the INS system
>correctly and efficiently than a host of lawyers that have
>taken money for their services and done nothing but have a
>clerk in their office fill out the forms and mail them in.
I agree that the news group is a great resource for information, and if a
person hires an attorney who never talks to them to evaluate their situation
and instead only has the staff fill out their forms has not been of service to
the client. However I do evaluate a case to make sure any problem issues are
spotted, I fill out the forms myself, and most importantly I'll follow up with
the service centers and consulates if there is a problem with the case.
>But for now please stop lauding your profession over us.
Yes, I'm an attorney, and yes I make a living practicing law. I'm not lauding
my profession over you; rather I'm just trying to help with information that
the news group might not be aware of. I did not start this string about the
benefit of hiring an attorney, and I disagree with your apparent assumption
that nobody filing a fiancee visa will benefit form at least discussing their
case first with a qualified immigration attorney with experience with fiancee
and permanent resident cases.
Arnoud W. Morsink
: AILA has no monopoly on this information; it can be discovered by anybody,
: and the INS and Department of State certainly don't do out of their way to
: help AILA. AILA helps AILA members.
Your using the word 'discovered' seems pivotal. I believe Lisa's point was,
as the INS is supposed to provide a _service_, their policies shouldn't
have to be _discovered_. Now, you can follow all the rules and still face
problems or delays - because it turns out there are rules the INS didn't
tell you about. It doesn't seem fair people have to pay lawyers hefty fees
in order to get simple things done correctly - for routine cases, being
able to read and write, and just a little intelligence should be sufficient.
And all the NON-routine cases should still provide plenty of work for
immigration lawyers!
I guess Lisa will correct me if that was not her point :).
Arnoud
Targetmedi
s_u_...@onramp.net
wrote:
->In article <19990627194849...@ng-ch1.aol.com>,
->lisa...@aol.comsafe (LisaDtoo) wrote:
->
->> I already don't like the idea that attorneys have the right to
->> "privileged" information such as described by Mr. Udall, simply because they
->> are attorneys. The sort of information described by him ought to be public
->> knowledge, not information shared only with those capable of charging clients
->> exhorbitant (or even reasonable) fees in order to have access to it.
->
->Lisa,
->All the information refered to by Mr. Udall *is* public information -
->check the INS web-site and other sites, where every single regulation is
->available. Members of AILA don't have special access *because* they are
->attorneys - but because they pay membership dues to a professional
->organization which uses that money to research and disseminate information
->on the latest changes in law and proceedure. All professional
->organizations do the same.
->
->I have found that the same information is usually accessible on the web -
->sometimes even faster. And I do quite a lot of research on immigration
->case law and regulations as an Immigration Paralegal.
AHA!!! At last we hear from someone who does the 'real' work :)
Larry
->
->If you want to do the work yourself - fine, its quite possible for any
->intelligent, literate person to do a good job. But that doesn't mean that
->everyone can, or wants to.
->
->Regards,
->Helen
s_u_...@onramp.net
[snip all the above]
->Yes, I'm an attorney, and yes I make a living practicing law. I'm not lauding
->my profession over you; rather I'm just trying to help with information that
->the news group might not be aware of. I did not start this string about the
->benefit of hiring an attorney, and I disagree with your apparent assumption
->that nobody filing a fiancee visa will benefit form at least discussing their
->case first with a qualified immigration attorney with experience with fiancee
->and permanent resident cases.
->
->Best Regards,
->Matthew Udall
->Attorney
Mr. Udall:
The Trouble With Lawyers was a book written over thirty years ago - and the
problems listed in that book continue unabated today. I have no doubt that
you are a fine Immigration Attorney - unlike two I went to in my home town
who didn't know as much as I did about the process; one of whom is a member
of your immigration organization. The point is that there are a ton of bad
lawyers, either because they do not know the law, or because they fail to
organize themselves in a businesslike manner; the latter failure most often
the real culprit, as you well know.
The problem is the process. How does someone unversed in the process know
when the attorney is a turkey? . How does someone know that he just hired
a new paralegal - the real behind the scenes person who fills out most of
the forms and should know as much as the Attorney on routine matters? How
does someone know if he/she is worth the money paid? Fees for services
range all over the map - and even you haven't provided a total fee list.
What recourse do you have if your Attorney screws up? And please, don't
even mention Bar Association Grievance Committees. Those are a joke.
The problem is that there are way too many Law Schools cranking out way to
many Lawyers, all convinced that they can hit a home run and get rich. And
there is no mechanism to weed them out unless they go broke. Nor is there
any mechanism to help the very real humans who trust them with their lives,
their happiness and their money. And until the legal profession decides to
clean itself up - unlikely - that is the way it is going to be. Basically,
Lawyers have earned the low public esteem that exists today.
From reading through your postings, I would not hesitate to recommend
someone to you who had no patience for the process. While I do not know if
your business practices meet the standards of your immigration law
knowledge, I take it on faith that they do until proven otherwise simply
because from the flavor of your comments, I do not think you have
overlooked that equally vital part of your practice.
Rather than just telling us why we might need an Attorney, and hauling out
the horror stories, have you ever thought of putting together a check list
someone might use to determine if an Attorney is a) needed, or b) knows
what he/she is doing? How about a list of questions one might ask of an
Attorney to see if they knew what they were doing?
No question but what there are ample horror stories about people who should
have hired a good Attorney. And there are equally ample horror stories
about people who did - and everything in between, including crisis of
expectations.
There are many people who appreciate the pro bono help you have given them,
as they should. I appreciate the tack and diplomacy with which you have
defended what you do, and your profession - even though I think your
profession could use a good house cleaning. Where I do think your
sincerity would be most appreciated would be in the arena of a check list -
what to look for in a good Attorney for Immigration Law purposes - and a
list of areas where a good Attorney is an absolute must. Detail what the
client must furnish - including the leg work - and what you do, including
the leg work - so people understand what they get for what they pay.
Just a suggestion
Larry
Take the _'s out of the email address
Rete & Jim
attorney in any step of the INS process. My main problem
with your posts is not your answers or suggestions but the
fact that you tell people to e-mail you and then tell them
that for a $75.00 fee you will be happy to discuss their
case with them on the phone. This is a public forum Mr.
Udall and I resent the fact that you are using it primarily
for business purposes and by your insistence that any
problems encountered in the K-1 process requires the
services of an attorney. The people who utilize this forum
are basically quite young and naive and scared to death as
it is with dealing with a government entity that for all
intents and purposes holds their futures in their hands.
Whereas myself and others are trying to stay their fears
with assurances and information, I see that you are feeding
their fears by continually posting that an attorney is and
should be consulted for the K-1 process because of the many
pitfalls. This NG ran John Davis, retired from the INS,
from the room when he made it known that he would accept
clients, for a fee, but many here have the same mental
attitude in regards to attorneys that they have towards
doctors ... they place them on a pedestal. I wanted you to
know that to me you are not an all knowing being, that I
believe you do have a more indepth knowledge of the legal
aspects of immigration, but that I have little respect for
any person that uses a public forum for drumming up
business for his practice. If you had remained insistent
on the need for legal assistance in the filing of the I-130
and I-485 for petitioners that had overstayed visas and
married Americans, or who been denied or delayed during
some step of their process I would not have spoken out.
But when you consistently tell petitioners that the K-1
process requires legal handling, I see only someone in need
of increasing his practice rather than a successful
attorney who is busy working for existing clients.
These are my personal thoughts and opinions Mr. Udall. You
are free to post and assist and offer your private
services. I will continue to do so in the manner in which
I have for the past 15 months.
Good Day Mr. Udall
Wolf
Wolf (Austr"alian")
Visit our Website at
Rete & Jim <ret...@surfree.com> wrote in message
news:9307406...@www.remarq.com...
LisaDtoo
That was my point...:)
MDUdall
>The problem is the process. How does someone unversed in the process know
>when the attorney is a turkey?
The reality is there is no way to know for sure; however the best way I know of
is to arm yourself with as much knowledge about the process as you can then
spend some time with the attorney asking him or her questions about the process
to get a feeling if they know what they are doing. Also when the attorney gives
you his or her evaluation of the case, make sure you understand what he or she
means and see if this advice makes sense to you. Also, you can ask for
refrences from past clients who have given their consent to have their numbers
given out for this purpose.
>Fees for services
>range all over the map - and even you haven't provided a total fee list.
