Dear jill. Many of us find value in what Ken, Michelle, and John post.

You on the other hand haven't added much other than complain.

If you don't like it, just ignore it. The rest of us are happy to see the extra info.

Sincerely, someone who isn't complaining

@Adam technically its whatever the record shows you were CONVICTED of. Not what you were charged with.

Its a pretty minor offence shown by the penalty which is a Conditional Discharge.

2 big factors here are:

- your letter of explanation
-since the discharge won't show on CPIC when you did your prints, I assume you submitted court documents.

What did THOSE documents say?

You shoudl have no problem getting a waiver if everything was prepared properly, and you provided either:

- a letter for a doctor saying you don;t do drugs
or
-a clean drug test

I sent off my waiver application 40 days ago for one count of simple possession (marijuana). Had 7 grams on me.

I was initially charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking because the guy I was with told the police his 7 grams wasn't his (We bought together).

Anyway the trafficking charge was stated in court and was tried for just possession. I received a conditional discharge. This happened 9 years ago.

Will homeland treat this as just simple possession or trafficking?

#1154, #1155, #1156 & 1158 I agree with you 100% I share some info on what we do and ways that the info can help people. We do not make a penny whatsoever from the sharing. I ask that you do not give up on the forum. I personally have no issue with anyone here whether they are waiver people or providers and I have always said that.

I am firmly of the opinion that people should not have to apply for an unneeded waiver. People in BC sometimes struggle due to the high cost of living. I do whatever I can to help out waiver people since waivers can cost thousands of dollars over a lifetime. I treat all waiver clients as if they are personal friends. Obviously, I do not give away specific trade secrets since it is still a business.

Getting back on track though...#1158 The bottom line is that CBP can take as long as they want in terms of processing a waiver. True it does seem for us that they tend to approve certain cases around the 4-month mark but that is no guarantee. We tell people CBP processing times tend to be 3-9 months on cases and 1 year or more for PPT(Possession for Purpose of Trafficking and) and sex crimes. I am not gonna quote stats since they don't mean anything to the person anxiously waiting for a waiver or even a person wanting to apply. Most people just want an honest answer if the job can be done or not. They don't understand or care about a statistical algorithm.

This is why I am telling people that if you apply before 5 years, then you are really taking a chance at a denial. If the packet is not properly prepared then again there is a chance of denial. Note that I am speaking in general terms only. No matter whom you use you should make sure that the person knows what they are doing.

A person can be deemed to have a criminal record just by admitting to the elements of an offence in a sworn statement. An example is if a person admits to prostitution or bank robbery and they were never convicted. Those people are deemed to have a criminal record. A lot of people to include some CBP officers and some lawyers don't fully understand how the code works because it is indeed extremely complex. I will not even mention DWCs.

So I am putting it out there for you guys not to give up on the forum since it can be a valuable tool. I ask John to refrain from whatever other relevant issue(s)/behaviour that may be present here. I will do my part to keep the peace. I am not here to debate anyone but I truly do not want anyone ripped off by a waiver provider...As I recently was by an auto repair shop that used my lack of knowledge about a specific car repair to charge me to find and fix a problem that they later claimed that they were unable to locate....Yet a specialty shop 2 days later found it within an hour and the repair was cheap.

Btw...so lets not argue or debate since the purpose of this forum is for information sharing...

:: @K SCOTT added on 24 Jun ’18 · 06:12

Btw there is nothing misleading since all the information is clearly documented in the relevant government regulations and other official sources. The thing is that you have to know where to look, how to interpret it, how to apply it and how to make the best possible case that is the most favourable to the client based on the regulations and the client case-specific information.

@jill I am responding to something that was posted. How many times have I posted in this category exactly how long it is taking, not just ONE application, but literally hundreds, and not just mine. Clients of other companies I have met.

The whole page before this one was about Prostitution..in the "processing times" category. ..i never saw you utter a peep then about being off topic. Your just upset when I go off topic? I have never seen you complain about this before, why only now?

I am responding to something someone said that we misleading. Please tell everyone here if you would prefer I let misleading information stand. @jill?

John
You’re missing the point. “Reply here,how long, weeks, months did it take to get a waiver” that’s what the this forum is for. You spend quite a bit of time on this forum, maybe it’s time to started your own thread

I am concerned with inaccurate information. I was very specific. It feeds on innuendo and rumors with no basis in fact. People who do their own waivers rely on the information here, and intend to make sure it is accurate.

