US Visa Waiver Programme?

[climbnormal]

Holiday coming up... Never visited the USA. Taxi driver in Antigua says he goes to Puerto Rico as it's cheap there. About time I got round to The Big Apple too I guess!

Anyway, I'm a bit spooked by this Visa Waiver Program (VWP) issue and how seriously they take the interpretation of the exact rules. The US embassy website for the UK states that you cannot enter under the VWP if you have a criminal conviction or even if you have been arrested! It also states that the US does not recognise the UK rehabilitation of offenders act (whereby minor offences become spent such that you can legally answer 'no' to the question 'have you got a criminal record'?).

Unfortunately, in our younger days, my wife and I were not the upstanding pillars of the community that we are now (easy to say under anonymity, of course) and both have a small skeleton in our respective closets from over 15 years ago. I was fined £50 for punching a driver who had deliberately tried to knock me off my motorbike (If only he'd said sorry, eh?). This has been considered spent for over 10 years now. The missus, paragon of virture that she now is, was arrested in Spain during her years at university 25 years ago for posessing dope (a bit unfortunate at the time as her dad was one of Franco's cops, albeit a good one) and then again in France about 15 years ago for smoking a joint in the street.

Anyway, do they really want us to apply for visas before attempting to go to the USA for a fortnights holiday, or would we get away with saying that we are arrest/conviction free on the VWP form? Is the system all-encompassing enough to pick up such untruths?

We don't really have anything to hide, but I'm just not sure that the VWP system is really designed to make life difficult for people such as us. On the other hand, whilst it might seem a pain to have to apply for a visa, it would be a long way to go to be refused entry so maybe 'better safe than sorry' would be the best option.

Can anyone with personal or professional experience in this matter offer some pointers please?

Much obliged to you all, and sorry if it's not quite the right forum but I couldn't see one more appropriate (maybe non air transport issues though?).

[xabi200]

Hi,

I would not worry if I were you.Just say you are conviction free on the form. Do you think they hold criminal records of every single country on the program????

I was illegal in the USA for three years, came back to France, change my passport, and came in again on the visa waiver program.

There is a box on the from asking if I ever was illegal in the US, I ticked no, and went thru no problem.

I went thru the mexican border so many time being illegal.The only question they asked me at the border was, "what is your country of citizenship" I would answer US (eventhough I'm french), they would answer "have a nice day sir".No passport or ID asked at any time. Well, I'm white with blue eyes, if I were mexican looking that would have been another questions.

Have a nice vacations

[MerchantVenturer]

Do US citizens visiting Britain for a holiday have to hold visas from the British authorities or enter a similar visa waiver scheme to that enforced on Britons visiting the USA?

[411A]

MV,
No, they do not.
And for others with criminal convictions on their record, IF found out, prepare to spend time in the slammer.

The 'new' INS means business.
Some might be surprised at the new databases used.

Beware.:ooh:

[MerchantVenturer]

Thanks for that 411A.

I find the situation remarkably uneven-handed then if the visa situation only applies one way.

BTW, how would the US authorities have access to Britain's criminal records office?

[411A]

MV,
You must be kidding.
Is not Tony B. in dubbya's pocket?

Having said this, from my perspective, the US needs to look at its southern border much more carefully...and seal it up TIGHT.

[san diego]

Sorry to be a party pooper but the US immigration service seems to know far more about us then we might like to think. The Visa Waiver Scheme is not a scheme which waives the need for a visa, but a scheme whereby you, the traveller, waives the right to object if they refuse to let you in!

Despite the fact that the convictions are long forgotten about in the UK, I would strongly advise you checking with the US embassy here before embarking on the flight. In recent weeks, journalists visiting to spend 2 days interviewing 'stars' in Hollywood have been arrested and deported, not becase of criminal activities but because all jounalists, even those that support Bush, must have visas. If you are prevented from travelling no insurace policy is going to refund you your lost payments for flights and accommodation

[OFBSLF]

climbnormal: Get the visas. Obey all the laws and regulations to the letter. If you don't and the folks from BICE (what replaced INS) catch up with you, they will make sure you regret it (and likely you will never again be allowed to enter the US). Consider your actions very carefully.We don't really have anything to hide, but I'm just not sure that the VWP system is really designed to make life difficult for people such as us.You know that you were previously convicted of a crime. You know that the US regulations require that you apply for a visa. But you don't think it applies to you? Why, exactly? If you come to the US and knowingly violate the visa rules, BICE will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

A fellow that I know is a BICE detention and deportation officer. Believe me, you will get zero sympathy from him.

