Jim's List site down

[michaelb]

>>Jamie is no longer with his wife.<<

How is that remotely relevant?!?

Is the guy who installed your satellite TV married?!? Does it matter?!

Candidly, I find the question so totally IRRELEVANT that it raises serious questions about the motive to even raise it.

>>Jamie did not agree to the Agency Code of Ethics and is not IMBRA Compliant<<

Jamie did not indicate agreement or disagreement with the ACoE.

In terms of Jamie's IMBRA compliance, have you asked him if his agency is compliant? And if his agency is NOT compliant, have you asked if his agency is REQUIRED to be compliant?

My position on IMBRA compliance is a matter of public record - and while I think the law stinks, it remains the law of the US and needs to be followed. There are also specific exclusions to IMBRA. I have not checked, nor asked, but it *is* possible Jamie's agency is exempt from IMBRA. Have you asked him?

>>Jamie is only interested in helping people who buy his expensive package.<<

bcc - have you ever owned a company? I see a lot of people making demands of improved customer service - and I generally agree. At the same time, there are some fundamentals of a market economy. The law of supply and demand - and there are human factors involved.

Do you recall the TV program called 'Vegas'? If so, did you see the special treatment the casinos gave to customers they called "Whales"? It is a common practice and it occurs in every business.

Jamie is no different.

You guys need to get over it - and you need to maybe get a crash course in the fundamentals of business ownership in a market economy.

- Dan

I don't know Dan, going to have to disagree with your logic here. Granted, I've never been (and not likely to be) an agency client, so guess that makes me not qualified to express an opinion per Jamie's standards. And I suspect maybe bcc's motives aren't as pure as newly fallen snow. But it is a relevant question. Using your own analogy, nobody is asking Jamie to install a TV dish nor repair an auto, and I don't think he is holding himself out as an expert in those fields either. But, I'd expect my TV guy to keep his own TV working and my mechanic's daily driver to be roadworthy. Jamie does hold himself out as an expert in matrimonial matters between US men and Colombian women. Now, I don't know if he's (still? or ever?) married or not, but it is a relevant question.

As far as asking "Are you IMBRA compliant?", that was a straight up yes or no question that merits a straight up yes or no answer, not "I'll tell you later, in a different thread".  I interpret the lack of a "yes" answer to mean "No, but I don't want to come right out and say that." Tell you what, if he doesn't respond to this with a "Yes, my agency is IMBRA compliant" or "No, we are not compliant", I'll start a thread that asks that question (and he can cut and paste his answer from this very sentence).  I don't like the law either and my personal opinion (already expressed in another thread, anybody that cares to can look it up) is that it is unconstitutional. But, until it is overturned, using a non-compliant agency may become grounds for not approving a I-129 petition or denying a visa if the consulate officer or some jerk in one of La Migra's back offices decides they want to play hardball.

[Dan]

I don't know Dan, going to have to disagree with your logic here. Granted, I've never been (and not likely to be) an agency client, so guess that makes me not qualified to express an opinion per Jamie's standards. And I suspect maybe bcc's motives aren't as pure as newly fallen snow. But it is a relevant question. Using your own analogy, nobody is asking Jamie to install a TV dish nor repair an auto, and I don't think he is holding himself out as an expert in those fields either. But, I'd expect my TV guy to keep his own TV working and my mechanic's daily driver to be roadworthy. Jamie does hold himself out as an expert in matrimonial matters between US men and Colombian women. Now, I don't know if he's (still? or ever?) married or not, but it is a relevant question.

As far as asking "Are you IMBRA compliant?", that was a straight up yes or no question that merits a straight up yes or no answer, not "I'll tell you later, in a different thread".  I interpret the lack of a "yes" answer to mean "No, but I don't want to come right out and say that." Tell you what, if he doesn't respond to this with a "Yes, my agency is IMBRA compliant" or "No, we are not compliant", I'll start a thread that asks that question (and he can cut and paste his answer from this very sentence).  I don't like the law either and my personal opinion (already expressed in another thread, anybody that cares to can look it up) is that it is unconstitutional. But, until it is overturned, using a non-compliant agency may become grounds for not approving a I-129 petition or denying a visa if the consulate officer or some jerk in one of La Migra's back offices decides they want to play hardball.

