[2025] NZIACDT 52 — SH v McGarrigle (Zamelia McGarrigle)

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 10 October 2025 · adviser: Zamelia McGarrigle

The Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal's published summary

Professional responsibilities and professional practice / Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007, s442 / Code of Conduct 2014, cl1, cl5, cl6, cl19l, cl26f / complainant engaged adviser to seek visa for adult daughter / adviser incorrectly advised complainant that the client was beyond the dependence age and could only apply for a visitor, student or work visa / no evidence that client was unwilling to fund more expensive residence application / breach of cl1 / adviser failed to disclose entitlement to commission from private business school and obtain informed consent from complainant in writing / no eventual receipt of commission no defence / breaches of cl5 and cl6 / adviser failed to comply with complainant’s request for full client file / inappropriately required client to complete authority to send request for information to INZ / breaches of cl1 and cl26f / alternative negligence heads dismissed / sanctions to follow

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.