[MerchantVenturer]

Presumably, because Britain does not apparently require US citizens to have visas to enter the UK, Americans with similar criminal convictions that would bar Britons from entering the US are allowed to enter Britain.

Am I the only one who thinks this is odd, and does anyone know why/how this one-sided visa thing between the USA and the UK came into existence?

Also is the fact that one was arrested on suspicion of a criminal offence in the UK grounds for being refused entry to the USA, even though no criminal conviction followed, indeed in circumstances where the arrest was later deemed by a civil court here to have been unlawful?

[climbnormal]

Thanks for the replies folks.

Yes, I know the rules - and my circumstances... I guess it's off to Grosvenor Square then! I don't seriously expect to be denied a visa, just wondering whether I could avoid the effort of applying.

Have to agree with the sentiment expressing concern about the one-sidedness of the arrangement though. I suppose it's something to do with the U.S. being the most powerful country in the world.

[Bealzebub]

MV

It does not matter why you were arrested or the circumstances, you still need to apply for a visa. The question that is asked is "Have you ever been arrested ?". it then goes on to state even though that arrest may have been subject to a pardon or resulted in no conviction. So even if you were falsley arrested or the arrest was malicious (malfeasance), it doesn't matter to the US department of justice you must declare the fact and enter the US on a visa.

When applying for a visa you are still asked the same question, but can properly explain the result or circumstances. The plus side of this is that it does actually make the process slightly easier in that you will not be asked the same questions on the white I 94 form.

As has already been pointed out the visa waiver programme also waives your right to any appeal, so although it costs money and involves some inconvenience the Visa application is probably the best way to go.

[climbnormal]

OK, so having decided to go down the Visa route, I've just been checking out the US Embassy London's website again.

It says you have to provide documentary evidence of your convicton and gives an address at Scotland Yard to write to. Unfortunately, I have no idea now of when my conviction took place although it would probably have been round about 1985/6.

An additional complication is that it says that there will be a considerable delay in processing your application if you are applying with a criminal record. That kind of rules out the whole process for an airline pilot (SH Europe) who is required to carry his passport around with him all the time whilst at work, doesn't it? Why can't you just have an interview with someone on the day and get the visa issued whilst you wait?

I must say (at the risk of appearing to be the geniune highly dangerous criminal that they want to keep out) I'm leaning towards taking my chances under the VWP at the moment.

Land of the free? Hmmmm......

[leemo]

Bealzebub, I doubt the US would have a database holding details are every criminal record from around the world.

Plus, most countries 'expire' criminal records after 5 or 10 years and I doubt they would supply the US with any information once the record had expired.

[Bealzebub]

Sure,but I dont suppose many want to take the chance based on your doubts. The consequences of a refused entry are much worse. Get a visa and tell them the truth. Unless you have done something really awful, I would assume they will give the application fair consideration.

Most pilots on shorthaul Europe are on occaisions without their passport whilst visa's are issued. If this is not possible do it during a leave period or some other period of low flight duty. Explain your circumstances and request the expeditious return of your passport.

Regarding the expiry of criminal records, that is probably correct but they care that you were even arrested never mind a criminal record. Who knows what they know, but I would still advise getting a Visa if there is any doubt. The final choice of course rests with you, I don't care. ;)

[climbnormal]

Well, I'm leaning back towards the 'getting a visa' option now. Does anyone know how long a non-immigrant visa is vaild for?

If it's just 3 months, then it gets a bit expensive and complicated if you, for example, wanted to plan a quick shopping trip to NY six months after returning from your initial fortnight's holiday. Or is the process of renewing/applying for a second time a little more of a formality?

It all seems such hard work for the sake of a goddam holiday. By the way, I visited The Islamic Republic of Tunisia in N. Africa last year for a week. Does that stamp on my passport make me a terrorist suspect?

BTW, is it true that if you've visited Cuba you can't enter the US? I would really like to see the place before Castro dies as I'm sure it'll get as spoiled as anything within a very short time following his demise. Yeah, I know they need the foreign money, but there's just a kind of attraction about them being the last communist country in the world. I know any form of totalitarianism is reprehensible by nature, but Cuba seems to have been the most genuinely benevolent of them to date (as long as you didn't try making unwanted political comment in public).

[Boss Raptor]

If you are a regular traveller the UK Passport Agency is more than happy to issue you a second passport to cover the 'passport in for visa' scenario, all you need is a request letter from your employer and to make another passport application - easy. Always amuses me as US immigration dont see my trips to Russia etc. which seem to cause them so much concern...and all sanctioned by the UK Passport Agency as they are aware of the problems such travels seem to cause when entering the US - So I have a 'clean passport, US only' and a 'dirty passport, everywhere else that I have to visit on business' - what a farce!

