Do not make that inference from a delay alone. Check the actual official payment and case instructions. The published initial US$15,000 processing fee is nonrefundable, while the later gift is requested after successful vetting. Any additional requested charge should be identified by its purpose and the appropriate official direction.
Separate a case inquiry from a new financial obligation
Retain the original payment confirmation and compare it with the notice or instruction received. Seek clarification through the official process if the records disagree. Budget applicable visa-related, medical and professional expenses separately, but do not invent a repeat fee to explain every delay.
Different charges can have different terms; the initial fee’s nonrefundability does not establish a universal rule for them all. Delay invites invention: an unexplained wait gets explained by an imagined second fee, and somebody pays it. The record that stops the story is the official case instruction retrieved for that case reference, compared line by line with the payment confirmation already held.
If the two disagree, the disagreement is the question to raise through the official channel, not a reason to send money. The published initial processing fee is nonrefundable, while the gift is requested after successful vetting, and different charges carry different terms, so the nonrefundability of one establishes nothing about another. Hypothetical example: an insurance consulting applicant waits three months, retrieves the current instruction, and finds no additional charge described at all.