True, the fees do vary quite a bit. I've heard of one attorney who charges
$5000 for the fiancee process plus the permanent resident process, and another
who charges $1,800 for just the fiancee process and an extra $500 for each K-2
child. I have personaly prepared and submitted many fiancee petitions (upwards
of around 100) and I have a good idea of the amount of work that is envolved
and the fees quoted above don't seem at all reasonable to me; however I believe
my fees are reasonable for the amount of work required. I am a solo
practitioner and I do every bit of the work myself as I don't have a staff.
>What recourse do you have if your Attorney screws up?
If an attorney gives you bad advice or screws up the case which results in
damages, you could sue that attorney for the damages suffered. That's one
reason why I only post general information that the news group may not be aware
of as I believe it is reckless to perform case evaluation in an open forum such
as the ng. My advice for a particular client would be based on their unique
factual situation and I'd be afraid that someone else would use my posting as
legal advice for their case when it may not be appropriate to do so. Attorneys
should carry malpractice insurance, for their own protection but MOST
importantly to provide a remedy for a client who is damaged. I carry a policy
with Lawyers Mutual even though I've never needed to use it before. When bad
advice is given by a non-attorney or an attorney without coverage, this
protection in the form of insurance is not available. Of course, clients want
the job done right and don't find much comfort at the outset of a case in a
possible legal remedy from the attorney.
>to
>many Lawyers, all convinced that they can hit a home run and get rich.
When I decided to practice immigration law, I was told by a few different
immigration attorneys that I won't get rich in this area of practice. Now that
I've been doing it for 3 years, I'd have to agree. The big bucks are in other
areas, personal injury for example. Its true that I do make a living from my
practice, however most of my clients make more than I.
I chose to practice immigration law because I want to help people; and
sometimes it feels like I've actually saved someone's life. Yes I could make
more money being a corporate or some other type of attorney, but the
accumulation of wealth is not my primary motivation and I'd feel bad to win at
someone else's expense. With immigration law, I get to ware a "white hat" and
do battle against the government, not some other individual. Immigration law is
a real "feel-good" area of the law to practice in, and I've noticed at the AILA
conventions that most of the other AILA attorneys I've met got into it for the
same reasons.
>Basically,
>Lawyers have earned the low public esteem that exists today.
I agree. Do you have any good lawyer jokes? I love to hear them.
Here's one for you: The Pope and his lawyer die in a plane crash and are met at
the pearly gates by St. Peter. St. Peter says he can only process one at a time
so he asks the Pope to have a seat. The Pope looks on as he escorts the lawyer
into a huge mansion where he is greated by angles playing harps and peeling
grapes for him. When St. Peter returns he escorts the Pope to a somewhat plain
looking studio apartment. The Pope says, "I'm not complaining, but I'm curious.
I've spent my entire life helping others and I've been the leader of the church
for years; why the difference in treatment". St. Peter replies, "You have to
understand that you are the 187th Pope we've had up here, but he's the first
lawyer we've ever seen".
>have you ever thought of putting together a check list
>someone might use to determine if an Attorney is a) needed, or b) knows
>what he/she is doing? How about a list of questions one might ask of an
>Attorney to see if they knew what they were doing?
I've never thought of doing this before, and its not a bad idea however the
creation of a check list that would cover every possible factual situation
would be very difficult to create. Once its created it would be risky to use
because there is bound to be someone with a situation that was not covered by
the check list and they could possibly be damaged as a result by giving them a
false sense of security about their case. This relates back to my comment above
that it is dangerous to give blanket case evaluation in the ng because not
every body's case is the same.
There is another poster with whom I've been having an interesting debate about
the benefit of hiring an attorney for at least a consultation before starting
this process (by the way, I don't charge a consultation fee for those
interested in hiring me to prepare and file their paperwork. Lately I've also
been giving free consultations to readers in this ng who state right up front
they will be doing the work themselves. I'll keep doing so until it gets to the
point where it's cutting into the time I need to spend on my existing client's
cases). In one of her postings in this string her blanket advice to the world
is that it is a waste of time and money to even discuss the case with an
attorney unless there is a criminal issue. Not only is this incorrect (criminal
issues aren't the only thing that can cause fiancee visa denial) but in my
opinion it is reckless to give this sort of blanket advice without first having
the benefit of discussing the particular facts with a client to determine if
there are any other problem issues to take into consideration. I don't believe
this poster is an attorney, nor do I think she has an insurance policy to cover
the damages her less than accurate advice might cause the readers in this ng.
But I do want to state for the record that I do value her opinion as much as
anybody elses, and in our debate it is looking as though we'll have to agree to
disagree on this issue.
>Where I do think your
>sincerity would be most appreciated would be in the arena of a check list -
>what to look for in a good Attorney for Immigration Law purposes
Ask how many of these types of cases they prepared before and their success
rate. Ask then exactly what is and is not included in their services. Ask if
they have ever been sued before. Ask for refrences. Ask them what they do to
make sure they are using the most up to date information. Ask them if they are
a member of AILA. Ask them anything you can think of... if they are any good
they won't hesitate to answer.
MDUdall
>with your posts is not your answers or suggestions but the
>fact that you tell people to e-mail you and then tell them
>that for a $75.00 fee you will be happy to discuss their
This is simply not the case. When I invite someone to call me, its for a free
consultation. I want to state for the record that I have never, never invited
someone in this ng to call me then hit them up for a consultation fee.
Also, I do state on my fiancee visa page that I generally do not ask for a
consultation fee from fiancee callers who are interested in hiring me to do the
job for them. Lately, I've also been giving free consultations to readers of
the NG who state right up front that they are not interested in hiring me. I'll
continue to do this until it gets to the point where it cuts into the time I
need to spend with my existing cases.
>This is a public forum Mr.
>Udall and I resent the fact that you are using it primarily
>for business purposes and by your insistence that any
>problems encountered in the K-1 process requires the
>services of an attorney.
Yes, its obvious that you resent me.
Yes, I'm an attorney who practices in the area of immigration law and that's
how I make a living. I don't think I've said that every case requires an
attorney; but I do stand by me feelings that it isn't a bad idea to run your
case by an immigration attorney who has experience in these cases to see if he
or she can spot any problem issues the petitioner or beneficiary may not have
taken into consideration.
>This NG ran John Davis, retired from the INS,
>from the room
That is what it feels like you are trying to do to me. I'm just trying to help.
>I wanted you to
>know that to me you are not an all knowing being,
I don't profess to have all the answers, especially in this day and age where
the INS does not implement regulations to follow. Instead immigration attorneys
must sometimes base their opinions on the latest INS memo from the INS
headquarters, or the latest memos from the Department of State, or from case
law. When I run into an issue and I don't know what to do, I'll contact one of
the hundreds of AILA mentor attorneys who are experts in a particular area for
advice.
In one of your eariler postings you mentioned you work at a law firm and have
access to Matthew Benders library. Matthew Bender publishes (twice a month) and
immigration booklet which should contain all of these memos and information.
Check it out. I subscribe to West's library and rely on the staff at AILA to
dig up this information for me.
>you consistently tell petitioners that the K-1
>process requires legal handling
If that's the message you taken from my postings they you have misinterpreted
my statements. I've stated over and over again that most petitioners get
petition approval, and most beneficiarys are issued their visas; however I
stand by me belief there is a benefit in checking with a qualified immigration
attorney who can evaluate the case to help identify problem issues.
I've enjoyed our debate on the issure of the benefit of hiring an attorney, and
I appreciate your opinion. I don't think either of us are going to convince the
other so why don't we call a truce and simply agree to disagree about this
issue. I'm willing.
Helen Parsonage
<57FCFB4DC8AB25AE.179DEEC7...@lp.airnews.net>,
s_u_...@onramp.net wrote:
> What recourse do you have if your Attorney screws up? And please, don't
> even mention Bar Association Grievance Committees. Those are a joke.
>
I really have to disagree here. I strongly urge *anyone* with a problem
with their attorney (lost paperwork, incompetence, holding papers hostage
for fees etc.) to call the State Bar for advice. At least here in North
Carolina, they are extremely helpful, and have brochures outlining
different avenues for complaints. In my case (well before I became a
paralegal myself), simply writing to my attorney stating clearly the
grounds for my dissatisfaction, what redress I wanted, and telling her I
had been in touch with the State Bar was sufficient : - )
Regards,
Helen
MDUdall
Thanks for your comment about my posting.
>Your using the word 'discovered' seems pivotal. I believe Lisa's point was,
>as the INS is supposed to provide a _service_, their policies shouldn't
>have to be _discovered_. Now, you can follow all the rules and still face
>problems or delays - because it turns out there are rules the INS didn't
>tell you about.
