VISA Waiver Program to USA

[cove]

It is like magic QF WP. Seems to work fine without any intervention from us.

The cost of food and accommodation in the bigger US cities is a bit higher especially with the lower $AUD.

 

[QF WP]

Thanks for the comfort @cove. Have got copies of the numbers just in case there is a snafu at check-in. Out of my control, so just a little disconcerting.

Yes, USD accom rates aren't much fun with exchange rate of ~0.72 at the moment.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

It seems really weird that I've done the ESTA's or my family and I don't need to tell anybody - was expecting to have to tell VA or my TA, but he said it is automatically matched with our flight booking. Can anybody shed any light on how this is done?

I thought it was linked to your passport, and the passport is scanned at check-in. That is all sent as part of the pre-arrival information before boarding. I have known, on the odd occasion, for people to be asked for a copy of their ESTA, so the system must break down sometimes. Perhaps for dual citizens maybe if they check-in with a different passport to the one they intend to use for the USA?

 

[cove]

We transfer money to a US bank account so we don’t lose 3% to 5% on foreign exchange.
Citi debit and Bankwest World credit cards work sweetly too.
Last week we sent funds to the US at 0.7630 using Bell FX to US Bank before the $AUD fell to 0.7440.
My youngest son has opened accounts at Bank Of America and Chase in the US. We made him a signatory on our US Bank Account this latest trip
I think he is doing HSBC in the UK.
With my eldest son he now has a US Citi Executive AA credit card so he can do his own AA Miles redemptions. It runs off my account as he doesn’t have a social security number.

 

[Srivap]

Hello,
I am new here but have read extensively on this subject in the past, so I'm not a complete 'noob' to the issue. I feel there is a load of misinformation out there. However I have identified that alot of people here seem pretty on the ball with this.

However some things still concern and confuse me regarding the criminal arrests and VWP/ESTA.

My situation.

2005- Arrested low/special range drink driving. received Section 10 no conviction + 1 yr Good behaviour Bond.

20017-Arrested common Assault and refusal to leave licence premises. Section 10 +2 yr Bond (still present) and refusal to leave charge dismissed outright prior to court.



Now my simple understanding is that I CAN indeed travel guilt free under the VWP. The reason is twofold. Firstly, as most know, the pertinent question is Have you ever been arrested or convicted for a crime that resulted in serious damage to property, or serious harm to another person or government authority? and the circumstance around this charge was me taking a swing at a bouncer during removal from a pub whilst drunk (yeah, not proud of this one) that was deflected. So, on face value, I have not done serious harm.

Secondly, I know that what this is really asking is whether I committed a CIMT. By my research, I have not. The CIMT factor in relation to assault only kicks in at Aggravated assault and higher. Good to go. I'd actually feel like I'd be lying by even thinking of clicking yes here.

Now, this is what confuses me.

To many times for my liking I see and read people, even in the know, who have interpreted this Esta Q. as 'declare any arrest' based on the front of the question being 'Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a crime' which would rule out anyone with a history, but my interpretation is the arrest has to be one of CIMT/Serious harm/Damage/Gov.

Secondly, it scares me that it is up to me to make that interpretation. For instance, what is 'serious'. In my mind my crimes arent, but if I asked my mum...very serious.

Thirdly, Common Assault is strangely not talked about here and elsewhere that often. You'll see plenty of drug and theft talk (absolutely CIMT btw) but strangely, the most common type of assault charge is rarely spoken about. So curious if anyone has a definitive answer.

Please, dont just say 'take the interview' without reading. Like the CIBP did when i emailed them (from a throwaway email).There are many reasons why I would prefer not to have the U.S government know my details. Namely, their shared relationship with Canada, who have a different set of rules.

I do appreciate anyone that has some input.
Am I ok?

 

[Srivap]

btw, worth noting there are some dramatic rule changes being drafted in Congress that will probably affect future VWP. Mainly in relation to gang affiliation and prison sentencing. Will get to that topic after my issue is answered/resolved.

 

[serfty]

It seems really weird that I've done the ESTA's or my family and I don't need to tell anybody - was expecting to have to tell VA or my TA, but he said it is automatically matched with our flight booking. Can anybody shed any light on how this is done?

As indicated, the matching is done as an automatic part of check-in.

Some years ago, back when AirNZ was still using T2 at LAX, I arrived at 6:15 to find no-one could check in as the link between AirNZ and the UA government systems were down.

 

[AisleSeat]

Hello,
I am new here but have read extensively on this subject in the past, so I'm not a complete 'noob' to the issue. I feel there is a load of misinformation out there. However I have identified that alot of people here seem pretty on the ball with this.