I hear you - so let's explore a bit further:

>>Jamie does hold himself out as an expert in matrimonial matters between US men and Colombian women. Now, I don't know if he's (still? or ever?) married or not, but it is a relevant question.<<

Does Jamie hold himself out to be an "expert in matrimonial matters"? I honestly don't know.

My sense is that Jamie offers access - and really, this *IS* the issue. It is all about the terms of the transaction. A few posts upthread, I referenced that engaging an agency is a business transaction. In ANY business transaction, there is an exchange - services for money. More specifically - WHAT services and for HOW MUCH money.

I suspect it comes down to the fact the 'contract' with most agencies are implied. That is - they are not written. As a consequence, there is WAY too much room for interpretation and disappointment.

Does Jamie offer consulting services or simply accessibility? The difference is HUGE - though I still fail to see the relevance of his marital status. Is Jamie automatically ineffective as a consultant (a/k/a "expert") if he is not married?

Look at it another way. If simply being married is the qualifier that determines Jamie's credibility and capacity to be effective as a consultant - I'd bet it would be VERY easy for him to get married (if he is not already). How does being married make him any more, or less, credible as a consultant?

Sorry - I just do not see the relevance.

>>But, until it is overturned, using a non-compliant agency may become grounds for not approving a I-129 petition or denying a visa if the consulate officer or some jerk in one of La Migra's back offices decides they want to play hardball.<<

Michael, we are generally in agreement on this point - and I understand your reaction to Jamie's non-answer. Still, my personal preference is to NOT draw conclusions until all the facts are known - and believe it is best to ask sincere questions to gain the facts necessary to draw those conclusions. Just me.

As for IMBRA enforcement - there is presently NO language in the legislation that would allow the Consular Officer to deny a visa based on IMBRA violations. The ONLY enforcement actions available to the authorities are brought against the agency. Unfortunately, the Consular Officers have so much latitude, they can deny for no reason at all - and to that extent, I suppose an IMBRA violation could be the cause of a visa denial, but if it were ever cited as such, it would be quickly overturned if challenged.

- Dan

[bcc_1_2]

I'm not really interested in arguing just how relevant the marriage issue is. At least not yet.

However it is something he touted on his business website so it is fair game. So is asking him if he is compliant with the Code of Ethics. I'll just avoid any further side arguments and wait for answers to those questions.

These are two very relevant questions that are clearly being avoided

[bcc_1_2]

As far as asking "Are you IMBRA compliant?", that was a straight up yes or no question that merits a straight up yes or no answer, not "I'll tell you later, in a different thread".  I interpret the lack of a "yes" answer to mean "No, but I don't want to come right out and say that

I agree. Nothing wrong with playing an intermediary and all that and encouraging everyone to do their own research and make their own decisions. But at some point you've got to decide what side of the fence you are on. Why not just focus in on these basic questions. Get answers and then go from there? Jamie posts on this site all the time. He is clearly aware of the Code of Ethics if he has spent any time on this forum. Why make excuses for him? Why not just say hey, no free pass, no BS, clearly answer the two direct questions,

Are you seperated or divorced (relevant because he touted his relationship on his business website)?

Do you comply and agree with the terms of the Code of Ethics?

Very simple. Now answer directly.

[Dan]

I agree. Nothing wrong with playing an intermediary and all that and encouraging everyone to do their own research and make their own decisions. But at some point you've got to decide what side of the fence you are on. Why not just focus in on these basic questions. Get answers and then go from there? Jamie posts on this site all the time. He is clearly aware of the Code of Ethics if he has spent any time on this forum. Why make excuses for him? Why not just say hey, no free pass, no BS, clearly answer the two direct questions,

Are you seperated or divorced (relevant because he touted his relationship on his business website)?

Do you comply and agree with the terms of the Code of Ethics?