As of Jan 1 the US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology program is scheduled to commence. The blurb states 'Visitors arriving in the US will be fingerprinted and photographed on entry and the information be used to verify their identity on leaving the country'

Well at risk of starting a row and upsetting our American Ppruners - I say f!ck that!

So we are now going to be treated like criminals to enter the USA. Well I am going to enjoy watching the US tourist industry collapse, particularly in Florida, when us 'aliens' take exception to being treated as common criminals just to enter a country. Think it's about time we get US citizens to have a Visa for the UK :mad:

[MerchantVenturer]

"Think it's about time we get US citizens to have a Visa for the UK"

Boss Raptor,

That was the point I raised in an earlier post in this thread.
I do not necessarily object to the US authorities insisting on visas (or waiver scheme) for UK citizens if they think it necessary for national security there. However, it seems to be that because the UK does not insist on visas for US citizens coming here then presumably any American can enter this country without being asked to disclose previous convictions.

I was lucky to be able to take early retirement in my early fifties several years ago (not in the aviation industry) and have since visited the USA for holidays on several occasions. I find the country fascinatingly diverse and its people friendly and open on the whole, there are always exceptions as in any country.

However, I have not been back since September 2001 mainly because of some horror stories I have heard concerning US immigration and over-the-top security - probably exaggerated and indeed my son has been to the US twice this year on business with no problems.

As to fingerprinting all visitors to the US, I would have thought this would lead to horrendous hold-ups at the point of entry to the US and of course would upset many from a civil libertarian point of view. I have no particular worry about being fingerprinted and my local airport in the UK (BRS) automatically photographs all departing pasengers to ensure the person checking in is the person who later boards the aircraft.

I also love visiting Canada so my next trips across the Pond wil probably be to there.

I have never been convicted in a criminal court anywhere or arrested anywhere - yet?!

[climbnormal]

Thanks for that info Boss Raptor,

I'll give the second passport a try, might also get a UK passport for the missus at the same time (currently Spanish citizen, despite living here for 17 years and being married for 13).

That should solve most of our problems. I still think it's a bit rich to expect you to go through such a rigmarole just to have a holiday though. Maybe, for the moment, I'll just confine myself to the rest of the world in protest.

So it's one passport for the US and Israel then and another for the rest of the world. Obvious really... Cushty!

[OFBSLF]

Have to agree with the sentiment expressing concern about the one-sidedness of the arrangement though. I suppose it's something to do with the U.S. being the most powerful country in the world.As a general rule, when dealing with governments, laws, and bureaucracy, it is a waste of energy to go looking for logic, fairness, and common sense. It is what is and the reasons for it are often not self-evident.

In this case, however, I would say that it has something to do with the US being the biggest target in the world. You may remember that we have a UK citizen, Richard Reid, in prison after he tried to blow up one of our airliners over the Atlantic.

If you don't like it and don't agree with it and don't want to do it, that's your right. There are plenty of other places in the world to go on holiday.

If you do choose to come to the US, obey our rules and enjoy your stay.

[Final 3 Greens]

OFBSLF
If you don't like it and don't agree with it and don't want to do it, that's your right Don't seem to remember GWB taking that attitude when he wanted 'our boys' with yours in Iraq.

I think that you really need a bit of an attitude adjustment - reciprocity should be the name of the game - or maybe does that 'special relationship' only operate one way e.g. "Hey there Brits, BOHICA."

By the way, 'your' laws violate many EU laws on data confidentiality - oh, I forgot, Amercian values always prevail, don't they..... maybe that attitude could help you to understand why the USA is the world's no1 target (if we accept your assumption.)

[OFBSLF]

Final 3 Greens:

That and $2.50 will get you a cup of coffee. Looking at this from the practical side... you may not like our laws. I may not like some of them either. Neither of our opinions are likely to get them changed, let alone changed in time for climbnormal's visit to the US. The US laws and regulations are what they are. So climbnormal's choices are 1) knowingly violate our laws and risk the consequences, 2) obey our laws and do what that entails, or 3) take a holiday somewhere else.

As for the UK's decision to deploy troops to Iraq -- first, that's a different issue and has nothing to do with US visa regulations, and second, that's between you and your Prime Minister, isn't it? If you don't like his decision, toss him and/or his party out at the next election.

As for someone needing an "attitude adjustment," we'll have to agree to disagree on just who needs such an adjustment.

[climbnormal]

Thanks everyone for the input.

