[2022] NZIACDT 14 — XZ v Liu (Jun Liu)

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 27 June 2022 · adviser: Jun Liu

The Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's published summary

Diligence and due care / adviser gave incorrect advice to client about whether they could enter New Zealand / originally gave correct advice, but in later correspondence, failed to correctly identify the relevant start date of client’s visa / assumed date of INZ letter was the same as visa start date / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1 / Immigration Act 2009, s62 / HELD / adviser admitted mistake / breach of cl 1 / faced with simple question and relevant instruction is uncomplicated / expected to correctly know facts and INZ criteria when giving advice on critical matter such as returning to NZ to undertake employment / adviser should have double-checked and followed up later if facing difficulties communicating / although common, not invariable that date of visa letter will align with start date / momentary lapse in concentration, but not an excusable human error / complaint 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.