[2020] NZIACDT 49 — HQT v Singh (Inderpal Singh)

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 19 November 2020 · adviser: Inderpal Singh

The Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's published summary

Rubber stamping / failure to personally engage with client & allowing unlicensed persons to perform immigration services / whether adviser personally undertook & controlled communication with complainant / complainant never met with adviser & only communicated with his staff / adviser involved behind the scene / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl2e, cl3c / no evidence of carelessness or lack of due care / adviser did not delegate to staff work that could be regarded as immigration advice / adviser failed to personally engage with complainant / adviser absented himself completely from client relationship concerning substantive immigration work / complaint partially upheld.

Read the full decision (PDF, Ministry of Justice)

This page reproduces the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's own published summary as a fair report of public proceedings; the linked decision is the authoritative record. A decision is not itself a finding of wrongdoing — some complaints are dismissed. Complainants are anonymised by the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal. Complaints about advisers go to the Immigration Advisers Authority.