[2026] NZIACDT 48 — INZ v Singh (Paramjit Singh)

Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal · decided 17 August 2026 · adviser: Paramjit Singh

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, cl3a, cl4a, cl14, cl22, cl23, cl26aiii, cl26aiv, cl26c, cl26d, cl26e, cl 31a / adviser acted for two clients / breach of cl1 / failed to provide clients with draft applications before filing / failed to apply for a visa for second client in a timely manner / breach of cl1, cl3a / permitted unlicensed person to undertake immigration advice work / breach of cl4a / failed to preserve client confidentiality / documents concerning another client sent to first client / breach of cl14 / failed to provide second client evidence of being licensed / breach of cl22, cl23, cl26iv / failed to provide second client with an invoice and receipt for cash payment / breach of cl26aiii, cl26e / failed to retain all written communications / failed to retain them on file and provide them to the Authority / breach of cl26c / failure to confirm material discussions in writing to clients / failed to ensure other adviser complied with this requirement / breach of cl26 / failed to train staff and other adviser to maintain well-managed client files / breach of cl1, cl31a / negligent provision of incorrect information to Immigration NZ / 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.