US Visa Application Scam

When it comes to scams there are some people or companies you you expect to be scammed by but a government run organisation you might not trust but you wouldn't expect them to run a scam.  Well, the US embassy certainly seems to be doing just that right now with it's new visa application system.

I don't think it started out with the intention of being a scam but, as it has been going on for quite a while now and they know people are losing loads of money in their system and they have not done anything about it, it clearly is now a scam.

If you want to enter the country or transit it and you don't qualify for the visa waiver program you have to get a visa.  Fair enough so far.  We are (were) to be going to Miami on 30th of this month to meet a friend who has his own twin engine aircraft.  The next day we were going with him to the Caribbean and then on to Brazil. Our return to the UK would be via a commercial flight out of Rio.  As we were not returning to the UK from the US we apparently require a visa.  To get a visa you have to fill out an application form on-line and send it off to them.  There is a really cheesy YouTube video trying to sell the idea of how easy the new system is on the Embassy web site.  We did that about 6 weeks ago as soon as we had had the holiday confirmed.  We waited for a week and didn't hear anything so I checked the Embassy web site again and discovered you have to phone the Embassy to book an appointment.  The phone number you HAVE to use is a premium rate number and by premium I'm talking £1.20 per minute!  I rang it as soon as I realised but first I wanted to confirm we would definitely require a visa.  I was put on hold for over 6 minutes while they discussed the matter and the guy I was speaking to finally confirmed I would.  He then said I'd have to ring back on this number to book an appointment.  I asked him if he could put me through but he told me that there were no appointments and none would be available for booking until after the 7th June.  I informed him we were hoping to fly on the 30th and asked if he could check and see if there would be an opportunity to book anything in time or if all the dates up till then were already booked.  He said he couldn't check that and I'd just have to ring back.  That was the end of that call, 10 minutes.

Another friend who was also joining the trip said he had managed to get a visa by going to the Belfast Embassy. So I phoned the premium rate visa line number again and asked about getting an appointment there instead.  I was told that both the Belfast and London Embassy appointments are dealt with by the same department and neither had any appointments available.  This time I was told the try again after the 4th June.  That was a 5 minute call.

On the 4th June I rang at 9am.  I got the initial recording warning me how much the call was costing and then the options to press for booking a visa appointment (Optio 1).  I pressed option 1 and got another recorded message saying "We are currently experiencing very high call volumes at the moment and cannot answer your call. Please ring back later" and the line is cut off.  At least £1.20 wasted.  I rang again an hour later - ditto.  I rang the Embassy switchboard and the spoke to a receptionist who just told me that as they had changed the system and the lines had only just reopened they were getting a very large number of calls and I should just try again later.  She said it would be quieter between 4 & 5.  She would not give me any idea as to the likely hood of getting an appointment in time for our trip.  I rang the appointment line at lunchtime, at 4.59 and just before the lines closed at 8.30pm but still the same result. 

Oh, and between the lines closing for appointments and them reopening the cost of each individual visa appointment has gone up from $131 to $140.  This is non refundable and has to be paid up front once you get through for each visa applied for. 

Saturday 5th - lines opened at 9 and I rang on the dot.  Same result.  I phoned 3 more times that day up to 4 when they closed and no change.  Each time this is costing at least £1.20.  Sunday they are not open.  Monday 7th, lines opened at 8 and I rang at 8 to the second. I was a fraction too quick and the lines were still closed.  I rang straight back and got the 'We are currently too busy' message again.  5 minutes later I tried again.  I rang the switchboard again and this time spoke with a very sympathetic lady who understood my problem and said she would put in a report as there were a number of people in my situation and it wasn't good enough.  She also thought it was unlikely that if I did get through that there would be an appointment available in time. I asked if it would be possible to go to the Embassy in person to book the appointment but she told me that phoning that premium rate number was the ONLY way to book an appointment, nothing else would be acceptable.I tried appointments line again that lunchtime, at 4.30, 6.15 and 8.45 but no change.

Tuesday 8th.  Once again I rang dead on 8am, same result.  I rang at lunchtime and now there is an additional recorded message straight after the first one warning of the cost that states that due to 'Unprecedented call volumes waiting times to speak with an agent were between 8 and 10 minutes1. OK I thought, it'll cost me £12 but at least I'll get an answer and hopefully an appointment.  The next recorded message comes on for the options to press and I select 1 thinking I'll be on hold for a while but should get answered.  No, the same old recorded message came on saying how they cannot take your call and please ring back later!  I rang again that evening but it was just the same. 