However some things still concern and confuse me regarding the criminal arrests and VWP/ESTA.

My situation.

2005- Arrested low/special range drink driving. received Section 10 no conviction + 1 yr Good behaviour Bond.

20017-Arrested common Assault and refusal to leave licence premises. Section 10 +2 yr Bond (still present) and refusal to leave charge dismissed outright prior to court.



Now my simple understanding is that I CAN indeed travel guilt free under the VWP. The reason is twofold. Firstly, as most know, the pertinent question is Have you ever been arrested or convicted for a crime that resulted in serious damage to property, or serious harm to another person or government authority? and the circumstance around this charge was me taking a swing at a bouncer during removal from a pub whilst drunk (yeah, not proud of this one) that was deflected. So, on face value, I have not done serious harm.

Secondly, I know that what this is really asking is whether I committed a CIMT. By my research, I have not. The CIMT factor in relation to assault only kicks in at Aggravated assault and higher. Good to go. I'd actually feel like I'd be lying by even thinking of clicking yes here.

Now, this is what confuses me.

To many times for my liking I see and read people, even in the know, who have interpreted this Esta Q. as 'declare any arrest' based on the front of the question being 'Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a crime' which would rule out anyone with a history, but my interpretation is the arrest has to be one of CIMT/Serious harm/Damage/Gov.

Secondly, it scares me that it is up to me to make that interpretation. For instance, what is 'serious'. In my mind my crimes arent, but if I asked my mum...very serious.

Thirdly, Common Assault is strangely not talked about here and elsewhere that often. You'll see plenty of drug and theft talk (absolutely CIMT btw) but strangely, the most common type of assault charge is rarely spoken about. So curious if anyone has a definitive answer.

Please, dont just say 'take the interview' without reading. Like the CIBP did when i emailed them (from a throwaway email).There are many reasons why I would prefer not to have the U.S government know my details. Namely, their shared relationship with Canada, who have a different set of rules.

I do appreciate anyone that has some input.
Am I ok?

A similar thing happened to my brother in law in the UK. He was drunk in a club and fell asleep. Bouncers came to drag him out and words were exchanged. They beat him down. Police were called and their story was that he attacked them. He got a good behaviour bond, even though he didn't do anything.

For his trip to the US he had to apply for a visa and attend an interview. He said the interviewee gave him the third degree and told him he had an alcohol problem. He's never going back as it's too much hassle having to go through that process all again, not to mention the extra cost.

 

[Srivap]

A similar thing happened to my brother in law in the UK. He was drunk in a club and fell asleep. Bouncers came to drag him out and words were exchanged. They beat him down. Police were called and their story was that he attacked them. He got a good behaviour bond, even though he didn't do anything.

For his trip to the US he had to apply for a visa and attend an interview. He said the interviewee gave him the third degree and told him he had an alcohol problem. He's never going back as it's too much hassle having to go through that process all again, not to mention the extra cost.

That sucks that it happened to him and is actually very similar to my story.

When you said for his trip he ‘had’ to apply for an interview, why did you say he HAD to? Who told him he did?
From every ounce of my research, there’s no need for him to have attended an interview at all. The form doesn’t say ‘declare all arrests’ in the same way the immigration form does, and Canada’s does.
If he caused no serious (aggravated or grievous) harm then he is Scot free to apply under Esta

 

[cove]

We had a sales training trip for staff and one had to go for an interview. Six months later he received a visa for multiple entry. He goes to the US every couple of years and the delay/wait was worthwhile.There was no speeding up the process.

 

[serfty]

When you said for his trip he ‘had’ to apply for an interview, why did you say he HAD to? Who told him he did?

Some years ago the Form when applying for an i94w (Visa waiver) there was a question like "... Have you ever been arrested ...", if answered to the affirmative then an interview was required.

Look at the first 50 or so posts in this thread.

 

[cove]

Yes that is a while ago serfty.
Whether social media checking will become mainstream is something we need to be aware of so red necks could have issues in future years.

 

[mrs.dr.ron]

Yes that is a while ago serfty.
Whether social media checking will become mainstream is something we need to be aware of so red necks could have issues in future years.

Cove, a couple of years ago I bought Ron a book in the US - "You know your a red neck when .... "

 

[AisleSeat]

That sucks that it happened to him and is actually very similar to my story.