Believe me I too wish there was a single book or website I could go to, or an
instruction sheet I could follow that gave everything I needed to know and took
into account the entire up to date body of immigration law, regulations,
current INS policy decisions and case decisions, the content of the Foreign
Affairs Manual, etc., but it just does not exist nor do I think it will any
time soon. Especially if it will be the INS to create this. After all, look how
long it takes INS to simply issue new version of forms that state the current
INS filing fee's (they announce these types of changes in the Federal Register,
but who here reads that on a daily basis?).
The closest thing I've found is to maintain a complete immigration library
including many of the specialized manuals published by AILA, reading the
monthly AILA publications, checking the AILA information network every day and
by calling on other immigration attorneys who are experts in their particular
field when needed (Just so you'll know, I've also incorporated some valuable
information from this news group too; thanks!). AILA also has a website I can
access where they publish daily critical news items, case decisions, INS
information, INS policy decisions and developments, and Department of State
memos and developments. There is also the AILA equivalent of this ng that AILA
members use to question each other with postings about various immigration
topics, visas and other options. (I discovered the news about the new INS
filiing fees on AILA infonet long before the new fees went into effect last
October, and I immediately passed this information on to this ng).
Sometimes INS policy will change due to an act of Congress and sometimes due to
case adjudication in the immigration courts (which is always ongoing). Also
memos from the INS chief counsel Paul Vertue (sp? ) have provided very valuable
information about changing INS policy and INS implementation of the law. Even
with the easy of publication on the web, keeping up with and publishing every
development for every issue would be a very difficult and time consuming task.
The INS chief counsel would be a good candidate to build and maintain this
site. Maybe someday INS will utilize the net to provide the sort of thing you
and Lisa have mentioned, but until that day comes we are stuck with the system
we have.
I used the word discovered because keeping up with it all requires digging and
constant attention. Attorneys are in the same boat as non-attorneys when it
comes to dealing with the INS. If there were no grey areas, unanswered
questions or changes in INS policy it would make my job much easier too;
however the reality is we are dealing with a system that is in flux and will
always be in flux so we have no choice but to deal with it the best we can.
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
Leonette
I've kept silent during this ongoing thread mainly due to the fact of my
less than satisfactory results of the immigrations attorney that we had
hired, and did not want to bash you or your new law practice in the
midst of it.
But, after reading your post here, i'm gritting my teeth, and maybe i'll
regret doing this later, but i'm just fed up with the whole thing now in
regards to attorneys geniune desire to help, or the geniune desire to
increase their clientele.
Yes, I do understand that you work for a living, and yes I understand
that all attorneys have costs, that it takes time to evaluate a
prospective client's case, for each has a different scenerio. Yes I
understand time is money, and yes I understand that you are new to your
profession and need to build your client base and track record.
However, you state here that you have never hit anyone up for a
consultation fee, that they are free if you choose to hire you.
Please see below for the email that you sent me:
<start of email>
Subject:
Reply
Date:
Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:49:55 EDT
From:
MDU...@aol.com
To:
sa...@supernet.com
Matthew Udall
Attorney at Law
64 Gough Street, Suite F
San Francisco, California 94102
e-mail: MDU...@aol.com
phone (415) 431-7657
fax (415) 255-1897
June 21st, 1999
Leonette Miles
sa...@supernet.com
Dear Ms. Miles,
Thank you for contacting me with your questions.
I am happy to discuss your case with you, answer your questions and
provide
you with specific advice about your options; however I charge $75.00 to
perform this consultation service. I need to briefly go over your
situation
with you on the telephone before I can render my opinion.
If this is acceptable to you, call my office for your consultation. I
prefer
to receive consultation calls between 3 and 5 PM pacific time. If I’m
away
from the desk when you call, please leave your name and number and I
will
reply as soon as possible.
After we have talked and I have analyzed your case and given my opinion,
I
will send you a bill for the consultation fee. You can pay with your
personal
check issued from a bank doing business in the U.S.
If after your consultation you decide to hire me to perform some
additional
legal services for you, I will credit your consultation payment toward
the
attorneys fees for the other services.
I look forward to your call.
Best Regards,
MATTHEW UDALL
<end of email>
When I wrote you initially, I explained to you that I was not satisfied
with the atty. that we have, and that we could not afford another. I
received the above email as your response, and I responded by chosing
not to call you and hire you at this time ONLY because of the lack of
funds to do so. You were gracious in the fact that you replied by
telling me you understood and gave me the name of an attorney that I
could call, but he too works for a living and would charge.
It appears that all the attorneys have all the answers.
It appears that they dangle the answers in front of you stating
that yes they can help you, for a fee.
It appears that unless you can afford it, then the additional help
needed is out of reach.
It has come to the point that it feels as if the critical information
needed is being thrown in my face, teasing me with the answers and being
yanked away due to that fact that I can not pay for them.
You may feel that i'm being childish, but what you must keep in mind is
that you are dealing with life changing issues, that everyone in this
newsgroup has the same fears as I. Although most have not had to deal
with a fiance that has had a problem in the past with a conviction which
triples the risk and triples the stress.
You must realize that to tease with answers that could make or break a
family unity is not acceptable. Your posts are general, and you appear
to want to offer your help.
This is a newsgroup for support, help, answers, and a
dwelling place to seek out others that have or are going through the
same thing, and with that it is a place for finding hope. If you
My suggestion is that if you wish to increase your client base then you
might want to consider where you are posting and offer more of your
knowledge while indeed you are learning from us as you do.
You too are being fed an abundance of knowledge and experience from
*lifers* here who have survived it, and are going through it, and with a
vast array of different incidences. You are benefiting from us, so, in
return, if you choose to remain a presence here, offer more of what you
are professionally trained to do. Help those that seek it, do not tease
with partially clouded bites of info then tell them if you want the rest
of the answers, *hire me*.
Nothing wrong in trolling for business, but please remember that you are
dealing with folks in critical times of their lives here. I am sure you
can help many here, and in return you will either be hired, or your name
given to others as needs arise. You will be benefited, but, you must
remember this is a *support* group of shared knowledge and experience
that does not charge for that info...it is given freely in hopes of
helping others.
Build you client base by offering more than a morsel, make your presence
here one that can be respected and passed on to those in need, this
newsgroup is accessible to the masses that continue to seek the help
that is needed and with technology growing as it is, the international
lines have been removed via the internet, and your profession will be in
great need as time goes on.
I do wish you the best of luck in your law practice, but in return,
please just remember where you are posting. Most are hungry for answers
and most will not have already had the bad experience with immigration
attorneys. But also remember there are those of us that have, and will
do everything we can to help.....freely.
Leonette (PA) & Claude (Ottawa, Canada)
In article <19990630194918...@ng-ce1.aol.com>,
> Best Regards,
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/index.htm
>
--
Our Destiny awaits, just beyond the Border Of
INSanity.
http://www2.gdi.net/~skye/destiny.html
John Minners
John & Deb
LMWarnock
don't like attorneys soliciting for clients in here because those who really
don't need an attorney may feel pressured into getting one if they encounter
some difficulties or have some confusion.
I have nothing against Mr. Udall personally, but I feel that if he wishes to
continue to post in this newsgroup, he should be willing to give free advice
(which he has to some extent) and answer people questions if there is a simple
answer and he knows
it.
If the person's situation is obviously complicated and requires the assistance
of an immigration attorney, I see no reason why he shouldn't offer his
services. However, (and I can't stress this enough) this is a forum primarily
for advice, not for obtaining business. I hope all attorneys who frequent this
NG will respect that.
Laura
MDUdall
Thanks for your comment on my posting.
>However, you state here that you have never hit anyone up for a
>consultation fee, that they are free if you choose to hire you.
No, thats not what I stated. What I said is when I post an invitation to a ng
member for them to call me, my invitation is for a free consultation. I don't
believe I ever posted such an invitation to you on the news group. Granted, I
also said I've just lately (over the past 3 days or so) been doing my best to
perform free consultations for members of the ng as long as it did not cut into
the time I need to spend on my existing cases. Your original letter to me came
in on the 20th, before I had made the decision to do free consults if time
allowed.
The e-mail you sent to me detailed a very, very complicated situation envolving
3 convictions and 4 unrelated arrests in a foreign country. You also mentioned
an outstanding warrant here in the U.S. for your fiancee.
So, sense I had not offered to do a free consultation, and sense answering your
questions would require many hours of research of the criminal law statutes of
the other country, I felt it was a situation where charging my standard
consultation fee of $75.00 was warranted (Of course, if after the consultation
you retained my services to perform some sort of legal work for you, I would
have credited the entire consultation fee toward the legal fees for those
additional services). And yes, that's when I sent my standard consultation
reply to you that you have now posted to this ng.