Please don't let it develop into the usual PPRuNe US vs. UK slanging match. Things are the way they are and we have to live with that. I suppose it's fair to say though that there isn't much difference between the US parties when it comes to foreign policy so voting one lot out wouldn't necessarily make that much difference. On the other hand, of course, New Labour didn't seem much different from the last Tory government up until very recently when they began to significantly increase public spending. Oh dear, I've drifted my own thread now.

My latest thinking is that in my relatively trustworthy position as a pilot, it's important to keep previous misdemeanours way back in the past rather than add to them by lying my way into another country. Although, according to current predictions I'll never get a long-haul command so permanent exclusion from the US wouldn't much matter, you never know when the CRA might increase to 60 or 65. There could even be a period of world stability and the airline industry expand by 15/20%! Thus, I shall be exploring somewhere else in the world in Jan and investing some effort next year into gaining the extra passports to allow us to wait whilst visa applications are in the post in future.

I can't help wondering what the wording of the I-94W (VWP) form that is given out on flights is though. A friend thinks it may just ask whether you have been convicted of serious offences such as fraud or terrorism, in which case I could give the right answers without actually lying. I suppose that this wouldn't really overcome the fact that you are not allowed to enter visa free if you have a criminal record, although I could plead ignorance/insanity (ah... I think insanity makes you inadmissable too, best stick to ignorance then).

Whichever way you look at it, it has to be best to stick to the rules I guess. Humbug! Obviously, there's a little bit of the rebel still in me that would like to take a chance and enjoy beating the system.

[Boss Raptor]

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for any reason other than minor traffic offenses, and/or have the intention of violating the law in U.S.? Have you ever participated in any way in terrorist activities or activities related to the overthrow of the U.S. Government by force? Are you a drug user, addict or have trafficked or assisted in trafficking illegal drugs (controlled substances)? Between 1933 and 1945 were you in any way involved in the persecutions associated with Nazi Germany or its allies?...and do you have a communicable disease?

Comments from the accompanying article, very true...

Is the INS attempting to trap Nazi war criminals or terrorists off-guard, tired after a long flight, hoping they'll accidentally confess? - "Hitler alive and caught - ticks 'yes, I am a Nazi war criminal' on visa waiver form" Or if they can't secure a conviction for a terrorist, at least they can charge them with something - "Osama bin Laden fined for misleading information on INS form."
:ok:

[OFBSLF]

Or if they can't secure a conviction for a terrorist, at least they can charge them with something - "Osama bin Laden fined for misleading information on INS form."I'd guess that it is more along the lines of if they lied on the form, then they can be deported more easily. Once someone is inside the US, it can be very time consuming and difficult to deport them. I'll try to remember to ask my BICE aquaintance.

Then again, who knows what "logic" drives bureaucrats...

[Boss Raptor]

I tried to find a copy of the form but it is not pictured on the INS website although many others are.

I recall some rather strange wording as for the conviction part 'have you committed or been convicted of a xxx 'Something' xxx' and it is a word we dont use in British English in that exact form and isn't in a British English dictionary?

Anyone recall?

Climbnormal - you mention yr wife is Spanish? then she also qualifies on the Visa Waiver programme under normal circumstances.

[climbnormal]

Yes BR, apart from the little confession I made on her behalf upon opening this thread, which sadly falls foul of the 'have you ever been arrested' question.

If your memory of the wording on the I-94W form is correct then it appears to mirror exactly the wording on the normal non-immigrant visa application form. Indeed, why wouldn't it?

It seems that if you have been arrested but not charged, it is acceptable to just state the circumstances on the visa application form, but if you have been charged or convicted you have to send the court papers with the application.

Anyway, it looks as if I'll have to stick to the rules, so that rules out going to the USA on 9th Jan. I would be unable to get everything done in time. Got any ideas for where else to go this time of year? Amazingly the missus is bored with the Caribbean! What's Singapore like this time of year?

[OFBSLF]

What's Singapore like this time of year?If you're headed that far, why not go to Tahiti? Or New Zealand?

[Final 3 Greens]

BR

Moral Turpitude :D is the term you are seeking.

[Boss Raptor]

That's the one...'Moral Turpitude'...I had never heard of it before as had about every other Brit on the flight...and we asked the American Airlines F/A and she didn't really know but just said and I quote 'just tick no anyway' :cool:

[Final 3 Greens]

BR

It means moral depravity or wickedness

[Boss Raptor]

A rather wide question/definition that one...clearly for catching war criminals etc...and interpretation applied according to the local direction...or as you say a few more could fall foul of that one...