Very simple. Now answer directly.

>>(relevant because he touted his relationship on his business website)<<

What, exactly, does Jamie say on his website that you are interpreting as having "touted his relationship"?

I am not disputing your claim - but want to see it.

- Dan

[michaelb]

Does Jamie hold himself out to be an "expert in matrimonial matters"? I honestly don't know.

Com'on Dan, you're either being coy or you haven't looked at his website.
----------------------

Does Jamie offer consulting services or simply accessibility?

If all he were trying to offer is accessibility, all he would need (and have) on his site is:
1) Here are some profiles, including nice pictures, of the ladies signed with us.
2) Here are some sleeping accommodations you may rent from us.
3) Here are some pictures of our office and a list of equipment (fax, telephone, internet etc.) you will have use of.
4) Yes! Translators are available.
5) Price list.
6) Here is how you can get in touch with us.

He wouldn't need all that other advice (actually, most of it pretty good advice, in fact I didn't see any of it that I could disagree with).

-------------------------

Direct quote from his site: "They will inform you of where you stand with the women you are interested in, plan and arrange your requested activities and advise and protect what is in your best interest"

If he wasn't 'consulting' and presenting himself and his staff as 'experts', he wouldn't say stuff like that. Not that he and his staff shouldn't do those things, mind you, but by saying that they do them and claiming they do them well, he is presenting them as 'experts' and you know darn well that's his intent.

-------------------------


Is Jamie automatically ineffective as a consultant (a/k/a "expert") if he is not married?

No, but if he claims he is but the marriage is over (either legally terminated or de facto they're not together anymore and/or can't stand each other), then it kind of hurts his 'expert' standing. But, that's why it's a relevant question, I honestly don't know the answer and am in no way implying that there is anything wrong with his marriage, or even if he is married. Come to think of it, I never saw any "Me and my wife, isn't she lovely?" pictures or claims anywhere on his website. Maybe and I just overlooked them and bcc saw them? 

[bcc_1_2]

Maybe and I just overlooked them and bcc saw them? 

It has been awhile since I've spent much time on Jamie's website (I went to Cali instead of the coast).

http://www.latin-wife.com/the_experts_speak.asp

I just quickly went to his website and scanned through it (al beit very quickly). That will link to a picture of him and his (ex?) wife on the site. I'm not sure how many pictures of them are still on the site and how many were on in the past. But there was some text on the site about her in the past and pictures (there is at least one still there that I linked to).

I do remember him using her in the past to market his website and even the pictures suggest he is not a single male agency owner. Back when I first visited his site I got the clear message that he was a happily married agency owner that would keep it real with his clients. So I think we can ask the question. I'd have to second Michaelb's opinion on Jamie holding himself out to be an "expert in matrimonial matters".

But regardless I'm willing to debate all that. After we get some answers.

[Researcher]

Actually, non-compliance with IMBRA (if it is a requirement for that agency), would *BE* a violation of the Agency Code of Ethics.

Reference paragraph 2-B of the ACoE, excerpted here:
- Dan

 So Jamie is required to do a background check on his US clients and provide this info to his female clients and obtain written permission from the female client before they meet.This is the law Dan.

[Dan]

 So Jamie is required to do a background check on his US clients and provide this info to his female clients and obtain written permission from the female client before they meet.This is the law Dan.

Yep, I am pretty clear on the law. What is not yet clear (to me) is whether Jamie is; (a) conforming to IMBRA, (b) required to conform to IMBRA (there are exclusion considerations), or (c) subscribing to the tenets of the ACoE.

Until he addresses those questions, we can continue to speculate - but that seems an unproductive use of time and energy. Better to get the answers, and then draw whatever conclusion each person feels is appropriate and best for them.

- Dan

[Dan]

Does Jamie hold himself out to be an "expert in matrimonial matters"? I honestly don't know.

Com'on Dan, you're either being coy or you haven't looked at his website.

The latter not the former.