Then you replied back to me stating that you already have retained an attorney
to work for you on your case, but that you would still be interested in my
opinion however you were unwilling to pay my $75.00 consultation fee.
In my final reply to this last letter, I indicated I respected your decision
not to hire me to do the work necessary to perform the consultation.
Since I knew your case involved the analysis of the laws of another country,
and since I knew that without spending hours researching this matter I was not
qualified to comment, I instead referred you to another AILA attorney I met in
Seattle who lives and practices in the other country. I mentioned that sense he
practices in that country he might be a great source of information about the
foreign arrests and convictions, and sense he is a member of AILA he should
also be able to give you advice about the consequences of these arrests and
convictions. I pointed out that he too may want to charge a consultation fee,
but that was out of my control. Finally, sense you were dissatisfied with the
performance of your present attorney, I mentioned that you might want to
reconsider your decision about not wanting to hire another attorney for at
least a consultation.
So I believe I treated you fairly and with honesty. I never invited you to call
me for free consultation then hit you up for a consultation fee. Even after you
declined my offer I still went out of my way to send you the name and number of
an AILA attorney who should be able to help you with the foreign arrests and
convictions and I wished you well
>I do wish you the best of luck in your law practice
I appreciate your best wishes. I too wish for you the resolution of your case
that you want.
I used to visit this ng for only a short while about a year ago, but I stopped
visiting because I got the feeling that I was being flamed for being one of
those dreadful attorneys that everybody seems to love to hate. I've only been
back to this ng for a couple of weeks now, and I'm careful to only post general
information that I think the ng might not be aware of. I do my best to avoid
performing case evaluations in an open forum as to do so would be risky in that
someone else might read the posting and rely on it as legal advice for their
case when it might not be appropriate to do so.
I'm only stating this again because I want to be clear about my motives in
visiting here. I want to help people get through the immigration process. It
makes me feel good to do so, and I really like what I do for a living (unlike
most other types of attorneys). If my posting of general info, such as the new
INS fees or the new CSC JIT reporting system has help the do-it-yourselfer's
then I'm happy to have helped. My practice has already grown (not from this ng)
to the point where there are barely enough hours in the day to keep up with the
work. I'm posting general information here as an offering of goodwill to the
ng. I'm not trying to drum up business here, and if it will make the readers
feel any better then I say "please don't hire me".
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
Leonette
> >consultation fee, that they are free if you choose to hire you.
>
to a ng
I don't
> believe I ever posted such an invitation to you on the news group.
Granted, I
> also said I've just lately (over the past 3 days or so) been doing my
best to
> perform free consultations for members of the ng as long as it did not
cut into
> the time I need to spend on my existing cases. Your original letter to
me came
> in on the 20th, before I had made the decision to do free consults if
time
> allowed.
******Oh...so your advice is by invitation only....*gotcha*.
> The e-mail you sent to me detailed a very, very complicated situation
envolving
> 3 convictions and 4 unrelated arrests in a foreign country. You also
mentioned
> an outstanding warrant here in the U.S. for your fiancee.
****** 3 spent 9 year year old convictions that were long due for
pardon, and 4 arrests 10 years ago that were erased due to aquittals,
and one warrant here yes because he could not show for a court date here
because he was refused entry at the border because they thought he was
coming to work for me! (If I only owned my own buisness I think I would
have hired him and went that route!)
> So, sense I had not offered to do a free consultation, and sense
answering your
> questions would require many hours of research of the criminal law
statutes of
> the other country, I felt it was a situation where charging my
standard
> consultation fee of $75.00 was warranted (Of course, if after the
consultation
> you retained my services to perform some sort of legal work for you, I
would
> have credited the entire consultation fee toward the legal fees for
those
> additional services). And yes, that's when I sent my standard
consultation
> reply to you that you have now posted to this ng.
******* I did not state that the consultation fee was not warranted.
In fact re-read my post, I said I understood that.
> Then you replied back to me stating that you already have retained an
attorney
> to work for you on your case, but that you would still be interested
in my
> opinion however you were unwilling to pay my $75.00 consultation fee.
***** No...I told you I had an immigrations atty. in my first initial
email to you, and told you that I could not afford another. I did reply
again, thanked you but also told you again I could not afford it but
would if I could.
> me for free consultation then hit you up for a consultation fee.
****** I never spoke that you treated *me* unfairly. I took it upon my
self to mail you, with details to see if you could help us. Since I saw
you broadcasting and leaving your calling card in this public forum I
felt that I too could mail you.
Even
after you
> declined my offer I still went out of my way to send you the name and
number of
> an AILA attorney who should be able to help you with the foreign
arrests and
> convictions and I wished you well
***** Yes you did, you went *way* out of your way to give me another
lawyers info to call, thank you.
****** "please don't hire me"....Hey...that was pretty good advice!
Leonette
> Best Regards,
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/fiancee.htm
MDUdall
a fee for my services and I was way out of line for trying to recommend another
attorney who may be qualified to help you. I apologize.
Since it is obvious to all here that I'm only interested in filling my pockets
with your hard earned money, I'll keep my general information to my self and
won't bother this ng any more.
Sorry for my butting in where I'm not wanted or needed. Good by ng.
Matthew Udall
Mark and Lyanne
want to go. Many others value the information and insight you have shared
with us, as seen in other posts. I, for one, would be sorry to see you go.
An easy solution is to put people you don't like on ignore - it works for
me. Many of us who have been on this ng for any length of time have had
run-ins with other people; not long ago I almost gave up the ng after some
really nasty email messages about something I posted, but now I'm glad I
stayed - I'm not going to give up something I value because of someone
else's bad attitude.
Whatever you decide to do, I wish you well in your endeavours and thank you
again for adding to the pool of knowledge found here. I personally think we
all need every piece of information we can get when dealing with the INS.
Lyanne
p.s. hope everyone realizes that I'm NOT taking sides in the argument that
prompted Mr. Udall's post - just wanted to let him know that I would be
sorry to see him go
MDUdall
I tried sending you this reply without posting it to the ng however it was
returned to me as undeliverable, so I guess I'll post it here instead.
I just wanted to say thank you so much for your words of support. You don't
know how much it means to me right now to have a little positive feedback. I've
got feelings too and I've been pretty devistated by Ms. Miles flames for my
interactions with her.
I'm really only trying to help with general info that might be found useful by
the ng. So far, I don't think my time and effort in the ng has resulted in dime
one for me; but that's OK as I was not doing this for clients. I realize the
posters in the ng are doing the job themselves and won't be hiring me, but I
wanted to pass along some useful info anyway.
I just got married myself, and I really enjoy helping couples during this happy
time of their lives; but I really don't know how much more I can stand (the
flames that is). Lately, I've had to defend my presence every day and it's
really taking a toll on my feelings.
Anyway, thank you again for your kind words.
SumrRainbo
>really taking a toll on my feelings.
>
>Anyway, thank you again for your kind words.
>
Just wanted to also say thanks , Mr.Udall for helping me clear up quite a few
questions Ive had here.. Your replys have always been speedy, and pretty much
to the point... Please stick around... I think you can help us, as well as we
can help you also...
Much thanks !!
Karen (US) Iain(UK)
I would be a procrastinator but I keep putting it off.
JD99
did not understand why you were arguing with people over whether or not
legal counsel is needed. At times it is, other times it is not. Perhaps,
if you just discussed legal issues and let people decide for themselves if
they need a lawyer, then the people who did not like your presence here will
not flame you. If you do decide to leave, thanks for sharing the
information with us while you were here.
MDUdall wrote in message <19990701170302...@ng-cf1.aol.com>...
Leonette
I'm kinda shocked to see your reaction.
Mr. Udall, I seriously suggest that you should learn how to debate on
issues, especially if you feel you are right and beleive in something.
I'd hate to think that these short series of posts got your feathers
this ruffled...wonder what will happen when you have to stand in front
of an INS officer in a debate or a case for your client. I hope that
you will take a better stance for your client than you did for yourself
here.
I never told you to leave, I said over and over that you could be very
helpful here, if you offered more of your knowledge in the fashion that
this NG is built on. By helping freely with what you can, while you
learn from us as you witness lives going through what your career is all
about. by you being a part of this group, I can't think of a better way
to get experience other than going through it yourself.
You seem like a good guy, a hungry young attorney, and you've found a NG
that can be a lot of help to you, as you can help us. I guess the
things got off on the wrong foot when the majority of posts we've seen
is..."I can help, call me"......you must remember that people will
either be leary of it, or jump right to it and call you. Either way,
your name will be spread, your career will get some free advertising,
and hopefully everyone will benefit.
But, I think you really took this way too hard, and became way too
defensive, way too fast.