Today, Wednesday 9th.  I ring again at 8am on the dot and get the same message complete with the extra bit and still don't get through.  I have tried 3 more times since then.  I left a message on their blog but it got scrubbed, no surprises there.  If I could be told there was no hope of getting an appointment in time for our trip at least I could stop calling and try and salvage what we can of our holiday.  We will lose all the money we paid for our flights as they are non refundable.

The Embassy must be creaming in the money on this phone line as I am clearly not the only one desperate to get through.  Each time someone calls it is at least £1.20 which is more than a lottery ticket and for me at least, I would have more of a chance if I did do the lottery than I have of getting a visa appointment.  I don't gamble and I don't normally ring premium number ever.  If it was a first come first serve system it would be fairer but the chances of getting through are just based purely on luck.  What are they doing with all the money they are making on this scam?  I'm sure it's just going to the Embassy coffers.  I wouldn't mind so much if it was donated back to the British people to help pay of some of our huge debt seeing as it is Brits they have conned the money from but I think that is extremely unlikely.

Thursday 8.am - same old story. 
I finally got through this afternoon as they changed the system to allow people to queue.  Unfortunately the earliest appointment they could offer was next Wednesday 16th but the processing time for the visa should my interview be successful is currently 5 - 10 working days and we only have nine.  The risk that our passports and visas might not arrive in time for our flights on the 30th is too much of a risk and too much worry.  Better to cut our losses now and try and work on a fall back holiday than spend the next couple of weeks stressing about it and find we have nothing at the end.

This is one experience I am not gong to be able to forget.

European Health Insurance Card EHIC

The European Health Insurance Card is required by all UK citizens when travelling through Europe in the event they require emergency medical treatment.  It replaced the E111 form that used to be required.  The cards are valid for 5 years after which they can be renewed either on-line, by phone (tel 0845 6062030) or at a post office.
If you are thinking of renewing or applying for an EHIC on-line my advice to you is don't unless you like wasting money.  If you renew or apply for your card on-line you will be asked to pay nearly £10 for each card when you can get it done for free over the phone or by going into your post office.  Although the fee is made clear on the web site it is not mentioned that it is free if you use the other methods. 
The downside - The only downside is the time it takes to process the application but it's barely worth worrying about.  If you apply on-line and pay the fee you are told to expect the card to take up to 7 days to arrive.  By phone it is between 7 & 10 days so not a lot of difference.  OK, if you go into a post office then it can take up to 21 days but as long as your application is in the system it doesn't matter if your card doesn't arrive on time for your date of travel.  You are given a phone number you can use should you need to in the event you requiring emergency treatment whilst you are abroad.

My Hunting Rant

With the national election fast approaching the pro hunting lobbyists have been raising their voices again like a pack of baying hounds. Apparently the Conservatives have promised to over turn the ban. Great, isn’t there more important things to be fighting this election on? I happen to feel they would be the best party to get this country out of it’s current mess but I’m not in favour of over turning this particular ban. I do agree that it is a pig’s ear of the law and need refining but I see no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. Apparently 75% of the nation agrees.

It’s not that I’m totally anti-hunting. In principle I can’t see much wrong with hunting foxes in this manner to a point. If it was just a matter of chasing foxes caught out in the open and killing them with the hounds then it is little different from any natural predator / prey hunt found in the wild. Where I draw the line is in the digging out of foxes that have gone to ground and the throwing of them to the hounds. Surely once the fox has outwitted the pack they should be left in peace. This is supposed to be a sport after all and digging them out or chasing them out with terriers is not being very sportsman like, is it?

As for the argument that the hunt is providing a service in keeping the fox number down, well that’s a total joke. Far more foxes get killed on the road by cars than any hunt could knock off. Then there are people who go out shooting them. They also take more than the hunts. The hunts response is they only take the weakest as the strongest get away. Well that might be true if they didn’t dig them out.

Foxes are very successful and adaptable animals and like any animal that is clever and successful we human tend to hate them. They are indigenous to the UK and have every right to a life just as much as we do. They pose no serious threat to our survival. Their numbers are high only because there is plenty of food available. Killing a handful of foxes only allows a better opportunity for the next generation to take their place. Foxes actually provide a very useful service as they help to keep the rabbit population down.