A border Crossing Card cannot be converted into a September Letter. I stand by my explanation. If anyone has information that shows I am wrong, please post it.

There is no way under this regime toy will suddenly convince them to make a person with possession of Narcotics (a joint) admissible. If anyone has seen data or results that are different, please post it.

In Both cases they need a waiver. Period. There is no possibility of anything else right now.

@Jill @Bee, would you prefer I don't correct erroneous information? Would you like a Forum where I KNOW information is incorrect and stay silent? Or would you prefer accuracy? Re-read my post # 1152. Not an attack on anyone. Simply giving my OPINION on information that I think is not correct. If I know someone is posting incorrect information, and stay silent, that's collusion. My reputation and integrity are very important to me. That's why use my real name, and am accountable.

I agree with Jill & Bee. No on is using this forum anymore.

That’s why people do not use this forum anymore. This forum is now basically for 2 waiver companies competing with each other

I thought this forum was for individuals who are waiting for their waivers but it is more of a platform for long drawn out drama between a few waiver companies it's becoming ridiculous

Why are you concerned about how we operate our business? Please tell me how often I ask you how you operate your business or about your own personal affairs!!! Why do you care that we are trying to get the guy a September Letter based on the BCC?? If they say no, then he will just have a waiver. Then he will have his next one done at no cost. Why do you care that we can get a lifetime clearance for certain offences? Why should a person have to spend thousands of dollars on a waiver over a lifetime if they do not need one?

In fact...I am even going to tell you the deal that we gave him ...even though I do not have to do such. We charged him a special reduced rate of $750 as a goodwill gesture. I told him that if he only gets a waiver, then we will do his next case for free. I then said that if he gets a September Letter, then we are both happy since he will not need a waiver again and he got it for cheap...Plus we would also have the knowledge on how to deal with this issue for future clients.

Now the reason that we have the fees that we do is that we are offering border crossing case solutions at the quality of Seattle area law firms but at a greatly reduced rate from what they charge. So for us, we are offering the same quality services that they offer but not paying their ridiculous prices. We know because some firms there are using our work now. So I want to reign in the fees back to us. So you have always wanted to know why we charge what we do and I never really said...Well, now you know why we charge what we do and why we are successful as such.

Again, I am still unsure why you care how we operate our business or what we charge?? If we had charged a person $8,000 for a waiver... then that is none of your business.!!! If the person sees the value that we offer and they voluntarily pay then that again is none of your business!!

Again, I do not understand why you are frustrated about what we are doing and the fact that it is not impacting you. Also, regarding DWC....we continue to use the term and promote it over the web. The term is spreading and people are starting to understand the meaning behind it. You cannot compare Michelle to it since we both worked for agencies before and have special knowledge. I personally think she should raise her fees since she has special knowledge that is hard to find in the industry. I have similar knowledge and she is definitely not a DWC.

Finally, I have repeatedly told you that I was not referring to you in regards to DWC...However, if you want to put yourself in that category on your very own or think it refers to you...Then that is too bad since it is not my problem and we will continue to promote it.

Btw...you keep talking about credibility but you have no idea how much you are destroying yours by always focusing on us and the things that we have accomplished. Everything that we have done can be documented in writing and is directly accomplished by usage of the terminology and procedures in relevant government regulations, policies and procedures.

@KScott I find this very frustrating.

Border Crossing Cards were given out by Immigration and Naturalization before 2002 because the Waiver program was completely different and almost 90% of applicants were meant to eventually get Border Crossing Cards after 2-3 waivers. They were the equivalent to a 5 year waiver today. They were not the equivalent to a September Letter.

When Homeland Security was formed, it was decided that there would NEVER be a permanent waiver again. Nothing has changed.

You stated on these boards before that people you knew were allowed to still use these BCC, and I told you I knew it was not true. No one is allowed to use these cards.

When this person applies for a waiver, he will NOT get a September Letter, unless he should have not had a waiver in the first place. INS was more lenient than Homeland Security was, so I find this unlikely.

As for this:

“We are still trying to get September Letters for people that have an offence for possession of a joint. So far, they have only been coming back with waivers on these convictions...Unfortunately.”

Your giving the impression your close to some breakthrough on possession of Narcotics. Its a clever sales tactic, but its no more accurate than me saying "I am working on making Waivers free, but no luck so far." Homeland Security is taking kids away from their families. They are trying to get rid of the green card lottery. Canada is in a trade war, as is China with the United States. The head of Homeland Security is vowing to get TOUGHER on crossing the border. Nothing politically matches up with what you are saying.

