7 ms·

This was her mistake: "..where a young man somberly asked me what brought me to the UK. “I’m giving a talk at a conference then traveling to see a bit of Engla

by jbob2000 10y ago

This was her mistake: "..where a young man somberly asked me what brought me to the UK. “I’m giving a talk at a conference then traveling to see a bit of England. I have a letter of invitation,” I replied, confidently handing over the requested documents." Just say "A short vacation", whether it is or not. Don't give the agent any more information than they need. Throughout her entire encounter with the agents, she was giving way more information than she needed to, which was prompting further questions.

Zikes 10y ago
"Being compliant and truthful with the authorities in a routine border crossing was her mistake." Whether or not it "just works", or how often people do it, that is just insane.
- eitally 10y ago
  But the agents don't actually want to know why people are traveling. Knowing that forces them to actually do something that isn't routine, which is annoying and a time sink. It's better to withhold information unless explicitly requested, to simplify and streamline the flow for both you as passenger and they as agents.
  - lucozade 10y ago
    > It's better to withhold information unless explicitly requested But that's not the question. The question is whether or not it's better to lie about why you're travelling. Now, for some percentage of the time it probably is better in practice. But it's a trade with a fairly large downside. Border agents have lots of reasons to carry out checks so you'll need to be very sure that everything else is completely fine and be lucky you don't hit a random check. And they do check. I've had to vouch for people at airports and they've checked social media, Google etc. For the lady in the article, it sounds like what she went through was solely for flouting work laws (and being rude but that would have just affected the degree of surliness). You get caught for directly lying and they'll be all over you for illegal immigration/terrorism. I would expect that to be more lengthy and more unpleasant than the unfortunate lady experienced. My advice? If you want to earn money in a foreign country do it legally. At the very least check with the consulate/embassy and get their answer in writing if possible.
    - eitally 10y ago
      I agree 100%. In this case she should have dotted i's and crossed t's and known inside & out exactly what the rule are governing the actions she was planning. As a longtime corporate employee, even I knew that specifying anything besides "business meetings" throws flags... but this isn't common knowledge for most people, nor are the minutiae governing specific reasons for travel to specific places. For example, if you've never traveled to a country that requires a visa but which only sells visas upon landing at their port of entry, that can be disconcerting. Will they take credit cards? What about my native currency? Do I need special paperwork? Will they stamp my passport or issue a new sheet? Can they just send me home?
      - lucozade 10y ago
        Indeed. What I think is happening is that international travel is a little too easy. Not a bad thing of itself but it's easy to get caught out thinking that it's just like intranatioanl travel. It hit home to me a few years ago when I was travelling between the US and UK a fair amount. One time I arrived in JFK and realised that all the ATMs were down. I also realised that I had travelled thousands of miles and hadn't bothered to carry any local currency. It hadn't occurred to me that this was a bit stupid because, well, it hadn't been a problem before. Was a bit of a wake up call to think a bit more in future.
mpeg 10y ago
It's not about lying, it's about giving only the information requested. "I'm attending a conference" would have been ok too, or even "I'm travelling for business" - I've used both in the US without the border agent asking any more questions. When you volunteer a lot of information you come across as nervous, and sketchy
- panglott 10y ago
  This wasn't "her mistake", in the sense that the crucial difference "giving a talk at a conference" and "attending a conference" have meaning within the bureaucracy that is totally inscrutable to outsiders. She was being judged at a trial with secret rules.
  - germanier 10y ago
    That difference (getting paid) is spelt out quite clearly on the UK Home Office's website and is certainly not a secret. Failure to check upon requirements does not excuse her even if personally thinking that a policy change is needed.
    - panglott 10y ago
      The difference (as described in her post) was that the conference was sponsored by a German organization, not a UK-based one, and that was not detailed on the Web site.
      - germanier 10y ago
        Even if the conference would have been sponsored by a British organization this would have resulted in the same outcome no matter what she described in her post.
        panglott 10y ago
        "[The officer] told me that the honorarium and letter of invitation only applies if the company inviting you to the UK is based in the United Kingdom. This clarification was not on the gov.uk site I and the organizers poured over."
settsu 10y ago
So the victim is to blame for their honesty? How does this improve security?
- vinceguidry 10y ago