Persecuting the fox in the countryside has encouraged them to take up residence in out towns. The hunt can’t get them there and here they have found a much easier and wormer living. We humans are very untidy and leave scraps of food all over the place, especially around fast food joints. All the fox needs to do is to overcome its natural fear of man to get at it. Something it has done very easily. Added to that, raiding gardens of pet rabbits and chickens is easier in towns than chasing them in the open. In the countryside the fox poses little threat but in a town it can be a real pest, although personally I find them quite endearing. Hunting has helped to create this problem and can’t do anything to put it right.

So why do people hunt? Because it’s jolly good fun. There is no other sport that allows such freedom to gallop en-mass over such a variety of private land. There’s the thrill of not knowing where the hunt will take you and what obstacles you and your horse will need to negotiate. Then there is the sheer adrenaline of the chase. Added to that, many humans have a blood lust, a desire to kill. It's a remnant left over from when we were hunter gatherers and no different from the actions of our pet cats when they kill birds they don't eat. I love to ride and would love the opportunity to join in something that exhilarating provided there was no actual living quarry. None of this is ever admitted to as a reason for keeping the hunt going but it is the only true reason.

When the ban was first being brought in the hunting community said it would see hundreds of people out of work and thousands of hounds would have to be destroyed. Well none of that has happened. Hunts can still hunt by drag hunting. The hounds just follow an artificially laid scent. Hunting is now more popular than it was before. The hunt leaders say this is in support of hunting as it was but it could also be that equestrians with an aversion to killing foxes now feel free to join in the fun.

The law as it is needs improving as it is very difficult to bring a conviction if a hunt does break the ban. Hence, few cases get to court. Most laws are refined by case law but that requires cases being prosecuted in court first and then going to appeal. If cases are not being brought in the first place there cannot be any appeals so the law won’t get refined. Something needs to be sorted out here but I don’t see a need to completely throw it out just because a minority of people think it’s wrong.

The Selfishness of Unions

All the post office workers in the UK went on strike today. They will be on strike again tomorrow and threatening to go on strike on several more days in the near future unless the Post Office agrees to their terms over conditions and pay. We, like the rest of the world are in a recession and there are currently 3 million unemployed in the UK; a number that is growing by the day. These strikers ought to think themselves lucky they still have a job. How selfish can they be? While they are on strike many small businesses are missing out on cheques and deliveries vital for keeping them going. Personally I'm not that effected as yet, touch wood, but as Christmas orders for portraits increase it will no doubt be a different story.
I hope the Post Office and the Government don't give in to the Unions demands because I don't agree with bully techniques and am really annoyed that the Unions state that they are doing it to "protect services for the nation". What a cheek. I wish the Government would legislate to open the postal service up to competition so that we could send our letters via some other company. As it is, if they don't go back to work as normal, I simply won't bother sending any Christmas cards this year...after all, what's the point, they won't get there in time?

Chinese Military possibly disguising themselvs as monks?

I didn't take this photo. It was sent to me via facebook.
It appears to be showing Chinese Military donning Tibetan Monk's robes before going on to riot and cause trouble in disguised. Whoever took this was very brave.

Incomprehension

The recent car bomb attacks in London and Glasgow didn't initially prick my attention. No one significant was hurt and life goes on as normal. Far worse things have happened. What did prick my attention though was the disclosure yesterday on our news network that all the people involved were health professionals. Five of them were doctors!
I admit, I have always wondered what actually goes through the mind of a suicide bomber. What makes him tick and what triggered his state of mind but have put it down to young impressionable minds looking for a cause and something to believe in that makes sense of their lives (to them anyway). Just like the people who get roped into religious cults. OK so maybe the latter don't get involved in killing people but mentally it's the same thing...a vulnerable mind getting brain washed.
What strikes me as being so different here is that right up to the day before the attacks these people were devoting their lives to saving life. How can such people reconcile saving the lives of people one day they are prepared to blow up the next? This no longer strikes of 'belief' but pure hypocrisy. I'm glad they didn't die in the event because now we might be able to discover more about how such brilliant minds became so corrupted and evil.

Love to Lead Question 17 (Just for fun)

Ok so no prises for this question it's just for the fun of it, but why not?

Question - Is Global Warming a Media Myth?

My answer - Prophecy or Scare Mongering?

It’s always difficult these days trying to pick the fact from the fiction from the news. Sad to say even the BBC news waters down it’s facts so much it is hard to tell where one ends and the other begins. I’m sure if you asked them or any of the news papers they would tell you it is what their customers (we) want; that facts alone are boring. That may be true, certainly a hyped up story sells better than a cold report of facts alone but when it comes to really important stuff how do we actually know what to believe?

