FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Trusted Travelers (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trusted-travelers-732/)
-   -   Global Entry Revocations [merged threads] (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trusted-travelers/1617123-global-entry-revocations-merged-threads.html)

GUWonder Jun 17, 2013 3:51 pm

One of the reasons that DHS/CBP is looking to bring in private contractors to get further involved in this "trusted traveler" nonsense: additional background checks/background check backlogs.

rubesl Jun 18, 2013 6:15 am


Originally Posted by GUWonder (Post 20939938)
One of the reasons that DHS/CBP is looking to bring in private contractors to get further involved in this "trusted traveler" nonsense: additional background checks/background check backlogs.

Along those lines, I heard Edward Snowden was going to be doing GE interviews at HKG!

GUWonder Jun 18, 2013 2:21 pm


Originally Posted by rubesl (Post 20942866)
Along those lines, I heard Edward Snowden was going to be doing GE interviews at HKG!

:D

If only he actually knew and released more than was already shared here. Hopefully he got a lot of frequent flyer miles too.

Dubai Stu Jun 19, 2013 5:09 am

I recently spent a few weeks at Point Roberts, Washington. Point Roberts is a US exclave in the middle of British Columbia. To get there from the mainland US, you have to drive for close to an hour through Canada. I learned when I was there that US CBP had recently starting giving this group some flexibility on Nexus applications. Some minor customs violations (e.g. old non-commercial agriculture violations) were being overlooked. Additionally, old US drunk drivings with the appropriate Canadian waivers were getting the ok in some situations. Apparently residents in Lake in the Woods, MN and Campobello Island, NB were also getting this treatment. If this is true, this may be a slight crack in the door.

Townshend Sep 26, 2013 4:58 am


Originally Posted by flyingpolarbear (Post 20785286)
That was the original reason for my post, to reduce my own speculation by learning from other people's experience navigating the system. This is a unique process and I am trying to understand better how the review process works. The strange position I found myself in was staring at a blank sheet of paper not knowing what to speculate about (so I could write something to the Ombudsman). I wrote a letter anyway.

According to an article, between 2002 and 2009, 6,534 NEXUS memberships were revoked, and another article says that Sentri revokes about 2,000 cards per year. GOES is in the same family with these programs, and I figure has a similar rate. So I'm probably asking a common question on behalf of a lot of people. Maybe they can update the GOES FAQ to provide some guidance on what information the Ombudsman is looking for when the applicant has no clue of the specific reason they are not eligible anymore.

Did you end up writing? If so what was the outcome?

flyingpolarbear Sep 26, 2013 10:29 am


Originally Posted by Townshend (Post 21507591)
Did you end up writing? If so what was the outcome?

I wrote to the Ombudsman back in May. In October it will be 5 months, no response.

I remember the words of one of the officers at the airport "you're not the only one."

I had almost forgotten about it and concluded I got caught up in some error from a program experiencing its growing quirks.

Townshend Sep 27, 2013 10:06 am

I was just revoked for GE as well. Here's my story:

Applied and received GE last year. In 2010 I was arrested and given supervision for DUI (I do not have a conviction). CBP was fully aware of this and admitted me after I supplied official court documentation showing the judgement.

Applied for NEXUS a few months ago and got an interview. Towards the end a CBP officer asked for additional documentation which I provided (same documentation I gave during the GE process). Never the less, my NEXUS was denied and subsequently GE was revoked.

Anyone have a similar experience? Tips/suggestions?

rwmiller56 Sep 27, 2013 11:13 am

"Does not meet program strict standards for membership."

The same nebulous reason they give everyone who is denied or revoked. If you try to find out the exact reason why, they will probably tell you that they cannot release information obtained from 3rd parties, i.e. background checks. That is what happened to me.
Good luck....

rwmiller56 Sep 27, 2013 11:21 am


Originally Posted by flyingpolarbear (Post 21509109)
I wrote to the Ombudsman back in May. In October it will be 5 months, no response.

I remember the words of one of the officers at the airport "you're not the only one."

I had almost forgotten about it and concluded I got caught up in some error from a program experiencing its growing quirks.

When you finally do get your reply, it will probably just reiterate that you "do not meet the strict program requirements", and that they do not disclose information obtained from 3rd parties, i.e. background checks. That was my experience.
Good luck....

