[quote=deadzone]BG, there is no way some hotel or restaurant is “sponsoring” a minimum wage service employee for to get a temporary work visa through USCIS.
As you say, getting fraudulent SSN is easy and employers have no reason to investigate if it is legit or not because they know they won’t be held responsible (with the exception of the French Gourmet in PB, not sure what was going on there).
So bottom line, the vast majority of these service workers are illegal, working with fraudulent SSN, regardless of whether they are living in Mexico or San Diego.[/quote]
deadzone, I’m not too well-versed in immigration law so I’m currently studying the instructions for the I-765 form (used to apply for a work permit):
I DO know that deceased persons’ SSN proffering for employment purposes has been rampant in SoCal for at least 30 years. I have experienced this phenom first-hand working as a RE salesperson in the eighties and early nineties. I “represented” a couple of buyers (at different times) who had GREAT jobs and little debt who had applied for government-backed loan programs (in this case, the FHA 203b program). Both could EASILY qualify to buy the homes in which their offer was accepted and escrow was opened. Both had the funds on deposit for the small downpayment and closing costs. During the underwriting process, their SSNs were found to be belonging to a reported deceased US citizen.
This is after I spent many, many hours (in addition to my FT job) finding them a suitable house, getting their offer(s) accepted and opening escrow. Such are the perils of acting as a buyer’s agent, which I am reluctant to ever do again.
One of my buyers was actually the Controller of a well-established business in National City with more than 50 employees and had worked there for 8 years! She was a Filipina who was attempting to buy a very nice 3 bdrm home in National City for herself and her 6 year-old son, who was a US citizen. She couldn’t bear to leave him as the kid’s father lived locally and demanded to have visitation with him. He couldn’t live with them because he was married to someone else … with children. His spouse knew about her child. It was messy and she was stuck.
I didn’t get her whole story until she didn’t qualify for the loan. I have no idea if the FHA (or local underwriter) turned her into the INS but I doubt it. She quickly “ghosted me” for fear she would lose her job and be deported, leaving her son behind.
What is really sad is that she worked for 12 years in the US using that particular SSN after her visitor’s visa ran out. I’m not sure if her prior payroll deductions for FICA under the deceased woman’s SSN she was using could be converted to a legitimate SSN in her own true name. I don’t know what the “rules” are in this regard. She very well may have forfeited all her FICA contributions under the bogus SSN she was using.
My other client referred to above was a Mexican National who claimed to me to have a green card but only had a work permit at the time (but employed FT in SD County, as was his spouse). He and his spouse could easily qualify for the home in which they had an accepted offer on. When the FHA underwriter ran their SSN’s, the husband came up using a deceased person’s SSN and the wife’s SSN was legit. Both worked FT but they didn’t qualify for the loan.
Both buyers told me in the end that they had no idea that the SSN’s they reported as theirs on their mortgage applications for an FHA loan would be “investigated.” Neither did I before the first client. I honestly thought of her failed escrow as an isolated incident and did not think I would run across this situation again.
Had either of these buyers tried to go conventional at the time (Fannie or Freddie) I don’t know what would have happened. Had they tried to go with the several “portfolio lenders” in town at the time (mostly S&L’s), I feel both would have very likely been successful in qualifying. However, neither buyer had the necessary downpayment to go conventional.
Yes, even the young Swedish nanny working for a family in PL (SD) is desperate to stay in the US. If there is even a whiff of trouble in getting her visa extended, she is going to “hide out” in her employer’s home (or a new employer’s home) until she and/or her employer figure out how to make her “legal.”
That’s the way its always been, ESPecially in SD.
I’ve got other stories related to my actual former co-workers in this regard but I’ll just leave it at that.
