tusphotog

Welcome to FT! You might want to confirm your name on your tickets and secure flight profile matches your NEXUS/GE card exactly. Full first, middle, last name. No initials or abbreviations unless they appear on your card. The TSA apparently updated their criteria for Pre-Check and it's caught a lot of folks off guard, including me. Updating the name did the trick.

Good luck and let us know if things get better.

ddpg

I know someone who was arrested and charged with a Class A misdemeanor for forgery. They were given deferred adjudication. I thought they had no chance of getting GE since the feds (including the military) seem to treat deferred adjudication as a conviction, but they talked to a CBP officer that just happened to be interviewing people at their place of employment and they said to apply and bring all of the court paperwork to the interview.

They applied, went to the interview and the officer scanned in the paperwork showing that they met all of the deferred adjudication conditions. They were approved. Not sure if joining the military and having a security clearance since the arrest helped with their approval.

goalie

Not turned down but.....

Had my interview this morning at SFO and was asked the following

CBP: Have you ever been fingerprinted before?
Me: Yes, for work

CBP: Have you ever been fingerprinted at a police station?
Me: Yes, for work

CBP: Have you ever been fingerprinted in Nashua, NH?
Me: Yes

CBP: Were you ever arrested?
Me: Yes, but that was supposed to be purged after 6 months and I was told I can legally say "no"
CBP: That's for things like employment but not when checking via the FBI for law enforcement related issues

CBP: What was it for?
Me: In 1977 when I was 19, I was arrested for possession of one joint

CBP: You're kidding? <chuckles>
Me: No-it was a different time back then

CBP: No worries and anything else?
Me: No that's it

CBP: You're good to go but you will probably receive the "X" on your form for about 6 months as where I'm sending your information to the FBI to have the flag removed, they're backed up so when you get the "X", show it to the officer, explain why and have them look at your file and you'll be fine
Me: Thank you very much

All told, 20 minutes, not video to watch, given some stuff to read and the approval e-mail hit while I was driving home

n.b. if you are planning on using SFO, they are (and using the CBP officer's words) "hammered because the airlines are giving it away free" so walk-in's are next to impossible-I had a friend come with me to see if she could do a walk in and it was a no-go

Now one question-with "still being on file", will this impact travel to Canada as from what I've been reading, they are sticklers.

drewguy

I wonder if the response would have been different somewhere other than SFO?

BigFlyer

Everyone, including customs agents, are a product of their environment.

In California, the maximum fine for possession of up to an ounce of marijuana has been $100 since 1975, for the first and repeat offenses, with no possible jail time.

By way of comparison, the fine for parking in a bus zone or handicapped zone is $250.

thomwithanh

Had you been applying in a more conservative area (e.g. DFW) you might not have been so lucky.

rwmiller56

It was a wet reckless in CA.
I have heard that alcohol related misdemeanor offenses result in instant denial.
The only stated reason for denial was "Does not meet the program requirements". I was denied in the initial review phase, before an interview could even be requested.
I wrote the ombudsman almost 2 months ago to get the specific reason for denial, and I have not yet heard back. So I called the CBP office at SFO, and they looked up my file. They said there was no notation in my file indicating that the ombudsman had reviewed it. They stated that there is ONE ombudsman that handles denials for the entire country, so it could be 6 months or more before I hear back.
This is not good news. It could take months, even years, if I need to have several exchanges with the ombudsman! Unfortunately, the only way to contact the ombudsman is by snail mail to Vermont. There is no email address or phone number listed.

SEA1K4EVR

A friend of mine who recently applied and approved for GE was charged with DUI in Washington state in 1992. He did a plea deal where he went to some kind of class and the charge was reduced to "slow" negligent driving which is also a misdemeanor. He lives in California now and the case never came up during the GE application or interview process.

rwmiller56

Thanks for the info. Good for your friend. I have never heard of "slow" negligent driving charge, but it seems that the charge does not imply alcohol related, and that is probably why he was approved.
It's a little late for me to do a plea deal after 12 years....

bevoinva

I'll add a couple of more data points for anyone that comes across this thread with a "checkered" past.