SeriouslyLost Sep 29, 2013 6:01 pm

As a related thought, is GE a programme derived from statute or is it run under an administrative order?

The reason I was wondering is because if it's the former then it's hard to challenge for info and/or correction, but if it's run under order then anything done under it can be challenged quite easily. (For certain values of "easily", obviously)

Townshend Oct 8, 2013 3:44 pm


Originally Posted by rwmiller56 (Post 21515063)
"Does not meet program strict standards for membership."

The same nebulous reason they give everyone who is denied or revoked. If you try to find out the exact reason why, they will probably tell you that they cannot release information obtained from 3rd parties, i.e. background checks. That is what happened to me.
Good luck....

The NEXUS denial did give a more exact reason:

You have been convicted and/or arrested for a criminal offense

PVDtoDEL Oct 10, 2013 9:27 pm


Originally Posted by Townshend (Post 21575653)
The NEXUS denial did give a more exact reason:

You have been convicted and/or arrested for a criminal offense

Canadians have big issues with DUIs. Even if the CBP was ok with the documentation, if Canada rejected the NEXUS application, you are ineligible for CBP trusted travelers programs.

Townshend Oct 10, 2013 9:55 pm


Originally Posted by PVDtoDEL (Post 21589231)
Canadians have big issues with DUIs. Even if the CBP was ok with the documentation, if Canada rejected the NEXUS application, you are ineligible for CBP trusted travelers programs.

Canada accepted me with open arms, US rejected me even though I've already been accepted into GE. Go figure?

GUWonder Oct 14, 2013 2:48 pm

Has anyone here who had GE revoked continued to use their GE number as the Known Traveler number in airline reservations for PreCheck purposes? How is that working out?

That and those conditionally approved for GE but who haven't completed the enrollment process would have been given GE Program Membership numbers that could be entered into the Known Traveler fields of airline reservations for PreCheck purposes. I am curious how that is working too.

BigRedBears Apr 26, 2014 2:02 pm

Global Entry card taken away at YYZ airport
 
I was on a mileage run today with a same plane turn at YYZ (DFW-YYZ-DFW).
Due to incorrect instructions given by a lady directing lines at border crossing my Global Entry card was taken away. What can I do at this point?

I got into YYZ from DFW and had ~50 minutes to clear customs (2x) and make a connection back to DFW. As I was entering the country, Canadian officer just asked me for the purpose of the trip and let me continue. I ran around the airport, checked in, and was about the clear customs again.

There was a lady directing people to different lines. I asked where someone with Global Entry should go and she pointed me to machines. Fine. I print out a slip with a photo and join the line. The line is about 8 ppl long and moves slowly. At this point my friend joins (he was a bit behind). We wait and since the line doesn't move, we ask whether we should be in the line. The lady say no, there is Global Entry line by the left wall and we should go there. So we do. There are more Global Entry machines there.

Since we already got the slips, we keep going. At this point border office jumps out of his cubicle and says we can't do that and we should go back in line. We explain we have Global Entry, but he still says to go back. Ok. We go to the front of the line, but allow everyone who was in front of us to go through. Finally we get to the officer:

Me: are those machines back there different from Global Entry machines near the wall?
Officer: Can I see your Nexus card?
Me: I don't have Nexus card. Nexus is for Canadians. I have Global Entry.

After a pause.

Me: I do have Global Entry card.
My friend: But it's for land crossings

We both give Global Entry cards to the officer.

Officer: why are you interrupting me? You tried to bypass me.
My friend: we have Global Entry and the lady directing lines told us to go there.

Officer: why are you interrupting me?
My friend: can I say something?
Officer: No. You are lecturing me about Nexus and Global Entry. You tried to by pass me. When I told you to go back into the line, you didn't go to the BACK of the line and skipped people [not true]. Global Entry is a trusted traveller program and right now I don't trust you. I'm going to confiscate your Global Entry cards. You can't follow instructions and don't deserve Global Entry. Now go to the back of the line.

We go back. Wait. He asks usual generic questions and lets us through.

What just happened there?!

Was border officer justified in his actions?

Did I only lose Global Entry card [pretty much useless] or will my Global Entry privileges be revoked?

Can I complain to anyone? If yes to whom?

Can I reapply for Global Entry and do I need to wait?

Thanks guys!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:04 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.