I get really annoyed when the press take it upon themselves to make up facts. A example of this was reported on the BBC1 lunchtime news only a couple of weeks ago. They showed us images of Hawthorn in flower. It was the middle of April and they were claiming this was a sign of global warming because the ‘nick name’ for this plant is the May Tree. This plant would probably been given this nick name over a thousand years ago when the temperatures in this country were certainly cooler than today. As kids my sister and I used to comment on what a silly name this plant had seeing as it nearly always seemed to flower in April! I’m sorry to say this was so long ago that no one had heard of global warming. OK so we do live in the South East where the climate is warmer but this was a really poor example and one that made me wonder how many other examples put up by the media were also rubbish.

The facts that I think we can take for granted are that our annual temperatures do appear to be getting warmer. Winter snow when I was a kid was something we could look forward to, now it is just a brief possibility. The south East of England has always been the driest part of the UK and yes we do seem to be having more ‘droughts’ but I think this is more due to the increase in demand for water here than the lack of rainfall.

One a global count I cannot say so I have to rely on what ‘experts’ tell me. It has been shown that as the Earth wobbles on its axis changes in global temperatures do occur causing ice ages and droughts every few thousand years and may be that is all this is. I think there might be something in that but I don’t think that is the entire story. As a species we do cause an increasingly large amount of pollution and I can’t see how we could expect to get away with that and think the world will just cope.

Unfortunately global warming is such an important subject we can’t afford to take chances. Get it wrong and ignore the warning signs and the damage we create for the future could be catastrophic with no way of putting it right. Act now to combat it and we could help prevent that. If it turns out later that the climate changed for natural reasons well, hey, nothing lost but in the mean time we learned to be less polluting.

Media hype in my opinion is undermining the campaign for us to clean up our act. There is a good work of fiction on this subject by Michael Crichton called ‘State of Fear’. Even though it is in itself total fiction it successfully highlights the need for us to separate fact from fiction in the media.

Love 2 Lead Question 15

Question - Should Gay Couples Be Allowed To Adopt?

My answer - The needs of the child outweigh the rights of the potential parents.

Let’s get this clear from the outset. I’m not a homophobe although I’m sure there will be people who will disagree. Once again, I have to speak as I feel which will no doubt ruffle a few feathers. I’m not out to upset anyone but the question has been asked.

I do not think it is right for gay couple to adopt. There, I’ve said it. Now for my reasons.

Initially it won’t make any difference to the child but how will things be for them once they start school? Chances are once the other kids understands about their parents they will use it as an excuse to pick on them. Kids can be cruel and anything that makes one kid especially different from the rest is likely to be a trigger for teasing or worse.

I never fitted in at school because my parents thought that pop music was bad for us kids so we were fed a diet of classical music. Nothing wrong with the classics but it meant I couldn’t join in with the conversations my piers were having and so I became branded as being different. That led to teasing and later relatively mild bullying.

If something so minor can prevent a child fitting in how much more would having gay parents cause problems? I accept that this, with time and it becoming more common, would eventually be less of an issue but why should any kid be placed in that position? Do we really want our children to play the martyr now so that future kids will accept gay parents as normal? We must remember that the babies placed with gay couple won’t have had any say in the matter.

My other reason is more old fashioned. All primates, including humans, learn their parenting skills from their parents. In a similar way we also learn our family and relationship skills from our parents too. If we agree that you are either born heterosexual or homosexual how will this effect the child’s understanding of how to make a relationship work if the child is heterosexual?

You could argue that the same applies to heterosexual couples who go through a divorce when the kids are small or that have a violent relationship. Children do go on to repeat the lives of their parents in a high number of cases. Some situations, such as a break-up of a marriage, cannot always be avoided but when a situation can be avoided I think we owe it to the children to do just that. For this reason it’s not just gay couple who I feel should not adopt but single people as well. The adoptive family should be as near normal as it is reasonable to expect even though, I accept, there is no guarantee it will stay that way.

I do understand that some gay couples desire children just as much as non gay couples but the needs of the children do need to be put first even though this may be a very hard thing to do.

Dangerous Dogs or Dangerous Owners?

I have just watched the Tonight program on ITV which was all about the failings of the dangerous dogs act and the recent amnesty in Merseyside. Typically enough, this program, like all the others I have seen on the subject, has completely missed the point. No one ever seems to ask the question "Why are these dogs the way they are?" Instead there is this big label placed on the breed or breed type as if it was something genetic. Well it's not. The dogs that have attacked people did so because they had been brought up and trained by either violent or incompetent owners. Until the law focuses on the owners and not the dog breed it will always be a shambles. I have known several pit bull type dogs that have been totally loving and gentle. They are not my preferred breed but I have nothing against them. The problem is a large proportion of them are owned by people who either want a dog to boost their macho image or want one specifically for dog fighting. What hope have the dogs got?