In spite of the fact I waded into this particular squabble, I normally ignore this sort of stuff because it doesn't interest me much. I suspect it has been a year or so since I last clicked on Jamie's site. I just have no reason to do so.

As for his marital status - if he elects to answer the question, fine. I remain unconvinced that it is related to his ability to be effective as an effective consultant - but if others choose to include that among their list of 'qualifiers' - that is their prerogative.

- Dan

[Researcher]

Yep, I am pretty clear on the law. What is not yet clear (to me) is whether Jamie is; (a) conforming to IMBRA, (b) required to conform to IMBRA (there are exclusion considerations), or (c) subscribing to the tenets of the ACoE.

Until he addresses those questions, we can continue to speculate - but that seems an unproductive use of time and energy. Better to get the answers, and then draw whatever conclusion each person feels is appropriate and best for them.

- Dan

 Definition of an International Marriage Broker. “International marriage broker” is defined as an entity (whether or not U.S.-based) that charges fees for providing matchmaking services or social referrals between U.S. citizens/permanent residents and foreign nationals.

Quote from Jamie:RPCV we are a Colombian company and we are not required to follow this American laws.

 http://www.planet-love.com/forum/index.php?topic=4057.75

[Dan]

Definition of an International Marriage Broker. “International marriage broker” is defined as an entity (whether or not U.S.-based) that charges fees for providing matchmaking services or social referrals between U.S. citizens/permanent residents and foreign nationals.

Quote from Jamie:RPCV we are a Colombian company and we are not required to follow this American laws.

 http://www.planet-love.com/forum/index.php?topic=4057.75

OK - so it seems Jamie believes his agency is not required to conform to IMBRA.

My read of the law is a bit different, but I am not an attorney. I have the same difference of opinion with Mike Krosky, the owner of Cherry Blossoms - and a few others.

BTW - in case you (or anyone else) is interested, I have attached an IMBRA Client Information Form that shows what information an IMBRA-compliant agency *must* collect about each US client.

FYI

- Dan

[bcc_1_2]

OK - so it seems Jamie believes his agency is not required to conform to IMBRA.

My read of the law is a bit different, but I am not an attorney.

He couldn't post this himself? Isn't this the guy questioning people's manhood?

Anyways common Dan let's be real here.

Is he compliant with IMBRA and your ACoE?

[Dan]

He couldn't post this himself? Isn't this the guy questioning people's manhood?

Anyways common Dan let's be real here.

Is he compliant with IMBRA and your ACoE?

bcc - you really need to try harder to keep up.

Researcher made a post containing a link in which Jamie has already answered the question about his agency's IMBRA compliance. Look about 3 posts prior to this one.

My comment was acknowledging that Jamie already answered the question.

I do not read every post here - and was not aware that Jamie already answered the question. I guess you were not aware either?

- Dan

[bcc_1_2]

bcc - you really need to try harder to keep up.

Researcher made a post containing a link in which Jamie has already answered the question about his agency's IMBRA compliance. Look about 3 posts prior to this one.

My comment was acknowledging that Jamie already answered the question.

I read that link but didn't see Jamie say yes we are IMBRA compliant (or no for that matter) And what about the ACoE?

He said he doesn't have to obey American laws because he is in Colombia. I mean come on Dan. I asked you the question because instead of posting in the board Jamie is just private emailing you.

If someone asks you if you are compliant with Amercian laws and you said I don't have to obey them because my business is in Colombia that means something.

Jamie is not IMBRA compliant and is not meeting the terms of the ACoE (not unlike many agencies).

Do you agree with this statement Dan?

[bcc_1_2]

Never mind you don't need to answer it Dan. We have lawyers here that have passed the bar that we could ask (and the answer is obvious)

But oh well at least we have some kryptonite for the mind numbing infomerical dribble right?

If you want Jamie to go away all you have to do is ask him about his wife or if he is IMBRA compliant and adheres to PL's ACoE. 

[Dan]

I read that link but didn't see Jamie say yes we are IMBRA compliant (or no for that matter) And what about the ACoE?