  The point is not to blame the victim for her actions, (that's in the past) but to advise on how to avoid such a situation yourself. (in the future) Border crossings are one of those utterly weird situations where not knowing what's up will put you at odds with people who have zero respect for your convenience or comfort and are perfectly willing to remove you from both. And you won't learn what's up the first, second, third, or even fourth time you go through. You have to first appreciate the gravity of the situation and then second learn what you have to in order to gain successful passage. Borders are where ordinary people run right smack into geopolitics. Most of us have learned the lesson from others to not bring plants or currency across borders, and not to say you're working without a work visa, but there's lots of other things that can fuck you over. I learn something every time I read a story like this. In this case it's about the necessity of not giving the appearance of tax avoidance. This particular situation had nothing to do with security, they weren't worried about her trying to attack the UK.
  - tobltobs 10y ago
    And what would your "advise" be if she would get into trouble for lying to a custom officer? I guess something like "Just don't lie".
    - vinceguidry 10y ago
      In order you to get in trouble for lying then they have to catch you in a lie. The easiest way for them to do that is for them to get you to admit to lying. This is why it's so important for you to give short, non-committal answers to their questions that reveal nothing, and to never let your guard down, because customs officials (any kind of security personnel, really) are not your friends.
      - 10y ago
icebraining 10y ago
Isn't it illegal to work for money while claiming you're just doing tourism? Seems like it could get her denied from future visits.
- omonra 10y ago
  When dealing with a rigid system built on stupid rules it's better to avoid direct confrontation. She would have a 0.1% chance of being denied future visits vs the 50% chance of going through the experience she faced.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    Are you saying that 50% of the US visitors to the UK who say anything other than "short vacation" get that experience? I frankly find that hard to believe.
    - omonra 10y ago
      No - I'm saying that when she said to the border agent 'I'm going to give a talk at a conference' the situation became 50-50. He could have nodded along and said 'I hope you have a good opening joke' or he could go down the route it ultimately went.
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  This is correct. That's why there is a distinction between vacation vs. business visits. Whoever is reading this: don't take advice you read on the Internet regarding these types of things. Just this thread alone contains a ton of misinformation that can get you in big trouble.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
Grue3 10y ago
When I visited UK for the first time I did say I was giving a talk at a conference (which was true). I didn't know you're not supposed to say that. Granted that was many years ago, but they let me through. I think the important part is that she visited for a second time. They already had her in the database and flagged her for some reason.
- gsnedders 10y ago
  Giving a talk at a conference is fine. Getting paid to give a talk at a conference is for many (most?) categories of conference employment and hence not fine.
btbuildem 10y ago
"A short vacation" would have been a lie. "I'm attending a conference" would have been better - I agree with you, give them minimum, make them ask for more. Unless you're triggering red flags, they'll move on.
outworlder 10y ago
Agreed, but be careful. * Do not lie to immigration officials, ever! * I can't stress this enough. "Attending a conference" would have been true. The fact that she was a speaker as well is additional information that she could disclose if asked. "A short vacation" could work, but beware. Depending on the country, this could get a flight back very quickly. Taking the US as an example: there's a "tourism" visa, and there's a "business", which includes attending conferences. For convenience, they have been issuing both at the same time if you ask for it on your application. However, if you only have the "tourism" visa, and it turns out that you are doing non-touristic activities at any time (such as going to a conference) and you don't have the required visa for that, you will be turned back. As for the letter of invitation, if things are going smoothly, then it is not needed. If things start to look like they aren't going so well, then you pull out the letter of invitation. Any information you volunteer opens new avenues for questioning. At some point you might be misinterpreted or be asked follow up questions that you don't recall. That never helps. I don't wish this sort of experience to anyone. But the thing is, she's complaining as if the UK was an outlier. Her country does the same things, only worse. Disclaimer: My views may be biased, but they are from experience. Spent 4 hours to go through japanese immigration once - with my uncle, who is a citizen, in the next room(which I couldn't see) to check my answers. Were it not for him, I would have been sent back for sure. Several US visas issued in the last few years, no rejections. No issues per se, other than navigating the amount of paperwork required (and double, triple, quadruple checking any information before submitting) and the required traveling. There's also the research required to make damn sure I was complying with all requirements. Spent some time in a "yellow room" at the Atlanta port of entry. Consulate had messed up my fingerprints. Went through immigration through Portugal a few times. No issues, even if they had to double check my info.
- refurb 10y ago
  All good points. If you say "here for a quick vacation", then they search your belongings and find an agenda for a conference or business papers, you can be sure you'll be denied entry.
  - outworlder 10y ago