Don't leave on my account....i'm sure there are tons of people here that
flame me, or perhaps praise me.....but who cares? If you have a
geniune desire to help this ng...stay..and do so.
Leonette
In article <19990701170302...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
mdu...@aol.com (MDUdall) wrote:
> Your right, I'm just a scum-bag attorney. I have absolutely no right
to charge
> a fee for my services and I was way out of line for trying to
recommend another
> attorney who may be qualified to help you. I apologize.
>
> Since it is obvious to all here that I'm only interested in filling my
pockets
> with your hard earned money, I'll keep my general information to my
self and
> won't bother this ng any more.
>
> Sorry for my butting in where I'm not wanted or needed. Good by ng.
>
> Matthew Udall
>
--
Leonette
I didn't mean to devastate you Mr. Udall.
I can't beleive you are taking this so hard!
Come on....this was a civilized exchange, I honestly
can't comprehend an attorney be devasted by what I wrote...
in fact that is pretty bad...i'm not a mean person...
i'm just in one of the most difficult times of my life, as you
will find that you will be dealing with a lot of people like me
as you go down your chosen career path. I really hope that you won't
let debates like this wear you down so easy. I honestly did not mean
to hurt your feelings, I was stating fact, and personal opinion, and I
really don't have anythin against you. I said some nice things about you
actually, I called you gracious, and I thanked you and wished you luck
with each mail and post. But stating my view should not beat you down
like this.
*sigh*
Leonette
In article <19990701193425...@ng-cj1.aol.com>,
> flames that is). Lately, I've had to defend my presence every day and
it's
> really taking a toll on my feelings.
>
> Anyway, thank you again for your kind words.
>
> Best Regards,
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
>
>
--
John Minners
I sure hope yopu don't give up this easily in an actual
Courtroom!!!!! I DO agree that the idea of someone coming to this NG and
selling their services is not an acceptable one. Many of the people here are
scared, desperate, and in some cases English Illiterate. It smacks of taking
advantage to me. Now having said that I will say that I don't know that
you've ever done that.
If, as you say, you are only here to offer advice then please do not
frighten off so easily. Your input could very well be invaluable to some
poor soul trying to scurry their way thru this maze. If, in all honest, you
really are here to promote your business then I too wish that you would go
away. I believe it's been the experience of the long term members of this
news group that this process can, in most cases, be handled without the need
for an attorney. Take care and Good Luck whatever your decision.
MDUdall wrote in message <19990701170302...@ng-cf1.aol.com>...
>
Hans
very valuable information. And while this is a forum for free advice,
I understand that you have to charge a fee (pretty modest from what I
have seen with other laywers) for more complicated cases, if somebody
requests more than general advice.
Thanks for your help, Mr. Udall
MDUdall
>defensive, way too fast.
Ms. Miles, I reacted the way I did due to the postings you put up about our
dealings with each other. I've been doing nothing but trying to offer free
general information, and I've even invited a few posters to give me a call if
they want, and when they do I do not first ask them if they will agree to pay a
consultation fee. I've given them advice even though they have made it quite
clear they won't be hiring me.
In your case I had not sent you this type of invitation; you wrote me on your
own with a very difficult case where I felt a consultation fee was warranted.
In one of your postings, you pasted my standard consultation reply letter
immediately below my statement that I've never invited anybody from the ng to
call then hit them up for a consultation fee. I took this as an attempt on
your part to make me look like a liar to the ng. It was very embarrassing, and
yes it was devistating to be made to look like a liar to the ng at large.
Then I wrote you a reply to explain to you that it simply was not true; that I
didn't invited you to call me for free then hit you up for a consultation
fee. Your reply, that I went *way* out of my way to help you and that I had
given good advice (when I tried to prove my clean motivations) by stating
people from the ng should not hire me was sarcastic and mean.
I've been working hard to build and maintain a good reputation and I did not
appreciate your blatant attempt to try and tear that down.
Alvena Ferreira
>
> MD,
> I sure hope yopu don't give up this easily in an actual
> Courtroom!!!!! I DO agree that the idea of someone coming to this NG and
> selling their services is not an acceptable one. Many of the people here are
> scared, desperate, and in some cases English Illiterate. It smacks of taking
> advantage to me.
I'm sorry, but I see nothing wrong with someone who is scared,
desperate, and/or illiterate obtaining the services of an
attorney--frankly, this is the type of person who may benefit the most.
If that person is not educated adequately, or not literate enough to
follow form directions, or if his/her anxiety level is too great, then
an attorney might be exactly what he/she needs. I say, if they have the
money and want the help, then who am I (or anyone else) to tell them not
to do that?
While I do not personally think that the "average" k-1 visa process is
something that requires attorney assistance, not every person is
intellectually adequate, skilled in paperwork, or in how to help
themselves in this type of situation. If they are not meeting that need
through this group, then they should look elsewhere, and a good
immigration attorney would certainly be the appropriate person to go to.
alvena
Leonette
> In one of your postings, you pasted my standard consultation reply
letter
> immediately below my statement that I've never invited anybody from
the ng to
> call then hit them up for a consultation fee. I took this as an
attempt on
> your part to make me look like a liar to the ng. It was very
embarrassing, and
> yes it was devistating to be made to look like a liar to the ng at
large.
OK...you want to play on words, I can do that...you stated that you
never asked for a consultation fee to Rita's post..I took it for what it
read...that you never asked anyone from the newsgroup for a consultation
fee. The way you want to skew words, phrases, to keep you in or out of
the loopholes is just fine with me, but please do not insult my
intelligence by trying to rearrange what you wrote. I can understand if
we both mis-read what was posted, and maybe that is exactly what it is.
However...I only replied to your statement, and you being a lawyer
should appreciate proof, and forthrightness, and a good debate if i'm
wrong. I am certainly not perfect, and I do apologize again for
devastating you. That was NOT intentional.
>
> fee. Your reply, that I went *way* out of my way to help you and that
I had
> given good advice (when I tried to prove my clean motivations) by
stating
> people from the ng should not hire me was sarcastic and mean.
I emphasized that the word *way* because you accentuated the fact that
you went way out of your way and did me a great favor by giving me
another attoney's name. Which I didn't understand why, since you knew
from my very first email that I was in no financial way to hire you,
much less some other lawyer.
And I only agreed and went along with your childish rant...I did not
tell anyone in the NG not to hire you...I merely said that you gave good
advice. That reply about you being a scumbag attorney that you made
about yourself was very unethical if I must say.
> I've been working hard to build and maintain a good reputation and I
did not
> appreciate your blatant attempt to try and tear that down.
>
I'm sorry, I did not attempt to do that. But your reactions to this
thread have done a pretty good job of it to your self.
In closing this Mr.Udall, I'd just like to say I honestly do not have
anything against you, and if you will go back and re-read my posts, you
will see alot of good in them, and many times said that you would be a
great asset to this NG ...as you learn from us, we learn from you...if
you give in the nature this NG was built upon.
Now...I am done with this thread, if you wish to harbor ill feelings
here i'm sorry, but I again will restate...I have nothing against
you..and if you wish to stay here and offer your
assistance...great!....if not..I wish you the best of luck in your law
practice.
Leonette
> Matthew Udall
> Attorney
> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall/index.htm
>
--
Our Destiny awaits, just beyond the Border Of
INSanity.
http://www2.gdi.net/~skye/destiny.html
Ann
But do develop a thicker skin--these are incredibly stressed out people who
are constantly worrying about the most important thing in their lives
(reuniting with or continuing to be with the one they love). We're all
constantly being reminded by the INS's often arbitrary and cruel decisions
that NONE of us are on solid ground--many of us have looked our entire lives
for the kind of love we've found with our spouses or fiance(e)s, and it's
quite anxiety provoking to be continually reminded that they could be torn
from our lives at any time, just because some bureaucrat is having a bad
day.
It's a terrifying thing, and even though we can sometimes ignore it, for me,
it's never completely out of my mind--and I have one of the easiest cases
(married to a Canadian in Canada, we've stayed in Canada for the precessing,
and we have a new baby together).
So relax--there should be at least one calm person posting here, and it's
rarely going to be me.
;)
Ann
--
Living well may be the best revenge, but it doesn't turn up in all that many
opera plots.
MDUdall <mdu...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990701193425...@ng-cj1.aol.com...
shannon friedrichs
I have honestly worried about this situation arising since you first appeared.
