Professional Misconduct and Consequences in Immigration Advising
Task 1: Identify and Explain Five Main Professional Issues
Unfair Fee Charging
The visa application of New Zealand's Active Investor Plus being charged at an excessively high fee of NZD $60,000, which is more than the standard market rate of NZD $25,000, is a violation of Clause 20(a) of the Code of Conduct 2014, which stipulates that advisers should charge fees that are fair and reasonable. The adviser's expertise that Mustafa trusted made him to accept the fee without any question, thinking that it was the right amount for the quality of service he would get.
On the other hand, the adviser's choice to charge more than the market rate is not right and justifiable. Mustafa's readiness to pay does not release the adviser from their duty to stick to the professional standards. The adviser can be seen as taking advantage of Mustafa's trust and his financial resources for his benefit instead of offering a service that is fairly priced for the amount of work that was done.
Misrepresentation and false information
LIA failed to provide a full eligibility assessment and did not disclose the risks associated with his visa application during the initial consultation and communications with Mustafa. This breaches Clause 29(a), (b) and (d) of the Code of Conduct 2014 that directs advisers to act in the best interest of their clients and provide them with all necessary information to make informed decisions. The licensed immigration adviser (LIA) in this case misrepresented their level of expertise and experience during initial consultation with Mustafa Saad. The LIA misled Mustafa and compromised the integrity of the visa application process by falsely claiming experience in managing Active Investor Plus Visa applications. The misrepresentation decreases trust between the client and adviser and can adversely affect the application of the client. This results in violation of the legal rules and regulations which need to be determined and managed in an appropriate manner.
Clause 2 (e) of the Code of Conduct 2014 states a licensed immigration adviser should obtain as well as carry out lawful informed instructions of the client. The client should be provided with sufficient options and advice to make an informed decision. It can be referred to case of HT vs Sarfraz Saif Shaikh NZIACDT 20 (Justice, 2024). The LIA did not provide appropriate advice to LIA which consisted of false and inappropriate information. The lack of full disclosure results in lack of trust with the client which should be determined and managed in an appropriate manner.
Failure to work within individual Knowledge and Skills
The adviser's statement of having dealt with many victorious Active Investor Plus Visa applications, even though he or she had no previous experience, is a sign of the lack of competence and professional knowledge. As stated in Clause 8 (a) of the Licensed Immigration Advisers (LIA) Code of Conduct 2014, advisers are required work within the individual knowledge and skills in the field they are specialized in. Tricking of the expertise is not only the weakening of the adviser's credibility but also the client's case is at risk.
The adviser, in the process of overstating their experience, may unintentionally offer the service that is not satisfactory to Mustafa. Attempting to deal with a complicated visa application without the appropriate skills can result in mistakes, omissions and eventually, an unsuccessful result for the client.
Submission of False Information
The LIA agreed to suggestion of Mustafa of providing false information and documents to Immigration New Zealand to support his visa application. As per Clause 31 (a) of the Code of Conduct 2014 providing misleading or false documentation or providing information from any decision maker in respect to the immigration matter is against the professional integrity of an LIA. These actions not only impact on the integrity of the process of visa application but expose clients to legal risks such as rejection of visa. It is important to deliver the information in an accurate and appropriate manner. The determined professional issues show serious breaches of the obligations of licensed immigration adviser under the Code of Conduct 2014.
Task 2: Discuss Potential Consequences
Potential Consequences for the Client
Visa Application Declined:
Mustafa has a high chance of having his application rejected if the Immigration of New Zealand finds the false documents and information given by the adviser. Immigration authorities are suspicious of any fraudulent act and can turn down the application instantly. The said might be a consequence of Mustafa not being able to receive the Active Investor Plus Visa, which means he would not only lose the considerable investment but also leave the chance to emigrate to New Zealand.
Legal Implications:
The criminal offense of providing false information to the immigration authorities can result in very harsh legal consequences. These types of sanctions are punishable in different ways, but Mustafa could be fined, expelled, imprisoned, or face criminal charges. Also, the integrity and credibility of Mustafa would be destroyed forever which would adversely affect his future settlements and ruins personal and professional reputation.
Financial Loss:
And by this time, Mustafa has already paid a significant amount to the counselor. If his visa application is denied on account of untrue statements, he will not only lose the money paid to the advisor, but in addition he will incur extra legal charges or fees that are needed for applying for the visa through proper means. This financial distress may turn out to be a very important one and it will also constitute serious financial distress for Mustafa.
Foreseeable Consequences for Licensed Immigration Consultant
Revocation of License:
The violations of the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 probably are numerous and involve false information, overcharging and not in client's best interest. Such infringements may lead to the IAA revoking the adviser's certification. Such an order would close down advisers' practice, cause them to lose their job as immigration advisers and damage their reputation and career. For example, a case of C v Tang (IACDT Decision Reference 2021-NZ-IACDT-18) shows that the advisor violated several professional standards which lead to their license being banned.
Disciplinary Action:
The IACDT has the power to investigate complaints about poorly performing licensed immigration advisers and impose disciplinary actions for misconduct. The Tribunal can impose sanctions including fines,suspension or a permanent disqualification from the lawful practice of immigration advice if the conduct of the advice giver is so criminal, for example, giving forged documents to immigration authorities. In the same vein, the case of BZ v. KLB (IACDT Decision Reference 2020-NZ-IACDT-14) featured an adviser who was disbarred and fined or submitting false records, signaling the gravity of such misbehavior and its effect on the adviser's reputation and capability to get employment.
Legal Liability:
However, counselors will also be under legal responsibility for their behavior. This may cause Mustafa to sue him for professional negligence, contract breach or fraud. Moreover, the consultant is subject to penalties if false information is deliberately supplied to the immigration authorities. These legal actions might result in heavy financial sanctions, imprisonment, and/or all of these which will just aggravate the seriousness of the case.
Damage to Reputation:
Taking part in unethical and fraudulent behavior undoubtedly destroys the adviser's reputation and confidence in the merchandise offered by them. The publicity of such a case which is negative could repel clients from approaching such an advisor and/or the business person,leading to financial losses and damaged professional name. Trust and credibility rebuilding in the industry is going to be very difficult and may lead to long-term career betrayal. For instance, in the H v EKM (IACDT Decision Reference 2019-NZ-IACDT-8) case, it showed how a negative name and unethical behavior can really limit the adviser's career and affect her business greatly.
Therefore, the consequences of the adviser's unlawful behavior can be dire for both Mustafa and the adviser. He might be refused a visa, face legal issues, and suffer financial losses. The advisory board can be subject to license revocation, disciplinary procedures, legal liability, and damage to their professional reputation, which can leave an irreparable dent on their career as advisors to the immigration industry.
Are you struggling to keep up with the demands of your academic journey? Don't worry, we've got your back!
Exam Question Bank is your trusted partner in achieving academic excellence for all kind of technical and non-technical subjects. Our comprehensive range of academic services is designed to cater to students at every level. Whether you're a high school student, a college undergraduate, or pursuing advanced studies, we have the expertise and resources to support you.
To connect with expert and ask your query click here Exam Question Bank