Zikes 10y ago

"Being compliant and truthful with the authorities in a routine border crossing was her mistake." Whether or not it "just works", or how often people do it, that is just insane.

eitally 10y ago
But the agents don't actually want to know why people are traveling. Knowing that forces them to actually do something that isn't routine, which is annoying and a time sink. It's better to withhold information unless explicitly requested, to simplify and streamline the flow for both you as passenger and they as agents.
- lucozade 10y ago
  > It's better to withhold information unless explicitly requested But that's not the question. The question is whether or not it's better to lie about why you're travelling. Now, for some percentage of the time it probably is better in practice. But it's a trade with a fairly large downside. Border agents have lots of reasons to carry out checks so you'll need to be very sure that everything else is completely fine and be lucky you don't hit a random check. And they do check. I've had to vouch for people at airports and they've checked social media, Google etc. For the lady in the article, it sounds like what she went through was solely for flouting work laws (and being rude but that would have just affected the degree of surliness). You get caught for directly lying and they'll be all over you for illegal immigration/terrorism. I would expect that to be more lengthy and more unpleasant than the unfortunate lady experienced. My advice? If you want to earn money in a foreign country do it legally. At the very least check with the consulate/embassy and get their answer in writing if possible.
  - eitally 10y ago
    I agree 100%. In this case she should have dotted i's and crossed t's and known inside & out exactly what the rule are governing the actions she was planning. As a longtime corporate employee, even I knew that specifying anything besides "business meetings" throws flags... but this isn't common knowledge for most people, nor are the minutiae governing specific reasons for travel to specific places. For example, if you've never traveled to a country that requires a visa but which only sells visas upon landing at their port of entry, that can be disconcerting. Will they take credit cards? What about my native currency? Do I need special paperwork? Will they stamp my passport or issue a new sheet? Can they just send me home?
    - lucozade 10y ago
      Indeed. What I think is happening is that international travel is a little too easy. Not a bad thing of itself but it's easy to get caught out thinking that it's just like intranatioanl travel. It hit home to me a few years ago when I was travelling between the US and UK a fair amount. One time I arrived in JFK and realised that all the ATMs were down. I also realised that I had travelled thousands of miles and hadn't bothered to carry any local currency. It hadn't occurred to me that this was a bit stupid because, well, it hadn't been a problem before. Was a bit of a wake up call to think a bit more in future.

mpeg 10y ago

It's not about lying, it's about giving only the information requested. "I'm attending a conference" would have been ok too, or even "I'm travelling for business" - I've used both in the US without the border agent asking any more questions. When you volunteer a lot of information you come across as nervous, and sketchy

panglott 10y ago
This wasn't "her mistake", in the sense that the crucial difference "giving a talk at a conference" and "attending a conference" have meaning within the bureaucracy that is totally inscrutable to outsiders. She was being judged at a trial with secret rules.
- germanier 10y ago
  That difference (getting paid) is spelt out quite clearly on the UK Home Office's website and is certainly not a secret. Failure to check upon requirements does not excuse her even if personally thinking that a policy change is needed.
  - panglott 10y ago
    The difference (as described in her post) was that the conference was sponsored by a German organization, not a UK-based one, and that was not detailed on the Web site.
    - germanier 10y ago
      Even if the conference would have been sponsored by a British organization this would have resulted in the same outcome no matter what she described in her post.
      - panglott 10y ago
        "[The officer] told me that the honorarium and letter of invitation only applies if the company inviting you to the UK is based in the United Kingdom. This clarification was not on the gov.uk site I and the organizers poured over."

settsu 10y ago

So the victim is to blame for their honesty? How does this improve security?

