Navigating Immigration, Cancun

[Cancunscorpio]

As I've been telling all along-the Immigration process in most cases takes just enough time to start a new application when the FM-3 or FM-2 is finally issued to the applicant:-)) Ridiculous-))))

[V]

There is always a gap between what is required- and what is communicated, and understood about what is required. Take the time lost when you (Tori) dropped in your papers, simply because you didn't have the letter I'd told you would be required, in which you request the extension of the FM3. Something similar can now happen if the proof of your address is ultimately rejected by the officer who reviews the file. To avoid unnecessary loss of time, it's better to get everything in the best possible form from the beginning.

At a minimum, at this point, I'd get the proof of address set up correctly, just in case you're ultimately asked for it; that is, proof of your actual residence in Mexico, which can be a paid utility bill, bearing your actual address, for a utility service which is billed in your name; or, if the utility account is in the name of another, then, in addition to the bill and a copy of it- a letter from that person, 1) signed under a declaration they are telling the truth; which 2) shows the address of the property; and, 3) names you as living there, with 4) the date on which you began living there- together with a copy of their personal identification; and, a copy of each and every one of these.

Then why in the world would they say to check back in 3 days if it takes 4 weeks?

They're really only talking about the first update of the file, which occurs in the first few days, and this is entered in the computer system where you can see it: the important update, in which you'll be summoned to the office, occurs much later (typically during the fifth week after submitting the paperwork).

And why did you and TJ and whomever else get it done in days if it takes 4 weeks?

T.J.'s case was taken out of sequence, and hand carried to the examining officer, because the agent wanted to do him a kindness. (She commented at the time that he had been very courteous in his dealings with them, as I understand it.)

The agents working there have repeatedly done nice things for me, and facilitated things, when necessary. It's not in their interests to make anyone's process harder than it has to be. They won't make it any harder for you, either, than it has to be; but, having the paperwork required will make things easier for them, and save everyone time.
________________________

[ToriB]

I appreciate the PM you sent with all the info, and I passed it on to my Boss, whom is ultimately in charge. And when they spoke to the lawyer who used to handle our FM's, he told her otherwise. So while in the office, speaking to the "experienced" (and I say that loosely for obvious reasons) agent, we gave them what they each individually required. So for proof of address, they wanted a letter from me, stating I live there. No mention of the landlord. So if it is a "requirement", why didn't anyone say something there? If someone is working the intake of document station, they should know the in's and outs. End of story.

And do a google search around Mexico and the time line for the rest of the Countries turn around. Even Playa del Carmen has a less then 30 day turn around from time dropping off...to time FM is in their hands. There is no excuse for their lack of organization and information.

I was the third person handing in my documents after not accepting another person papers for 3 weeks. If they require more, that should have been already reviewed after 5 full days in their office.

Again, thanks for taking the time to respond, but since you get favors done for you, you see things through rose colored glasses. I will have the landlord write something up, but I bet you I am never asked for it.

[V]

I will have the landlord write something up, but I bet you I am never asked for it.

That's right: it's just a matter of being prepared to meet any objection made later, to what you've submitted up to now, and they may never ask.

The difference between the approach I take, and that taken by some others, is that I look at the regulations, themselves, and what they state is required, rather than relying on anyone else to tell me what's required.

Frequently, the people working at the INM office have told me things which are not correct, about both the law and the proceedures: I ignore them, insofar as necessary, when they do. This has occasionally caused delay, but has not adversely affected me in any important way because I'm not relying on them for advice.

Should it be this way? Of course not, but that's the way it is, and it's that way in almost any government agency you care to name. I would never rely on the advice given me by IRS employees, either. It's just impossible for any of them to be as well informed on a limited subject as it is for the motivated customer.

[Gringation]

For proof of address, I've always had to bring in an electric/water bill, along with a letter from my landlord and a copy of their IFE (both sides).

[ToriB]

Last yr I didn't and it was handled by the lawyer. He can't forge an ID. And this yr, two different people didn't ask for it. So my point proven again, that they are not constant and it hold up the process. It's just annoying as I would lose my job if I gave people the wrong information over and over again... or the company could be sued.

[V]

Several people have asked me, recently, what sense to make of the messages that appear in their cases, when they go online at the INM website for information about the status of their case. Here's an example of what you may see there....

31/10/2011 El trámite ha sido registrado
31/10/2011 El tramite ha sido asignado
07/11/2011 El trámite ha sido clasificado
30/11/2011 Presentarse en una oficina del INM

Some of these are easily understood; for example, the first is when they log in your application; the next is when the case is assigned to a case officer; then, comes the "clasificado" step, which I believe indicates the officer has made a decision about what is to be done with the case- whether to approve, deny, or ask for more information- though this is conjecture on my part.

