it feels pedantic, but I do get lost easily. I believe you get a visa based on marriage and then extend that visa. Am I wrong? Also, if I leave and come back does it mitigate the need for the 90 day check in?
I haven't had a reasonable immigration offer say anything ever. I had a crazy lady make a scene once and her supervisor intervened and told her to cut it out. The whole "not living here on short term visas" thing is, as far as I can tell an artifact of conversations here. I haven't seen it on the immigration website or on forms at the office. An immigration official hasn't spoken to me about it. I don't want want to break the spirit of the law, I prefer to operate in good faith, but other than "no more than 2 land entries a year" this is just tribal knowledge based on anecdotes. Today the guy told me about the family extensions AFTER we discussed that I was planning to move to the marriage visa.
It's good information and I'm glad I have it, but I am not convinced this is unscrupulous.
The TONE seems to be related to the frequency of entry. And it's such a wonky gray area anyway. I'm definitely prepared to do the marriage visa. But I might just see if this raises eyebrows first.
Brandon I suspect I had some mini strokes in my early 40s and some types of data retention just went from normal to nil. I simple can't hold some types of information anymore. The search functions are for shit and this is a community to ask questions and talk about things. If my questions bother you block me. I don't need "guy with encyclopedic knowledge of esoteric shit" to make me feel bad as I do that really well on my own thanks.
I leave periodically for work ANYWAY. Before getting hitched the frequency that I needed to leave was greater than that required by work. It's probably still better to do the marriage but this is new data for me.