My wife and I both applied for GE around the middle of September. Were both conditionally approved about a week and half later. On the initial application my wife answered truthfully that she had been convicted of a crime (misdemeanor shoplifting conviction when she was 18 - about 18 years ago) and I answered truthfully that I had never been convicted of anything (more on this later).

I looked at the interview slots available at our home airport (IAD) and the next available slot was about 2 months out. I also took a look at PHL which is close to my in-laws about 2 and a half hours away. They had slots available pretty much next day so I set up interviews for the end of the month.

We arrived for the interview early but they showed us in and conducted the interview together. They asked our address and then went straight to the good stuff - "Have you ever been arrested." Note that the application form says "convicted" but at the interview they specifically asked about arrests. Anyways, my wife mentioned her arrest that she had already disclosed on her application and the officer acknowledged it and moved on to me. At that point, I told the officer of a felony arrest I had about 23 years ago as an 18 year old (long story short - got caught with a fake ID trying to get into a club). Not surprisingly, the officer already knew of both arrests. As for my my wife's, he said it wasn't a big deal. However, we hit a snag with mine. Apparently, there was no record in the background check as to the resolution on my charge so he couldn't approve my application until he had that information. This corresponds to other experiences mentioned in this thread so I wasn't all that surprised. He fingerprinted both of us and took both of our pictures.

My wife's application was approved the next day - she got her card a week later. I contacted the court and got paperwork showing the charges against me had been dismissed - took about 2 weeks. Faxed the paperwork into the GE office and called to make sure they got it. The officer I spoke with said he got it and the application would then be forwarded to a supervisor. Checked on line and my application had been approved that afternoon.

Anyways - overall a pretty painless process - the customs people were all super friendly through the entire process.

rwmiller56

Well, I finally got a snail mail reply from the GE "Ombudsman" after a 3 month wait. All he did was reiterate the initial statement from the denial letter, stating that I "did not meet the program requirements". He also added that they could not disclose any information obtained from 3rd parties (I am assuming this includes results of criminal background checks, etc).

Not meeting the program requirements could be due to a criminal offense, or a few other customs/immigration issues. Now, I know I don't have any previous customs/immigration issues, so I am very sure this is because of my wet reckless conviction.

So it seems that I am caught in a Catch-22 situation. They won't tell me the exact reason for my denial (citing privacy concerns), and at the same time they tell me that I don't meet the program requirements.

There is no process for appeal, other than to prove that the information they have is incorrect. This is stated in the denial letter, and reiterated in the Ombudsman's letter. But, they won't tell me exactly what information I would have to prove to be incorrect...
All I can say is that their system is very convoluted. Almost as if they don't want you to attempt an appeal, and their decision is final.

It looks like my only hope would be expungement, and reapplication for GE. But I don't want to incur the legal expense for something that is not guaranteed.

So, I have decided not to pursue GE any further. I've had enough of their BS. All I can say is that they made the wrong decision, as I am not a "customs risk".
I'll be fine waiting in the long passport/customs lines. I'll just have to schedule my connection time accordingly. See you all (or at least some of you) in the lines

cparekh

No one can say for sure, but I think this is a good investment, and in many states can be done yourself with minimal court and filing fees. In addition, it might be a good idea to expunge, aside from GE.

rwmiller56

Thanks, but I'll pass. I already blew $100 on the GE application fee to the CBP, who have no accountability whatsoever. I work too hard for my money.

squatch

i also noticed the inconsistency between the application and the interview. there is a HUGE difference between being arrested and being convicted. i'm wondering if the difference between the application and interview is an oversight or intentional (and if it's intentional, why?).

i'm glad the above poster was able to deal with it easily, but it seems like it could generate chaos

drewguy

It appears to have been intentional in this instance because there was no record of what happened after the arrest. The CPB official saw no convictions listed on the application, but the background check turned up an arrest with no specified outcome. This was a way to reconcile the not-fully-consistent pieces of information.

Once the previous posted explained/proved there was no conviction, we was approved.

I suppose CBP could save a step if it asked for all arrests, and the resolution after the arrest. But I'd prefer they don't ask for any more information than necessary, and I expect most arrest records show a dismissal (if one occured).