He said he doesn't have to obey American laws because he is in Colombia. I mean come on Dan. I asked you the question because instead of posting in the board Jamie is just private emailing you.

If someone asks you if you are compliant with Amercian laws and you said I don't have to obey them because my business is in Colombia that means something.

Jamie is not IMBRA compliant and is not meeting the terms of the ACoE (not unlike many agencies).

Do you agree with this statement Dan?

Never mind you don't need to answer it Dan. We have lawyers here that have passed the bar that we could ask (and the answer is obvious)

But oh well at least we have some kryptonite for the mind numbing infomerical dribble right?

If you want Jamie to go away all you have to do is ask him about his wife or if he is IMBRA compliant and adheres to PL's ACoE. 

I am not afraid of answering your question.

>>I asked you the question because instead of posting in the board Jamie is just private emailing you.<<

Jamie is, indeed, honoring my request that he (and FindaLatina) restrict themselves to the dispute between the two of them. It is, for now, being addressed in PM's, and it *may* eventually find its way to the PL Court.

There has not been a single word in those exchanges about IMBRA.

In terms of IMBRA compliance - it seems Jamie answered that question previously, and wrote that he believes he does not have to comply.

In terms of ACoE compliance - Jamie is not a subscriber to the CMA program and we have never evaluated his agency for any level of certification.  Unless and until those reviews are performed, the only thing I can tell you is to use the ACoE to perform your own evaluation of ANY agency's conformance.

- Dan

[bcc_1_2]

I am not afraid of answering your question.


In terms of IMBRA compliance - it seems Jamie answered that question previously, and wrote that he believes he does not have to comply.

In terms of ACoE compliance - Jamie is not a subscriber to the CMA program and we have never evaluated his agency for any level of certification.  Unless and until those reviews are performed, the only thing I can tell you is to use the ACoE to perform your own evaluation of ANY agency's conformance.

- Dan

Ok thanks Dan. So we know Jamie is not compliant with IMBRA therefore he can not agree and accept the ACoE.

And you previously asserted that if the agency doesn't agree and accept the ACoE then you suggest not doing business with them? Is that correct?

[Dan]

Ok thanks Dan. So we know Jamie is not compliant with IMBRA therefore he can not agree and accept the ACoE.

And you previously asserted that if the agency doesn't agree and accept the ACoE then you suggest not doing business with them? Is that correct?

bcc - you seem hell-bent on trying to 'put words in my mouth.' I am not going to bite.

What I have stated, repeatedly (do I need to go back and link you to all the occasions you apparently did not read?) is:

* The ACoE is a resource developed for people to use for making decisions about ethical behaviors by agencies.
* PL promotes and encourages the tenet of individual choice.

In this particular instance, Jamie may have a very good reason for his position that his agency is not required to comply with IMBRA. Just because I make a different interpretation of the law does not necessarily mean I am right, and I am not at all familiar with Jamie's agency.

Lack of IMBRA compliance does NOT directly equate to lack of ACoE compliance. Read again the post I made a while back in which I posted the ACoE excerpt that is applicable.

bcc - I am done with this. I don't have the time, and my interest has expired, in chasing after these petty issues of yours.

Either get to real issues - or give it up. This pettiness is assinine.

- Dan

[bcc_1_2]

I think it is very much a real issue.  I don't feel like I'm the one being petty or anything of that nature.

I asked a question that required a yes or a no. Seems very simple to me.

To be fair I don't think many agencies comply with this US law (because they aren't in the USA). But still it only required a yes or no response.

[Dan]

I think it is very much a real issue.  I don't feel like I'm the one being petty or anything of that nature.

I asked a question that required a yes or a no. Seems very simple to me.

To be fair I don't think many agencies comply with this US law (because they aren't in the USA). But still it only required a yes or no response.

bcc - if you are being sincere and the issues you raise are really and truly significant to you, I wish you all the best as you are certainly going to need it.

I am done with this silliness - unless it threatens to disrupt the board, in which case I will intervene.

- Dan

[Researcher]

OK - so it seems Jamie believes his agency is not required to conform to IMBRA.