Bloody stupid question :cool:

I like the bit on the form which is the 'cost' of filling it in calculated by the Bureau of Paper Pushing...a classic

I was not aware until I discovered yesterday that US Immigration charges the airline (for that read the pax.) $6 for each I-94 and I-94W that is filed. I have never come across any other immigration body charging directly to allow a passenger to enter..so not only do you have to put up with their attitude we have to pay for it as well :*

[watergate]

Wife and I discussed going to NY next summer for our holidays because of many good memories from previous visits.
However, because of the American attitude problem towards foreigners dropped the idea.
Going to Greece instead. :ok:

[OFBSLF]

I like the bit on the form which is the 'cost' of filling it in calculated by the Bureau of Paper Pushing...a classicThat statement is required by US law. IIRC, the thinking behind the law was to remind the petty bureaucrats that every form they create costs taxpayer money. I think it was a vain attempt at behavior modification.

[PAXboy]

A friend of mine (sadly now dead) was a professor of music at a college in the USA. As he had permanent tenure in his post, the only excuse they had to chuck him out was 'Moral Turpitude'.

We spent many happy hours debating how much turpitude he would have to endure before being removed from his post. He became highly inventive at devising what was the manner of the turpitude in which he would be discovered ... :}

[pilotwolf]

Copied direct from the Visa Waiver form in front of me..

B. Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral acctivities?


Also notice that it was confirmed on the news that the UK will porvide details of every pax name, address, DOB, criminal record to the US authorities on every trip across the Atlantic.

PW

[Boss Raptor]

Thanks for that...

In which case Climbnormal and his wife seem to pass the requirements as their offences dont constitute 'the two or more offences aggregate sentance etc.' :ok:

[Lily Rowan]

From my reading of the question, it appears that Climbnormal is in the clear.

Unfortunately, his wife, having been arrested for a violation relating to a controlled substance, would have to check the “Yes” box if she chose to answer truthfully.

[climbnormal]

Thanks for the wording piltowolf,

It certainly does seem to allow some leeway, which I suppose is where I was coming from in the first place. Odd really as the US Embassy in London's website clearly states that you cannot travel visa free under the previously discussed conditions. It looks as if they are confused themselves!

Anyway, all inclusive holiday booked to Tobago instead now (how bad is that?) :) ... Will see about getting second passports and proper (= honest) visas for later on in the year. When in doubt, take the safest option.

[OFBSLF]

It looks as if they are confused themselves!Not surprising. Laws and regulations are often so poorly written that nobody reallly knows what they mean. My wife often deals with state regulators and on more than on occasion, when she has asked about a particular regulation, the government drone on the other end has said "Good question. I don't know. What do you think?"

In many of these cases the blame belongs not on the bureaucrat pogue trying to figure out the laws/regulations than on the idiots who wrote them in the first place.

[1]

I won't go to the US for holidays anymore. Those guys are completly crazy. I mean... similar to Russia in the KGB days I would say ... fingerprints upon arrival ... com'on ...

[trium16]

PilotWolf Says:
Also notice that it was confirmed on the news that the UK will provide details of every pax name, address, DOB, criminal record to the US authorities on every trip across the Atlantic.


Not feasible. Especially given the UK Data Protection Act Laws (not to mention the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act)

For the above to be allowed - even if technically feasible which is unilkely - would require an act of parliament - again - with the civil liberties activists and our own very vocal home grown public - this is just a pipedream - even for Tony.

Lets not get carried away by hysteria here...

[christep]

It's not clear to me that any of this helps in any way except to keep a lot of bureaucrats employed.

Richard Reid was arrested on a flight from Paris to the US. Who would supply his details to the US under the new scheme?

The UK can only (even with the proposed changes in the laws to allow it) supply information on UK citizens (or perhaps UK legal residents). That leaves a whole heap of other people on those planes...

The whole think is a completely useless mess.

If all the money that was being spent on "Homeland Security" was being spent on, say, HIV research or a malaria vaccine then orders of magnitude more lives would be saved than will ever be lost to terrorist action.

[Boss Raptor]

My feelings/thoughts exactly Christep...'fraid this harks back to the recent times when passengers on US bound flights were only required to be screened on departure from the foreign country to the USA and at the time I made the comment 'of course all terrorists/madmen live outside the USA dont they!?'...

Sept 11 and previously Mc. Veigh, the Unibomber, Mr. Anthrax and others proved that one wrong. Yet they still seem to think this way.

I could go on but I wont as this forum is not a place for a political debate, neither do I wish one...merely the comments of a confused 'Alien' :uhoh: