[2023] NZIACDT 8 — BC v Murthy (Nirmala K Murthy)

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 22 March 2023 · adviser: Nirmala K Murthy

The Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's published summary

Adviser failed to uphold numerous professional practice requirements / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl24c, cl25a, cl25e, cl26b, cl26c, cl26d, cl26e, cl28b / HELD / adviser’s health is not material for liability decision / failed to promptly provide a refund after client terminated services, breach of cl24c / admits refusing refund before funds were payable and failed to recognise they remain the client’s property, breach of cl25a & cl25e / admits failing to provide complete file to IAA within deadline, which was missing emails, breach of cl26e /did not have a well-managed filing system, breach of cl26d / failed to confirm in writing material discussions about visa eligibility, breach of cl26c / failed to inform in writing when EOI was lodged and provide written updates, breach of cl26b / failed to inform INZ she was no longer representing the complainant, breach of cl28b / complaint substantially 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.