‘Stable job, Rs 50 lakh savings still denied’: Customs officer’s US visa rejected in just 3 minutes

An Indian government officer shared his experience in depriving him of an American tourism visa, despite what he described as a stable profession, financial security, and there is no intention to settle abroad. The account was published on r/usvisaschareding On Redit earlier this week.

The 40 -year -old customs officer said that he and his wife attended a B1/B2 visa interview at the American embassy in September 2025. The interview wrote, hardly three minutes.

He said: “The entire matter continued for about 3 minutes. No questions were asked about my money, my property, etc.. I carried all the documents necessary to support my claims, but nothing has been asked or asked at all.”

According to his position, the officer asked Al -Qunsali about the purpose of the trip, the planned destinations, the duration of the residence, and the professions and income of the spouses. The officer said he made it clear that they had planned a two -week vacation covering New York and Las Vegas, and they returned from Los Angeles. He also announced his government service, his wife’s job as a kindergarten teacher, and her joint annual income of about 20 dollars.

Nevertheless, the request was rejected under Article 214 (B), a standard floor for denying insufficient ties to the mother country. “If a legitimate government employee has a permanent stable job, then his own home, and large investments are not” strong ties in the homeland “, then I do not know what it is.

The applicant added that he has more than 50 dollars in savings and investments, owns a house, and has no relatives in the United States. He previously traveled to Dubai and Thailand now planning trips to Japan and Ireland instead.

While I was disappointed by rejection, he noticed practically: “Goodness-I saved about 8-10 for Lakh (I would really visit us in January 2026). Now I will visit Japan for a winter trip and Ireland in the summer-and I still save some of the remaining money.”

At the same time, he was frustrated with how to conduct consular interviews. “Some may say that I spoke less, and that my responses were very small. But if they issued a visa, the same people will say that my responses were sufficient. The interviews are completely self, all depend on Vo and its mental framework.”

He also rejected suggestions that the flight line raised red flags: “Some people may say that New York and Vegas are completely far away. I was visiting for two weeks! It is a few hours from New York to Vigas. I had money, I had planned for the trip, calculated my expenses, stayed in emergency situations, and I was going back.”

A comparison of his case with others at the embassy, ​​he said: “A couple in front of me, although he could not speak the appropriate English language, retired from the service, gave a visa – their son was already in the United States of America.”

The officer linked such results to the wider visa concerns. “Many visa fraud for a long time – the people who overlook them, work there, etc., this means that the rule of Vos is doubtful. It has allowed, in the past and currently, all kinds of people in the United States of America on a random basis (who gave“ perfect responses), but they deprive them of the money they enjoy. Refuse the visa – I understand.

The reactions were directed by their colleagues from his colleagues. One of the users mocked: “He should have been mentioned about the black money man.”

Another was more sympathetic, and writing: “I don’t see any major red sign in your interview. Perhaps the SFO Fumble may make Vo think you will go SF but chose not to mention it. It’s really random and mostly depends on today. There is no big deal, progress again after a few months or so.”