Your advise has been great. You have gone out of your way to provide free legal
advice to the general public. But I also felt that eventually you would run into
someone that was in a high emotional state because their case was not working well,
and you as a lawyer would be an open target. I dont know what you should do. I
look for your post daily as instructional even in matters that dont concern my
case. It has been very educational. (at one time I studied as a paralegal but
decided to let it go by..I'm retired and dont need the agrivation and will not
sacrifice my every available hour to a law firm). But I know this is very likely
to happen again and I'm not sure that someone in the future will attempt to attack
you even beyond this newsgroup. Be careful of some jerk off getting the notion
that they can file a malpractice suit against you. They probably wont win. But
they can be very annoying. Whatever your decision, thank you for your FREE advice
and the FREE education that you have provided to so many of us.
Richard
cyn...@empireone.net
"cover sheet" mentioned for the first time (since I joined this
group) Please tell me what it is for and what should be stated on
it.... thankyou
LMWarnock
>"cover sheet" mentioned for the first time (since I joined this
>group) Please tell me what it is for and what should be stated on
>it.... thankyou
I think what most people mean by a cover sheet, is just a letter to the INS
(and who knows if they'll actually read it!) itemizing what you've included,
and possibly giving some more details about you and your fiance(e).
It is not a requirment, and many people have been approved without using one.
Good luck,
Laura
Arnoud W. Morsink
:> immediately below my statement that I've never invited anybody from
:> the ng to call then hit them up for a consultation fee. I took this
:> as an attempt on your part to make me look like a liar to the ng. It
:> was very embarrassing
: OK...you want to play on words, I can do that...you stated that you
: never asked for a consultation fee to Rita's post..I took it for what it
: read...that you never asked anyone from the newsgroup for a consultation
: fee. The way you want to skew words, phrases, to keep you in or out of
: the loopholes is just fine with me, but please do not insult my
: intelligence by trying to rearrange what you wrote.
He wasn't. He wrote to Rita exactly what he said he wrote:
= This is simply not the case. When I invite someone to call me, its for a free
= consultation. I want to state for the record that I have never, never invited
= someone in this ng to call me then hit them up for a consultation fee.
We all get a little worked up at one time or another, but if you accuse
someone, you'd better get your facts straight first.
Arnoud
ri...@infoave.net
doesn't hurt either below is a copy of the cover letter we used.. in the
top right hand corner was the days and my address..
________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Ma’am or Sir:
Immigration and Naturalization Service
Texas Center
PO Box 850965
Mesquite, Texas 75185-0965
My name is Kendra Jean Auberger. I am filing a I-129F, “Petition For
Alien Fiancé`”. My fiancé`, Lawrence, and I have met in person within
the last two years. Neither of us have been married before, and are
therefore free to marry each other. We would like to be married October
23, 1999, as it is a very special day to both of us. This date would be
within our 6 month time period after we would receive approval from the
Sydney Consulate. We would also be married within the 90 day time
period, allowed with the K-1 visa, after Lawrence’s entering the USA.
Included in this package are the following items:
Cover Letter
I-129F Petition , with continuation sheet for question number 19.
G325 A, one filled out by myself, and one filled out by my fiancé`.
Signed and dated statements by both of us verifying that all copies are
of unaltered originals.
2 color photos of myself and 2 of my fiancé` (Lawrence), both with the
proper name penciled lightly on the back. Each photo was taken
within 30 days of this petition.
A check for 95 US dollars made payable to: Immigration and
Naturalization Service
Copies of both the US citizen’s (Kendra) birth certificate and my
fiance`’s (Australian).
You will also find the following items as supporting proof of our
relationship:
Copies of fiance`’s ticket stubs from his trip here as well as copies
of the Itinerary.
Copies of 2 different phone bills.
5 colored photos, 4 from my fiance`’s visit to the US, and 1 is our
Engagement photo.
A copy of the song he wrote for me, one on paper and the other on tape.
2 disks, one containing a program we use to chat with, the other
program we use can be found at: http://www.icq.com. The second disk
contains two more color photos of us, a program that was made and
sent to us by my father counting down the days until our hopeful wedding
day, and a copy of the Engagement Announcement card we’ve sent
to all our friends and relatives.
A copied picture of the wedding dress I am making as well as a copy of
the verified card for the tuxedo rentals.
The receipt for the engagement ring my fiancé` bought me while he was
in the US.
A personal letter written to my fiancé` from myself, and one he wrote
to me.
Thank you very much for your time,
Kendra Auberger
Alvena Ferreira
However, if you plan to send copies and don't have the "official" form
for doing that, the cover letter is also a nice place to include that
statement about "copies enclosed are true copies of the originals...."
before you sign it.
alvena
Leonette
his email to me, and also stated there was a 75 dollar consultation fee.
those are facts and those are straight....right out of his own mouth.
In article <377e18af$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
--
Our Destiny awaits, just beyond the Border Of
INSanity.
http://www2.gdi.net/~skye/destiny.html
shannon friedrichs
time trough all our subsiquent meetings...if there are any special
circumstances explain them here....anything that you would explain to an
immigration officer over the phone or in person...write it out...
you might want to attach everything together with a two prong clip at
the top...i think they are called acco clips...you can also create an
index put under the coversheet....and index the different sections....if
you are sending a bunch of pictures.....put them in a clear
envelope....write the dates on the back and where they are taken...if
you have pics of your fiance or you with other family members identify
them.....i put tabs at the bottom of mine to break it up into sections
to match the index....if you are sending original documents up at the
top write original or copy so they will know the diff..sometimes its not
that easy to tell...just some thoughs...
richard
cyn...@empireone.net wrote:
> Okay folks... I'm about to send my application in and have seen a
> "cover sheet" mentioned for the first time (since I joined this
> group) Please tell me what it is for and what should be stated on
> it.... thankyou
>
s_u_...@onramp.net
I take exception to what you said for a practical reason. While I am not a
big fan of lawyers due to personal experiences with incompetence and sheer
stupidity, there are times when you do need a good one.
Here is my point.
Udall, through his posts, has proven that he knows what he is doing. I
have read a good many of them, and if I needed an attorney, would not
hesitate to hire him - over someone unproven.
I don't know if there is a governing FAQ or charter for this group; such is
not common for alt. groups. If there were, it would likely include
provision for the solicitation of business provided that the posts were
relevant and also provided free advice. That is the usual custom in these
types of groups. I have been on Usenet for over 8 years, and even in the
more tightly run groups outside of the near chaos that rules alt. groups,
what Udall is doing is very common, and almost always within the rules.
My 2 centavos worth
Larry
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 03:04:01 -0800, Rete & Jim <ret...@surfree.com> wrote:
->I have no problem with anyone who wishes to consult an
->attorney in any step of the INS process. My main problem
->with your posts is not your answers or suggestions but the
->fact that you tell people to e-mail you and then tell them
->that for a $75.00 fee you will be happy to discuss their
->case with them on the phone. This is a public forum Mr.
->Udall and I resent the fact that you are using it primarily
->for business purposes and by your insistence that any
->problems encountered in the K-1 process requires the
->services of an attorney. The people who utilize this forum
->are basically quite young and naive and scared to death as
->it is with dealing with a government entity that for all
->intents and purposes holds their futures in their hands.
->Whereas myself and others are trying to stay their fears
->with assurances and information, I see that you are feeding
->their fears by continually posting that an attorney is and
->should be consulted for the K-1 process because of the many
->pitfalls. This NG ran John Davis, retired from the INS,
->from the room when he made it known that he would accept
->clients, for a fee, but many here have the same mental
->attitude in regards to attorneys that they have towards
->doctors ... they place them on a pedestal. I wanted you to
->know that to me you are not an all knowing being, that I
->believe you do have a more indepth knowledge of the legal
->aspects of immigration, but that I have little respect for
->any person that uses a public forum for drumming up
->business for his practice. If you had remained insistent
->on the need for legal assistance in the filing of the I-130
->and I-485 for petitioners that had overstayed visas and
->married Americans, or who been denied or delayed during
->some step of their process I would not have spoken out.
->But when you consistently tell petitioners that the K-1
->process requires legal handling, I see only someone in need
->of increasing his practice rather than a successful
->attorney who is busy working for existing clients.
->
->These are my personal thoughts and opinions Mr. Udall. You
->are free to post and assist and offer your private
->services. I will continue to do so in the manner in which
->I have for the past 15 months.
->
->Good Day Mr. Udall
->
->
->
->
->**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
s_u_...@onramp.net
Put yourself in the shoes of a hungry young lawyer - one who understands
his profession is not the most highly regarded one around. He is trying to
make a living, trying to be honest, and for that, he has people distort his
posts then characterize his responses as playing with words. I read his
interchange with the person who had a problem with a criminal record. He
was right.