vinceguidry 10y ago
The point is not to blame the victim for her actions, (that's in the past) but to advise on how to avoid such a situation yourself. (in the future) Border crossings are one of those utterly weird situations where not knowing what's up will put you at odds with people who have zero respect for your convenience or comfort and are perfectly willing to remove you from both. And you won't learn what's up the first, second, third, or even fourth time you go through. You have to first appreciate the gravity of the situation and then second learn what you have to in order to gain successful passage. Borders are where ordinary people run right smack into geopolitics. Most of us have learned the lesson from others to not bring plants or currency across borders, and not to say you're working without a work visa, but there's lots of other things that can fuck you over. I learn something every time I read a story like this. In this case it's about the necessity of not giving the appearance of tax avoidance. This particular situation had nothing to do with security, they weren't worried about her trying to attack the UK.
- tobltobs 10y ago
  And what would your "advise" be if she would get into trouble for lying to a custom officer? I guess something like "Just don't lie".
  - vinceguidry 10y ago
    In order you to get in trouble for lying then they have to catch you in a lie. The easiest way for them to do that is for them to get you to admit to lying. This is why it's so important for you to give short, non-committal answers to their questions that reveal nothing, and to never let your guard down, because customs officials (any kind of security personnel, really) are not your friends.
    - 10y ago

icebraining 10y ago

Isn't it illegal to work for money while claiming you're just doing tourism? Seems like it could get her denied from future visits.

omonra 10y ago
When dealing with a rigid system built on stupid rules it's better to avoid direct confrontation. She would have a 0.1% chance of being denied future visits vs the 50% chance of going through the experience she faced.
- icebraining 10y ago
  Are you saying that 50% of the US visitors to the UK who say anything other than "short vacation" get that experience? I frankly find that hard to believe.
  - omonra 10y ago
    No - I'm saying that when she said to the border agent 'I'm going to give a talk at a conference' the situation became 50-50. He could have nodded along and said 'I hope you have a good opening joke' or he could go down the route it ultimately went.
enraged_camel 10y ago
This is correct. That's why there is a distinction between vacation vs. business visits. Whoever is reading this: don't take advice you read on the Internet regarding these types of things. Just this thread alone contains a ton of misinformation that can get you in big trouble.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

Grue3 10y ago

When I visited UK for the first time I did say I was giving a talk at a conference (which was true). I didn't know you're not supposed to say that. Granted that was many years ago, but they let me through. I think the important part is that she visited for a second time. They already had her in the database and flagged her for some reason.

gsnedders 10y ago
Giving a talk at a conference is fine. Getting paid to give a talk at a conference is for many (most?) categories of conference employment and hence not fine.

btbuildem 10y ago

"A short vacation" would have been a lie. "I'm attending a conference" would have been better - I agree with you, give them minimum, make them ask for more. Unless you're triggering red flags, they'll move on.

outworlder 10y ago

Agreed, but be careful. * Do not lie to immigration officials, ever! * I can't stress this enough. "Attending a conference" would have been true. The fact that she was a speaker as well is additional information that she could disclose if asked. "A short vacation" could work, but beware. Depending on the country, this could get a flight back very quickly. Taking the US as an example: there's a "tourism" visa, and there's a "business", which includes attending conferences. For convenience, they have been issuing both at the same time if you ask for it on your application. However, if you only have the "tourism" visa, and it turns out that you are doing non-touristic activities at any time (such as going to a conference) and you don't have the required visa for that, you will be turned back. As for the letter of invitation, if things are going smoothly, then it is not needed. If things start to look like they aren't going so well, then you pull out the letter of invitation. Any information you volunteer opens new avenues for questioning. At some point you might be misinterpreted or be asked follow up questions that you don't recall. That never helps. I don't wish this sort of experience to anyone. But the thing is, she's complaining as if the UK was an outlier. Her country does the same things, only worse. Disclaimer: My views may be biased, but they are from experience. Spent 4 hours to go through japanese immigration once - with my uncle, who is a citizen, in the next room(which I couldn't see) to check my answers. Were it not for him, I would have been sent back for sure. Several US visas issued in the last few years, no rejections. No issues per se, other than navigating the amount of paperwork required (and double, triple, quadruple checking any information before submitting) and the required traveling. There's also the research required to make damn sure I was complying with all requirements. Spent some time in a "yellow room" at the Atlanta port of entry. Consulate had messed up my fingerprints. Went through immigration through Portugal a few times. No issues, even if they had to double check my info.

refurb 10y ago
All good points. If you say "here for a quick vacation", then they search your belongings and find an agenda for a conference or business papers, you can be sure you'll be denied entry.
- outworlder 10y ago