Dogs only know what we teach them. Placing the blame on the dogs is a cop out when it is the owners or trainers who must take all the blame. These people should be banned from ever owning a dog again.

I felt really sorry for the families in the program who had their innocent dogs removed from them on the suspicion of them being pit bull type breeds. OK so they got them back after a lengthy court case because they were able to prove they were well trained and safe but the law dictated that these dogs had to remain muzzled and on leads when ever they were in public. How ridiculous is that? Some perfectly safe dogs are now to be treated like they're insane. One of these dogs was an American Bulldog, looks like a boxer but the size of a mastiff. Such a dog would require loads of exercise which it simply can't get on a lead. Keeping a dog well exercised is one way of reducing its stress. The other problem with keeping dogs on leads is that dogs are more likely to attack if they are on a lead than if they are free. This is because when a dog is on a lead it feels trapped so if something happens that unnerves it instead of being able to get out of the way and avoid confrontation it is forced to defend itself.
I know, without a doubt, that I could raise a pit bull type dog from a puppy in such a way that it would be as trustworthy and friendly as any other dog.
The dangerous dogs act was written by people who clearly didn't understand dogs and were too frightened to lay the blame where it deserved to be...at the feet of the owners.

It's official - Dogs are good for you

According to a report on the BBC Dogs are good for our health. Pet ownership in general is apparently beneficial to our health as they help reduce stress, heart rate and blood pressure, but dogs are particularly good probably because owning them involves taking them for walks. Perhaps now dogs will become available on the NHS :-)
Owning any kind of pet is also good for children according to a related report on the BBC. Children who have been exposed to pets at a young age are less likely to develop allergies and Asthma. I firmly believe in pet ownership for children, it teaches them not just about animals and how to care for them but gives them a sense of compassion and responsibility. OK, so most parents end up with the lion share of the looking after but I still think it's worth the effort.

No Hope For Rusty

Despite being convicted of failing to care for their Labrador 'Rusty' by allowing him to get so overweight he could hardly walk, the Benton brothers were still allowed to keep him. In an interview after the court case they were claiming that they had not done anything wrong. Anyone with half a brain could clearly see they had been neglectful to allow the dog to reach this state. If they cannot see why they have been found guilty how can they learn from this sufficiently to be able to give Rusty the care he needs? Clearly they won't and the dog will continue to gain weight until he dies. They admitted he had hip dysplasia leading to arthritis and used this as an excuse for him not being able to walk. Surely this makes controlling Rusty's weight even more crucial? The brothers were also reported as saying in the Times that they could not get rusty to stick to a diet! Well that really says it all. After all, who is supposed to be in charge? I'm sure Rusty doesn't prepare his own meals and certainly does not look agile enough to raid the fridge!
There are no excuses here and I personally believe that as these two men cannot accept they have done anything wrong they should be banned from keeping any more animals, ever.

For further info go to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/6256349.stm and watch the inverview!

Dangerous Dogs?

The sad news about the 5 yr old girl that was killed by a pit bull terrier a few days ago was really tragic. I can't begin to imagin the grief that family must be going through. Tragedy aside though, I get really annoyed at all the media hype about amending the Dangerous Dogs Act. The act was a shambles in the first place particularly as there is no such recognised breed as Pit Bull Terrier. It is a mongrel breed and so difficult to legislate against. In any case, the 'Pit Bull' is not the one to blame here. I have known many well mannered so called 'Pit Bulls' owned by sensible dog minded, owners. All dogs have the potential to inflict harm on humans and the larger and stronger the dog the more serious that harm might be. What stops them is the way they are handled and trained. OK so some breeds may have a more aggressive tendency but that just means they need to be owned by the right people. Unfortunately the kind of people that own 'Pit Bull' often are the kind that shouldn't own a dog at all. Anyone who trains a dog for fighting or badger baiting, as some pit bull owners do, should be banned for life from ever owning another animal of any description. The owner of the dog in question had already been warned about his animals behaviour but clearly failed to deal with it. He apparently has been arrested now, lets hope he is prosecuted. In my opinion if having trained a dog to fight and it then goes on to kill someone you should be prosecuted for man slaughter.