My read of the law is a bit different, but I am not an attorney. I have the same difference of opinion with Mike Krosky, the owner of Cherry Blossoms - and a few others.

BTW - in case you (or anyone else) is interested, I have attached an IMBRA Client Information Form that shows what information an IMBRA-compliant agency *must* collect about each US client.

FYI

- Dan

    My view is based on my experiences with the visa process that I recently went through and information I gathered during it. I stood in front of a CO in Bogota and answered their questions.I told them how I met my wife(through a IMB that is actually IMBRA compliant, LAI)and I am glad I used this agency. I had to not only give them the name of the IMB but also contact info.According to the info I gathered:Consular offices must provide the foreign client lady with a copy of the fiancée visa application (form I-129) with the information on the U.S. citizen requested by the form. The consular officer is also required to inquire on whether the relationship was facilitated by an IMB; if this is the case, the consular officer will assure that the IMB provided the foreign lady with information and documents about the U.S. citizen's background. If this information was not provided, the consular officer may deny the fiancée visa.

    Also, from the time I met my wife until the day we had our interview I saw the enforcement of IMBRA change.They were not asking anything about IMBs at the embassy and it was not required to give any info about an IMB when I met her but later were. I believe that more changes are coming when it comes to enforcement and any man who meets his future wife through an IMB that isn't IMBRA compliant is taking a big risk.And don't forget that there are more steps after the visa is obtained.

    I have a friend who is married to a Colombiana who has had big problems with immigration.He and his wife thought that just because she was approved for a visa everything was good.Not true. An mistake his wife made slipped through the embassy but was later caught by someone else later in the process.They were told by immigration and thier lawyer that she would have to take thier child and leave the US.They fired the lawyer and hired another to fight the matter.The point is, it is better to have all your "I's" dotted and "T's" crossed when it comes to this or you may end with with many problems later.

    It just isn't worth the risk to go with a Non-compliant agency. There are Compliant agencies out there.

[singlefather no more]

bcc - I am done with this. I don't have the time, and my interest has expired, in chasing after these petty issues of yours.

Either get to real issues - or give it up. This pettiness is assinine.

- Dan

As for me attacking anyone's girlfriend. If you have never met her... she is not your girlfriend.

bcc,

What is with this pettiness ? You are looking ridiculous in your quest to keep going at Jamie.. So lets see .you like to attack posters who date or marry teenage girls from the philippines , attack a posters Filipino girlfriend on PL Asian forum and attack Jamie a agency owner..

Your arguments in all these multiple threads with Jamie make you look like you have a real ax to grind..

bcc - you really need to try harder to keep up.

- Dan

How many pages of more threads will it take for your to keep up with Jamie ? 

Please do all us all a favor and take this to PL court with Jaime or drop it.. I know Jaime will gladly take you on there and we don't have to read all this drivel going on and on.

I can see some and respect Researcher questions but you are just out to lunch bcc with your attitudes and your disrespect to other members..

You seem to like to offend & attack people to stir up [snip] all the time just to create fights and dissent on this board..

These are real peoples lives who are posters on this board and this is not a University debating class on the meaning life , and how many types of positions are in there in the Kama sutra ?

Think about contributing something positive and not negative to this forum for once maybe ?


singlefather no more


..

[bcc_1_2]

bcc,

What is with this pettiness ? You are looking ridiculous in your quest to keep going at Jamie..

The point about there being no online girlfriends is a very legit point. As for Jamie it is nothing personal. In fact all he really would have had to do is say colombian law doesn't require it so I'm not IMBRA compliant and I would have left it alone.  I don't think Jamie is the root of all evil. In fact I'm sure there are many worse agenices to go to. I just don't think he is being very transparent. Researcher outlined the importance of being IMBRA compliant. That's why the question is also important and valid.

[bcc_1_2]

Think about contributing something positive and not negative to this forum for once maybe ?

Saving people a few grand when they just decide to sign up for some personal dating sites might be positive to them? Sure is to me.