Your giving misleading information, (like above) making up false terms (discount waiver companies) and its not helping your credibility.

If what you do as a business it ethical and honest, and good value for what you charge, then these gimmicks are unnecessary. You rightly criticize Pardon companies that do shoddy waiver work. We all criticize lawyers that charge a large fee and don't know what they are doing. We also are critical of the scammers like Dominion Pardons. Don't move towards that to make a few extra dollars. Its not worth it. The internet will reveal you and getting back your reputation is very difficult.

Btw...We just finished up a packet for a client that has one of the old Border Crossing Cards from 1996. We are going to see if the ARO is willing to give him a September Letter based on our submission. If they do, then everyone with the old BCCs will not either need waivers or we can prepare the same presentation as this client. We will let everyone know of the success of this mission since it will open even more doors for us.

We are still trying to get September Letters for people that have an offence for possession of a joint. So far, they have only been coming back with waivers on these convictions...Unfortunately.

usentrywaiverservices.com

#1147 Michelle, I think he will run into big trouble if he gets a CBP officer that needs to make his quota and this client says the wrong thing. On one hand, canceling his waiver may be somewhat beneficial since it would have to be prepared in a way to show why he did not need a waiver. He would then get a September Letter and he would carry it when he crosses over.

The danger here is that he does a sworn statement and says something that will cause him to become inadmissible in other areas. Then he will be up a creek without a paddle. If they deny him entry on only his solicitation conviction, then yes we can probably get him the September Letter if this is his actual conviction only.

Right now he is at the mercy of whatever CBP officer he gets when he tries to cross that border.

#1149 Chrisd good question..Why were you denied in 2015? What was the original conviction, specifically what date were you actually convicted and did you prepare your own waiver?

chrisd why were you denied in 2015?

1104 - I applied in Feb of 2017. Almost exact same situation as you. I had applied back in 2015 and was denied. Applied again after 1 year and I have now been waiting 17 months... nothing.

@1146 K Scott, thanks for info, I am not sure what this client is going to do now, he thinks he will be able to travel now with no problems, but I am not so sure, without any documents proving this, I think he maybe denied in the future. He is cancelling his waiver with me now, against my advise, however, the final decision is his to decide what is best for himself... I will give him your contact info also.

Michelle..btw that guy that had the offence for communicating with a prostitute can 100% be permanently cleared since we have done 2 like his case. Half of these CBP guys do not know what they are doing so that is why there is a lot of bad information out there...even from CBP officers.

Plus, they use the sworn statement to determine if the person is a "prostitute" if they have no convictions for the offence. It is simply a matter of how the CBP views it. The big thing here is that the USA has this "morality" issue and it has been carried over by the generations. Prostitution is illegal in most USA states.

They have always been hard on prostitution/escorting. I have seen in removal proceedings where they removed a woman that had admitted to escorting and this was in 2008. She did give a very detailed sworn statement that was used against her. She had only been driving a friend down to SEATAC Airport when she was sent inside and admitted to prostitution.

We also had a girl that was visiting her boyfriend in USA and had a lot of lingerie in her luggage. The CBP officer saw it and she said that the boyfriend likes it. She foolishly admitted that he was married and the CBP officer threatened to deny her entry under the grounds of Adultery...which is technically a violation. She then admitted that he paid her bills for her and he said prostitution and denied her entry.

We got her out of needing a waiver because we showed that the sworn statement that he did was done incorrectly and the ARO agreed. She was told that she did not need a waiver. This was in 2011.

Plus, I think the overstay part is because the USA has so many illegal immigrants anyway. The current administration has pledged to "send them all home."

@michelle I would think thats exactly what they are worried about, the ramification of overstaying.

Also again its a moral "splitting hairs" issue. Are you a "prostitute" or in simply a beneficially cooperative consensual relationship? Its a ridiculous situation brought on I am sure about someone complaining they were "taken advantage of" by a woman from outside the country, and suddenly some Congressman has made it a "cause".

@John Rogers and Kent Scott, I wonder if the US is just getting paranoid about "prostitution" because they are worried that the person may live illegal in the USA if they hook up with a US Citizen?

And talk about double standards..I have a client who started a waiver because he was charged with Communication for the purpose of Prostitution, and when his wife called the border to see if a waiver was required - they said her YES, Absolutely - she needs a waiver.

This weekend he went to the Border to check it out, and they welcomed him in with open arms..told him no worries...don't need a waiver...