The point is, it ain't easy being an attorney. Your clients usually resent
you, other attorneys are trying to beat you into submission along with
THEIR clients, many of your opponents do NOT play by the rules and they lie
like junk yard dogs. In his case, he has to deal with government
bureaucrats on a daily basis, enough to drive a crazy man crazy. Then he
gets on here, trying to help and build his practice at the same time,
something well within the Charter rules for Usenet groups. And he gets
flamed. People take out their general dislike for lawyers as a group on
him. People selectively try to make themselves look good by posting only
part of the story - and in turn make him look bad - likely because of a
crisis of expectations.
So he acts very human by blowing up.
I am going to be a cynic for a moment. If he has actually profited by the
exposure from this group, most likely he will get over it and be back so
long as that happy state (for him and possibly his clients) exists. On the
other hand, if he is losing money by being here, I suspect we have seen the
last of him.
And my last comment is to agree with your general tone; namely he needs to
develop a thicker skin if he is going to make it in the legal profession,
and keep his ethics. And given the decided lack of ethics among his fellow
practitioners, that is gonna be a hard job.
Larry
On Fri, 02 Jul 1999 01:31:14 GMT, Leonette <sa...@supernet.com> wrote:
->Holy smokes!
->
->I'm kinda shocked to see your reaction.
->
->Mr. Udall, I seriously suggest that you should learn how to debate on
->issues, especially if you feel you are right and beleive in something.
->I'd hate to think that these short series of posts got your feathers
->this ruffled...wonder what will happen when you have to stand in front
->of an INS officer in a debate or a case for your client. I hope that
->you will take a better stance for your client than you did for yourself
->here.
->
->I never told you to leave, I said over and over that you could be very
->helpful here, if you offered more of your knowledge in the fashion that
->this NG is built on. By helping freely with what you can, while you
->learn from us as you witness lives going through what your career is all
->about. by you being a part of this group, I can't think of a better way
->to get experience other than going through it yourself.
->
->You seem like a good guy, a hungry young attorney, and you've found a NG
->that can be a lot of help to you, as you can help us. I guess the
->things got off on the wrong foot when the majority of posts we've seen
->is..."I can help, call me"......you must remember that people will
->either be leary of it, or jump right to it and call you. Either way,
->your name will be spread, your career will get some free advertising,
->and hopefully everyone will benefit.
->
->But, I think you really took this way too hard, and became way too
->defensive, way too fast.
->
->Don't leave on my account....i'm sure there are tons of people here that
-> flame me, or perhaps praise me.....but who cares? If you have a
->geniune desire to help this ng...stay..and do so.
->
->Leonette
->
->
->
->
->In article <19990701170302...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
-> mdu...@aol.com (MDUdall) wrote:
->> Your right, I'm just a scum-bag attorney. I have absolutely no right
->to charge
->> a fee for my services and I was way out of line for trying to
->recommend another
->> attorney who may be qualified to help you. I apologize.
->>
->> Since it is obvious to all here that I'm only interested in filling my
->pockets
->> with your hard earned money, I'll keep my general information to my
->self and
->> won't bother this ng any more.
->>
->> Sorry for my butting in where I'm not wanted or needed. Good by ng.
->>
->> Matthew Udall
->>
s_u_...@onramp.net
Disagree all you want Helen. For the most part, grievance committees are a
joke - and that is more or less common knowledge among attorneys and those
who have tried - unsuccessfully - to get a hearing. One problem is that
for the most part, the GC's get hit by a ton of bogus complaints, when
clients suffer from a crisis of expectations. Another problem is that when
a minority attorney really screws up, and the GC gets on him, he/she will
exercise the minority card in an effort to get out of the trouble he/she
has so richly earned for themselves through their theft, stupidity, or
whatever caused the problem.
Further, where do you find an attorney to sue another one. And who has the
money to hire one? How do you know they will do a good job after they take
your money? After all, you sue an attorney for screwing up - right? So
how often do you hire another one without suspecting that they will do the
same thing.
The real culprits are the law schools. There are waaaaay too many of them
spewing out more and more attorneys intent upon complicating life for us
all and enriching themselves in the process.
Larry
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:40:09 -0400, hpars...@ibm.net (Helen Parsonage)
wrote:
->In article
-><57FCFB4DC8AB25AE.179DEEC7...@lp.airnews.net>,
->s_u_...@onramp.net wrote:
->
->
->> What recourse do you have if your Attorney screws up? And please, don't
->> even mention Bar Association Grievance Committees. Those are a joke.
->>
->
->I really have to disagree here. I strongly urge *anyone* with a problem
->with their attorney (lost paperwork, incompetence, holding papers hostage
->for fees etc.) to call the State Bar for advice. At least here in North
->Carolina, they are extremely helpful, and have brochures outlining
->different avenues for complaints. In my case (well before I became a
->paralegal myself), simply writing to my attorney stating clearly the
->grounds for my dissatisfaction, what redress I wanted, and telling her I
->had been in touch with the State Bar was sufficient : - )
->
->Regards,
->Helen
LisaDtoo
lol...I worked with hundreds of attorneys who seemed to have no problem at all
being an attorney. They liked the lunches at the club, the mega-salaries and
the chance to eventually make partner-sized mega salaries. They liked the
challenge of being an attorney. They had great relationships with their
clients and with the attorneys they often worked against. I never heard one
complain about any lying opponents either.
I have nothing against attorneys, but you'll never convince me that the life
they've *chosen* is any harder than the life in any other profession. We all
deal with "stuff" in our jobs. At least a lot of attorneys (yes, I know not
all attorneys) make the big bucks. I sure as heck never did as their paralegal
(at a nationally known law firm that required a bachelor's degree *plus*
paralegal certification (at the time only available from three schools, in
Chicago, Philadelphia and Atlanta that weren't cheap) from their paralegals); I
started there at $16,500 (only slightly more or about the same as their legal
secretaries) ...associates started at $45-50,000...partners made in the three
figures, easily. I make more in my new job after two years than I did after
six years as a paralegal.
I'm well aware that not all attorneys make lots of money...but a lot of them
do. Such a sweeping generalization is therefore a bit over the top, in my
opinion. So, don't talk to me about "the hard life of lawyers" as a sympathy
ploy. We're all grown-ups and we've all been knocked down by people coming
into this newsgroup. Just because a poster might be an attorney doesn't make
him or her special. They simply have an additional piece to add to the pie
that makes up this newsgroup. I've been called things and accused of things
that are unbelievable by people here...but I'm still here, helping others.
You may see our wedding web page at the following URL:
http://members.aol.com/lisamiky/index.html
Chesmen
occupation that is an sleezy as an attorney.
All I could think of was:
- the auto mechanic who fixes our cars and replaces parts we don't need or
fails to fix the car at all, but we don't know this when we pay.
-the dentist who fixes who knows what - we can't see what they're doing in our
mouths
-the doctor who misdiagnoses
-product advertisers who claim a central selling point that we need, but really
don't and we get sucked into buying it (sometimes just because it's a name
brand)
-the teacher who really doesn't want to be there and screws up our kids
learning that particular subject at a given time
-the list could go on and on
The point is, Mr. Udall IS an attorney, that is the profession that he chose.
Whether or not he makes a great deal of money is not our concern here. Whether
or not he is a competent immigration attorney should be our concern. Please
stop degrading the man for his profession. Please limit criticism to the
issues and not the person.
Many states do in fact take grievenances seriously. In fact, Texas publishes
the names of attorneys who have grievenances against them, the result of that
grievenance and disbarment if that is the end result.
I really doubt that Mr. Udall will need a thicker skin in the courtroom. He
certainly won't be bashed in a courtroom to the extent that he has been by this
ng.
Take the information he passes on and put it to use or save it for later. It's
free guys!
Regards,
Chesmen
Alvena Ferreira
> I have nothing against attorneys, but you'll never convince me that the life
> they've *chosen* is any harder than the life in any other profession. We all
> deal with "stuff" in our jobs. At least a lot of attorneys (yes, I know not
> all attorneys) make the big bucks.
Well, I agree that *some* of them make the big bucks, but I think you
would find those to be liability, criminal law, and sometimes worker's
comp (depending on the state's laws). But immigration law?
Nawwwww....don't believe it...takes a lotta time and the payoff isn't
NEARLY what you get otherwise.
I've seen them in the Louisville INS office, and believe me, they AREN'T
the ones wearing the $500 suits.
alvena
Chesmen
>Well, I agree that *some* of them make the big bucks, but I think you
>would find those to be liability, criminal law, and sometimes worker's
>comp (depending on the state's laws). But immigration law?
>Nawwwww....don't believe it...takes a lotta time and the payoff isn't
>NEARLY what you get otherwise.