The last is easily understood, they are ready to see you in the office for the next step in the process. This is the one we all wait for!

Notice the elapsed time- in this case, one month. The last message, to present yourself at the INM offices, usually comes in the fifth week after submitting your documents, in my experience.
______________________

[V]

I mentioned that it has been my experience that the notice to present yourself typically comes after the expiration of four weeks from the day of filing, on a renewal of FM2/3s. But, the two most recent cases of which I have personal knowledge both got their notice, "Presentarse", on the 23rd and 24th day after filing. One of these was the more remarkable because that period included the two weeks the INM offices were closed for the holidays!

Go, INM Cancun!

[T.J.]

In my case late last year, when I turned in my docs, they told me that the first notice would be available on the website in a week. When it wasn't I stopped by to find out why. At that moment they sent me to the far right counter, which essentially was my notice to appear, and two days later I had my FM2. This was not a renewal.

If I remember correctly, they did the interview that day, gave me the payment info and told me to bring back the Banjercito receipts (there are two for an FM2) and my fotos. I already had the fotos but she told me they did not want till I had the receipt.

I went straight to Banjercito but INM closed before I could get back so I did as instructed, coming back at whatever time I was told the next day. I turned in the receipts and the fotos. They fingerprinted me and had me sign various things. I was told to come back between noon and 1 pm the next day, which I did, getting my FM2 after signing a receipt or something.

For the 100th time, it was 9 days from the date I walked in the door with ALL of the requisite forms and documents until the day I walked out the door with my FM2.

The only glitch was I walked outside for a moment, put some papers in my INM folder went to my car and realized I did not have my backpack. Went back inside and it was nowhere. The guy at the far left counter, who handed me my FM2, got my autograph, etc. told me I definitely walked out with it. Retracing my steps, I found it where I left it, on a conrete planter, where I stopped to put the stuff in the folder, and walked off without it. What a huge relief that was. I can be quite goofy from time to time.

[V]

I walked outside for a moment, put some papers in my INM folder went to my car and realized I did not have my backpack. Went back inside and it was nowhere. The guy at the far left counter, who handed me my FM2, got my autograph, etc. told me I definitely walked out with it. Retracing my steps, I found it where I left it, on a conrete planter, where I stopped to put the stuff in the folder, and walked off without it. What a huge relief that was.

Twice lucky, at INM, that day, T.J.

[V]

Frequently, the people working at the INM office have told me things which are not correct, about both the law and the proceedures: I ignore them, insofar as necessary, when they do. This has occasionally caused delay, but has not adversely affected me in any important way because I'm not relying on them for advice.

Should it be this way? Of course not, but that's the way it is, and it's that way in almost any government agency you care to name. I would never rely on the advice given me by IRS employees, either. It's just impossible for any of them to be as well informed on a limited subject as it is for the motivated customer.

Had an experience on 1 Feb that perfectly illustrates this principle. I called the Social Security Administration, on the first day of the enrollment period, at 8 AM EST, and told them I'd like to request Part B, of Medicare. (I'd already received a notice, addressed to my Mexico address, telling me enrollment in Part A was automatic, in my case, but that I had to request enrollment in Part B.)

The person on the other end of the line said, "Our records reflect that you rejected Part B because you have insurance."

Do you think I argued with her about the impossibility of this being correct- that this was practically the first moment of the first day in which I could have made this request (based on my birth date), and that someone would have had to call that very day, before I had, and known all my personal details to have recorded anything in my file? Of course not. I'll just go forward from there, with my request, and see what happens.

Same with IRS when I asked about the EIN on our fideicomiso. The agent said, "Oh, that number is for a business, not a trust." Do you think I even bothered to dig into it? No, and it turned out she was wrong.

The point is simple, the people you deal with just can't possibly know everything about everything, nor can they do much for you if they lack the authority.

Recently, I called the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City to report my foreign employment (required by SSA regs). The person on the other end of the line said, "You'll have to prove your employment." I asked how I was to do that, and he said by completing a SSA-7163 form, which he'd send me.

In response I mailed them that form, filed last year, and a document that showed my case was under the general supervision of International Operations- in other words, that all was as it should be, and there was nothing that I needed to do.

It's just not worth the trouble to argue with people at this level of authority: same with INM personnel. You just don't need to be their teacher, and go through the struggle with them.