Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v Kennelly [2022] NZLCDT 31 (1 September 2022) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...three adult beneficiaries. PP died in June 2013. Probate was granted in August 2013. [26] In August 2014, Mr Kennelly paid out $270,000 to each of the three adult beneficiaries. A balance of $16,241.27 was retained “for tax and accounting fees.” That balance was invested on interest bearing deposit along with funds for the care of a pet of the deceased. Quarterly interest was paid into Mr Kennelly’s trust account and added to the interest bearing deposit. 18 Orlov v NZ...

2. [2020] NZIACDT 22 - NJUM v VOLE (2 June 2020) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...It is appropriate that he has a period of time out of the industry while he upskills, with the ultimate opportunity to return. Submissions from the complainant [21] In her submissions of 13 and 16 March 2020, the complainant seeks a refund of fees and compensation in the sum of $30,000, which is said to exclude Immigration New Zealand’s visa application fees. [22] The complainant has copied to the Tribunal receipts from Mr Vole’s company which total $13,329. There are also...

3. [2023] NZIACDT 12 - XX v Xu (13 April 2023) [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...Immigration Consultants Ltd, of Auckland. [5] On 23 February 2022, the complainant and Ms Xu signed the latter’s service agreement. Ms Xu would apply for a student visa for the complainant’s mother and a partnership visa for her father. The fee was $345 (incl. GST but excl. Immigration NZ’s fees). [6] Ms Xu worked with the complainant and the relevant education provider to compile the necessary documents. The visa applications for the complainant’s parents were lodged w...

4. LCRO 130/2022 FN v EO (31 October 2023) [pdf, 261 KB]

   ...[Company B Ltd] on 21 March 2019 summarising the work to be undertaken as follows: Matter: Statutory Demand and [redacted] claim 2 Memorandum FN to TX (11 August 2021) at [5]. 3 Description Charge/Debit For our professional service fee to serve Statutory Demand and file to liquidate [Company A] Limited 9,230.43 For our professional fee to investigate the affairs of [Company A] Limited, any and all companies of Mr SK and Ms DZ, and to bring a claim against the Estate...

5. [2022] NZIACDT 18 - TQ v Gibson (25 July 2022) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...stress caused and offered to file for free a new skilled migrant application and temporary visa applications for the family. Furthermore, she had offered to pay for all future visa applications. The complainant had requested a refund of the service fees ($10,000) paid to the previous owner of the Immigration Centre. She had done so. [23] In her letter to the investigator, Ms Gibson said she had taken over the business in January 2021 and was under extreme pressure given the numbe...

6. Wellington Standards Committee v Manktelow [2012] NZLCDT 30 [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...Palmerston North. The two practices were small practices with that of the Practitioner being made up of himself and one longstanding staff member who gave general support. Each of the practices in Lower Hutt and Palmerston North concentrated on civil litigation, often estate type litigation. [4] The practice maintained a Trust Account where at any one time the volume of client funds was relatively small. The Trust Account was operated using a manual handwritten system and this...

7. Guide-5-A-Guide-to-Deportation-Appeal-Cancelled-Refugee-and-Protected-Person.pdf [pdf, 371 KB]

   ...Page 4 statement about your situation, and any other documents that relate to your situation. humanitarian If something is humanitarian (such as “a humanitarian appeal”) it is concerned with the interests and welfare of people. lodgement fee The NZ$943 fee you must pay when you appeal to the Tribunal. member The members of the Immigration Protection Tribunal are the people who make decisions about appeals. They are appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the...

8. LCRO 138/2015 AZ, VY and CX v DW and EV [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...Respondents The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] Mr GT lodged a complaint on behalf of his clients (the respondents) against HS & I “seeking a revision of fees, and general complaint of a failure to meet proper standards causing increased fees and costs”. [2] The Complaints Service acknowledged the complaint and, on 14 March 2014, advised: The legislation does not provide for the Lawyers Com

9. LCRO 28/2021 RW v BD and Law Firm A (3 May 2022) [pdf, 330 KB]

   LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2022] NZLCRO 25 Ref: LCRO 28/2021 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of [Area] Standards Committee X BETWEEN RW Applicant AND BD and [LAW FIRM A] Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] Mr RW has

10. AI v ZR LCRO 102 / 2010 (11 February 2011) [pdf, 122 KB]

    ...made by each party, the Committee came to the decision that the complaint did not raise any professional standards issues. It considered that the advice and representation was appropriate in the circumstances. [35] It also considered that the fees rendered were fair and reasonable in the circumstances. 6 Application [36] The Applicant has applied for a review of the Standards Committee’s decision. [37] In the application, he raises a number of issues. Those that are rel...