Yeah, and the clients an immigration attorney is representing usually is not
suing someone. All fees come out of the clients pocket. And guess what? It's
not unusual if the attorney loses the case, the client does not pay in full.
Especially if the client is deported! This is not a stirke it rich field of
law for many immigration attorneys.
>
>I've seen them in the Louisville INS office, and believe me, they AREN'T
>the ones wearing the $500 suits.
I've seen them in private law offices in NYC.
They AREN'T wearing the $500 suits either and their offices look the same.
Regards,
Chesmen
LisaDtoo
>would find those to be liability, criminal law, and sometimes worker's
>comp (depending on the state's laws). But immigration law?
>Nawwwww....don't believe it.
One of the partners in the firm that I worked at did exclusively immigration
work...he was one of those that made a three figure salary. Some immigration
attorneys *do*, indeed, make the big bucks. Thus my point that sweeping
generalizations about *any* kind of attorney (or anyone, for that matter) and
their salary are misguided and often untrue.
Arnoud W. Morsink
: I guess it struck me wrong when in fact he did invite me to call him in
: his email to me, and also stated there was a 75 dollar consultation fee.
Exactly - all in the same message. No surprises.
: those are facts and those are straight....right out of his own mouth.
Words can mean a lot of things; the exact meaning often depends on
the _context_. Out-of-context quotes are not facts.
= I want to state for the record that I have never, never invited someone
= in this ng to call me then hit them up for a consultation fee.
"invited someone (..) to call me THEN hit them up"
As in, invite people to call suggesting it will be free, then when
they do, surprise them with a fee. This is not what happened to you.
Also, as it was a response to an accusation regarding his posts,
'invited someone in this ng' meant 'invited someone in a post to
this newsgroup'. Pretty clear if you look at the context.
Anyone who's read the entire thread can see your accusations are
unfounded. If you're upset for some reason, that happens. But
discrediting people who didn't deserve it, is hardly a mature way
to deal with that.
Mr. Udall seems like an honest, ethical man. That doesn't mean
he is, but I'll believe it, because so far I have no proof to the
contrary.
Arnoud
--
== Popular misspellings on alt.visa.us.marriage-based ==
#2: Affidavit, sometimes misspelled as 'Alpha Davit' or 'Alpha Divit'
LisaDtoo
>he is, but I'll believe it, because so far I have no proof to the
>contrary.
I agree. I think it's clear that he's been ethical and hasn't deserve the
accusations to the contrary...and is indeed deserving now of apologies for
those accusations. Any discussion that I've had with him has been strictly
related to issues and not him personally. I just wanted to make that clear. I
do (and always have done) appreciate the information that he
provides...especially sinceunfortunately we can't get the same information
directly from the INS.
Leonette
I never said that he as an attorney was not ethical, I said his rant and
calling himself a scumbag attorney was unethical.
I did apologize for hurting his feelings, and I have more than many
times stated that he could be of great help in the newsgroup, as well as
the newsgroup helping him.
In no way, did I want to discredit him, I have nothing against him.
It all boils down to the way posts are read and interpreted.
My situation is not like most K-1er's...but there are more and more
coming to the surface and there will be tons more with situations less
than perfect. I don't hold it against Mr. Udall, I don't hold it
against anyone. In a normal situation, no attorney is needed. But there
are those cases that need one, and in times like this it is easy to be
discouraged and in need of help. I thanked Mr. Udall for his
graciousness in my reply mail to him, I thanked him for his time, and
reiterated from my initial mail to him that if funds were available, i'd
probably seek his councel.
Again, it all boils down to the way posts are read and interpreted.
I again will say that I never wanted to hurt his feelings. I will again
apologize for doing that. I have no excuses to what my opinions are, or
for what was said, however, I do regret that hard feelings have arose
from it.
I still maintain that it would be of mutual benefit for both the K-1ers'
and I-130's if Mr. Udal utilizes this forum in the nature it was built.
Leonette
In article <19990704085032...@ng-cg1.aol.com>,
--
Our Destiny awaits, just beyond the Border Of
INSanity.
http://www2.gdi.net/~skye/destiny.html
Graham Gudgin
enough 'evidence of relationship', I would strongly advise against
sending stuff which is *too* personal. The INS really only want to see
evidence that you have met each other. After ticket stubs, copies of
passport stamps and maybe a photo or two, the rest probably won't even
be looked at.
When Becky & I were going through this part of the process, she wanted
to send in personal emails and cards, as well as the other evidence.
That is where I drew the line - there are certain things that are best
kept as special mementoes for the two of you to look back on over the
years, and not for the eyes of some faceless bureaucrat!
Graham(An Englishman In New Jersey).
On Sat, 03 Jul 1999 19:44:43 -0700, ri...@infoave.net wrote:
> A copy of the song he wrote for me, one on paper and the other on tape.
> 2 disks, one containing a program we use to chat with, the other
>program we use can be found at: http://www.icq.com. The second disk
>contains two more color photos of us, a program that was made and
>sent to us by my father counting down the days until our hopeful wedding
>day, and a copy of the Engagement Announcement card we’ve sent
>to all our friends and relatives.
> A copied picture of the wedding dress I am making as well as a copy of
>the verified card for the tuxedo rentals.
> The receipt for the engagement ring my fiancé` bought me while he was
>in the US.
> A personal letter written to my fiancé` from myself, and one he wrote
>to me.
Anti-spam - remove XTRA from address to reply by email.
gud...@XTRAiname.com
MDUdall
>passport stamps and maybe a photo or two, the rest probably won't even
>be looked at.
Graham,
At the service center director meeting at the AILA conference in Seattle in mid
June, the comment was made that the adjudicators do read every bit of
information that is submitted with an application or petition. As I'm not there
to look over the adjudicator's shoulder I can't state that I know for a fact
this is true; I have to reply upon is this statement made by the service center
directors.
Best Regards,
Matthew Udall
Attorney
Arnoud W. Morsink
: At the service center director meeting at the AILA conference in Seattle
: in mid June, the comment was made that the adjudicators do read every bit
: of information that is submitted with an application or petition. As I'm
: not there to look over the adjudicator's shoulder I can't state that I
: know for a fact this is true; I have to reply upon is this statement made
: by the service center directors.
A couple of months ago, John Davis posted that the officers weren't
really interested in anything too personal; he mentioned once getting
a shoebox full of letters and other stuff, explaining how it just cost
him a lot of time going thru it - not reading anything, but making
sure there wasn't anything in there he _did_ need.
I guess the real question is not, 'do they really read everything' but
'do they require any personal correspondence'. In general it seems the
answer is no - but maybe it's yes, if you don't have any other evidence
of your relationship (although that would make it hard to prove you've
actually met, of course).
Arnoud
MDUdall
>really interested in anything too personal; he mentioned once getting
>a shoebox full of letters and other stuff, explaining how it just cost
>him a lot of time going thru it - not reading anything, but making
>sure there wasn't anything in there he _did_ need.
Arnoud,
Thanks for your comment.
I agree that the more evidence submitted, the longer it takes an officer to
look it all over. At the Service Center director meeting in Seattle, the
directors all gave tips on how to organize petitions and evidence to help
reduce the time it takes for an officer to view and digest the material.
Obviously there comes a point of diminishing returns. 1 extra letter or e-mail
is not going to make much of a difference if 20 pages worth have also been
submitted. Common sense should tell you how much is too much. When it comes to
supporting evidence, think quality, not quantity.
>I guess the real question is not, 'do they really read everything' but
>'do they require any personal correspondence'.
If you follow the instruction sheet for the I-129f, I don't believe
correspondence is mentioned; however I always include it with my submissions.
As a matter of fact, there are many things I always put in with my submissions
that are not mentioned anywhere on the instruction sheet. We're not bound by
what is on the instruction sheet; our imagination is the limit. If submitting
something will help demonstrate eligibility then I put it in.
I just received my new AILA Visa Processing Guide in the mail, and I was in the
process of transfering some of my notes from my old edition to the new copy
when I ran across a paragraph for the U.S. Consulate in Manila Philippines. The
author was discussing that quite often the Consulte finds the beneficiary has
more that one fiancee petition on file for her or him (multiple petitioners),
and in such cases it makes it much harder to determine eligibility. In such a
case, having a lot of personal correspondence may help to tip the scales in
favor of the petitioner and beneficiary.
I'll bet this multiple petitioner problem also exists and will become a bigger
and bigger problem as time goes by anywhere there are organizations promoting
and arranging meetings and partys between prospective visiting petitioners and
beneficiarys. I suppose if you found your fiancee this way, you should
definitely ask if any other petitioners have filed for them before.