That´s a good one, Davie. Unlike the forum mentioned earlier on this thread, which I roundly criticised, the operators of the one you cite seem to try to offer authoritative information, and understand the issues involved.
*sigh* I asked the following question on the Yucalandia blog: And got the following response: Even though I'm certain that the person who replied got their visa under the old system, I think I'm going to send some $ down so that one of my inlaws can make a trip to Merida and ask if there are any additional requirements specific to that location.
Ask three people and get three different answers: why not just look at the law, itself? Since I have already posted links to the law, and the regulations, let me add just one more, the link to the instructions to the INM employees telling them how to do their job, and how to process every type of tramite. Scan the "articulos". They act as a guide to what is contained in each, long section of instructions, and you can quickly find what you need. Proof of solvency, with the amounts required, are given for each tramite of which proof of solvency is necessary. Who can offer you a more definitive answer, when you can look at the source, such as we can in Mexico? Why settle for just an opinion? Documento sin título Taking a broader view of this, why look for certainty, where none can be found? Life doesn't offer the degree of certainty you seem to be searching for in any aspect of life I can think of, why should this be any different?
I would have definitely taken the law at face value were it not for one little thing, located at the bottom of the list of requisitos: So, individual locations can ask for additional documentation. My goal is to find out if the Merida location has continued asking for financial solvency proof even after the transition to the new regulations. I generally am quite accepting of uncertainty, as I've had to deal with it my whole life. I don't expect this to be any different, really, but with two young children (and possibly a 3rd on the way) and this being a big move, I want to know what I'm in for. I don't have the financial luxury of flying back and forth, nor can I count on relatives to mail me documents should I need them at a later point. Everything has to be taken care of before we leave. If we are required to prove a certain amount of money, we can't at this juncture, and we'll have to find a way around it. That will require time (and some degree of fenangling) and may postpone when we can leave. There are a lot of factors in play that make me seek out a relatively definitive answer on the subject. I appreciate your continued patience and feedback while I flesh out the details.
Can it be that you're going at this all wrong? Why base your immigration on your husband, when you're so unsure he'll be able to show means? Why not line up a job, yourself, then apply. You'll have your income disclosed in the contract to employ you, and the choice whether to, 1) apply independently of your husband; or, 2) join him in his petition, but with the boost his petition would get from your income, if resources were going to be considered? _______________ You've been good about trying to dig out authoritative information, but I don't recall your ever finding any fixed sums representing financial solvency under the circumstances of your application; rather, the sums you can up with were for those in which the spouse was a foreigner. Isn't it the case that there were no fixed requirements for those in your situation, and the law simply said something to the effect, "adequate in the judgment of INM" ?
Just a brief update: I had someone physically go to the INM office in Merida to ask for the requirements for vinculo familiar. At no point was solvencia economica mentioned. They only require the foreigner's passport, ID from the Mexican, and the marriage certificate, according to the walk-in Q & A.
Thanks for the update, limejello; so, what they were told then fits with the silence on this point in the current list of requirements for the tramite, as well as the absence of fixed requirements in the former law, for those in your situation. Always nice to triangulate our understandings of immigration law. I never rely solely on what I'm told at INM, but do use that source, along with others, especially the law itself, in deciding how best to deal with immigration issues. There is a blizzard of conflicting information being passed around on the various forums, much of it arising from people talking with INM, and using that as their primary source for reaching their conclusions (see the website Davie and I spoke of favorably, earlier on, which has now descended into a kind of chaos, with irreconcilable information being submitted by one and all). I think it's a mistake to rely exclusively on what INM personnel may say, in spite of how obvious it must be to most that that should be the best, most authoritative source for answers to questions relating to immigration: I haven't always found that to be the case. _____________________
"Triangulation" seems to be the perfect word for what I'm trying to do. I don't plan on relying a single source as providing a definitive response to my question. Obviously the law itself will take precedence, but if my final *actual* experience turns out to be different from what I predict based on the law/regulations, in-person questioning at the INM office, direct contact with the INM through their website AND by telephoning the INM, then I can genuinely be surprised. Although, this is Mexico, so anything goes... I will update if and when I hear anything new. Mientras, only ~1 month to go until our move!
