[2021] NZIACDT 26 — RH v Ji - Sanctions

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 23 December 2021

The tribunal's published summary

Sanctions / dishonest behaviour / deliberately misled INZ and IAA / conflict of interest / numerous breaches of obligations / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s3, s50, s51 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl5, cl7a, cl17a, cl17b, cl17c, cl18b, cl19l, cl22, cl31a / adviser did not engage with Tribunal until sanctions stage / found to have notice of proceedings / did not accept more serious findings / explanation that behaviour not dishonest, rejected / three previous disciplinary findings, including dishonesty / adviser censured / has not learned from prior appearances, not worthwhile to order training / prevented from reapplying for licence for maximum two years / prevention is sanction of last resort, consumers protection required / supervision not adequate / ordered to refund $1,000 fees / compensation must arise from misconduct / ordered to compensate $1,000 for stress / compensation for complainant’s labour compiling complaint, declined / ordered to pay $5,000 financial penalty

Read the full decision (PDF, Ministry of Justice)

This page reproduces the tribunal's own published summary as a fair report of public tribunal 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 tribunal. Complaints about advisers go to the Immigration Advisers Authority.