When you said for his trip he ‘had’ to apply for an interview, why did you say he HAD to? Who told him he did?
From every ounce of my research, there’s no need for him to have attended an interview at all. The form doesn’t say ‘declare all arrests’ in the same way the immigration form does, and Canada’s does.
If he caused no serious (aggravated or grievous) harm then he is Scot free to apply under Esta

It's the question about "Have you ever been arrested or convicted......". He said yes, so instant denial.
The question itself is poorly written.

 

[Srivap]

Some years ago the Form when applying for an i94w (Visa waiver) there was a question like "... Have you ever been arrested ...", if answered to the affirmative then an interview was required.

Look at the first 50 or so posts in this thread.

My understanding of this was prior to late 2014, the question read;

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ARRESTED OR CONVICTED FOR AN OFFENSE OR CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE OR A VIOLATION RELATED TO A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE; OR HAVE BEEN ARRESTED OR CONVICTED FOR TWO OR MORE OFFENSES FOR WHICH THE AGGREGATE SENTENCE TO CONFINEMENT WAS FIVE YEARS OR MORE; OR HAVE BEEN A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TRAFFICKER; OR ARE YOU SEEKING ENTRY TO ENGAGE IN CRIMINAL OR IMMORAL ACTIVITIES?

That was very confusing: it is a compound question that includes legalese, not the least being “crime involving moral turpitude.”

Given the confusion surrounding the language on the ESTA application, the US government finally changed the question to avoid compounds. Now what was one question has been broken up into several, including:

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for a crime that resulted in serious damage to property, or serious harm to another person or government authority?Have you ever violated any law related to possessing, using, or distributing illegal drugs?

Is there a third variant I do not know about?

 

[serfty]

Is there a third variant I do not know about?

Probably not.

The only issue was what "Moral Turpitude" meant - and while that is no longer relevant; that meaning is thoroughly discussed upthread:

 

[Spongbob]

Probably not.

The only issue was what "Moral Turpitude" meant - and while that is no longer relevant; that meaning is thoroughly discussed upthread:

Looking at Question C, our former neighbour was in the the state German youth organisation (HY) as a child; so I wonder how he would answer that question.

 

[Srivap]

It's the question about "Have you ever been arrested or convicted......". He said yes, so instant denial.
The question itself is poorly written.

If you stopped reading there, then you'd tick yes, but the words following that qoute are 'have you been arrested or convicted for a crime that caused serious harm to a person/Government/property' and before that it mentioned 'CIMT'.
I'm 99% confident your BIL could happily and legally have ticked no and never needed to attend the interview and let the USA know of his charges.

 

[Srivap]

Probably not.

The only issue was what "Moral Turpitude" meant - and while that is no longer relevant; that meaning is thoroughly discussed upthread:

This is great, Ive always wanted to see a screenshot like this.

To be honest, the new variant is the same really, just worded differently and broken up a bit.
The single bigggest issue with the old variant in the screenshot is the definition of aggregate. A normal person could easily misinterpret aggregate to mean actual sentencing, rather than potential sentencing applied. I never personally have done jailtime, but technically in the eyes of the law, I could have done 2.5 years (2x years max for Common Assault and 6 months DUI). What a handful to remember. Luckily, thats now irrelevant.

The real issue for me in todays world with the new question, is the grey area.
Im fairly confident that the Australian definition of Common Assault is equivalent to Simple Battery and Assault in the USA which is NOT CIMT by any metric.

However what if it was Assault occasioning Bodily harm? That leads the person doing the ESTA to make their own interpretation and could they be picked up for it?

Thats the real issue, its clear that USA do not, I repeat, do not, want to be clogged with interviewees coming in on minor charges. Some people have reported elsewhere on reddit that they have gone in to an interview on the back of charges like 'drunk and disorderly' and have had the interviewer ask 'why are you here? why didnt you use ESTA?'

Otherwise they would specifically ask 'have you ever been arrested or convicted of a crime?" and leave it at that, the same way they do for migration visas. But they dont.

 

[Matt_01]

Hopefully this is the correct place to post. Is there a minimum period your passport needs to be valid for to enter the US. At the time of entry MissM’s passport will have about 4 months before the expiry date. When I booked the flights MEL-NRT-ORD on JL with QF points there were no warnings or notices that popped up when entering APIS data. I booked the return flights today LAX-SIN-ADL with SQ and the SQ site popped up a message indicating as there is less than 6 months on the passports entry may be refused.

I could not find info on the web and even ran through a dummy ETSA application process without issue. Is there a requirement to have a minimum of 6 months on a passport for the US, also if it make a difference we are also going to Canada. I am not fussed if we need to renew MissM’s passport prior to travel.