500 items matching your search terms
IMMIGRATION ADVISERS COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL Decision No: [2019] NZIACDT 79 Reference No: IACDT 003/18 IN THE MATTER of a referral under s 48 of the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 BY THE REGISTRAR OF IMMIGRATION ADVISERS Registrar BETWEEN IMMIGRATION NEW ZEALAND (JOCK GILRAY) Complainant AND PETER JOHN CROXSON Adviser DECISI
...Rendall, solicitor, Rotorua. Mr Howitt participated in the adjudication claim initially including an application for joinder of a respondent. I was told that Mr Howitt normally lived in Rotorua and from time to time during the adjudication he was off-shore. In June 2006 Mr Rendall advised that he was not receiving instructions from Mr Howitt and all attempts to contact him had been unsuccessful and he sought leave to withdraw as counsel. While that is a matter of courtesy to the...
...purpose. ETNZ has assisted in the development of the application for resource consents by providing information from an operational point of view in terms of what challenger teams will need. We based this on our own long experience as a challenger offshore, our knowledge of the new boat design. Initially ETNZ was going to be located at Hobson Wharf, so we had to work carefully through what our functional requirements would be. These requirements formed the basis for how the team...
...victims of his rubber-stamping operation had no agreements, and had not undergone a client engagement process. It is implausible that Mr Levarko informed a staff member of the Authority that he was planning to provide immigration services to an offshore service provider who would then engage clients without complying with the Act, and he would sign off documents the unlicensed person completed. That is in fact what he was doing; and it was patently obvious to the least experienced p...
...realised there was one. It was not hidden as both the employment agreement and the visa application used the same address. Since she did not put the conflict in writing, she is willing to be punished. She had learned a lesson about engaging with offshore clients and in future will put everything in a detailed contract. Ms Ma sincerely apologises for her wrongdoing. She should have spent more time on the paperwork. [22] As for the fee of RMB 85,000, the complainant should have c...
...suitable for single-handed sailing back to New Zealand. The appellant was close to giving up on the endeavour but did ultimately, after a significant delay, find a suitable vessel. There were then unexpected problems with fitting out the vessel to offshore standards. One of those difficulties was that he had to change the registration of the vessel, and could not do so without meeting some survey requirements. That became very problematic because the only place where the work...
...provide the correct advice regarding the impact of travel on the resident visa application, in breach of the obligation in cl 1 of the Code to be diligent and to exercise due care. 2. Lodged the resident visa application while the complainant was offshore, contrary to the immigration instructions and in breach of the obligation in cl 1 to be diligent and to exercise due care. 3. Failed to provide a copy of the application to the complainant before filing it, in breach of the oblig...
...in New Zealand during that period. [40] A significant factor is the appellant’s claim in 2015 for the cost of his travel to and from New Zealand. It would of course be dishonest to claim a tax deduction for travel if it related to being offshore for a holiday. The claim could only be justified if the appellant resided outside New Zealand and had to travel here for business purposes. The appellant has been unable to explain the discrepancy. [41] We are satisfied the appellan...
...population who meet the 65 years of age criterion, but do not qualify or choose not to apply. The reasons include non-qualification due to past, current or intended residence, that their New 9 Zealand Superannuation would be offset by an offshore pension, or that they have a philosophical aversion to applying (such as privacy concerns). We consider there was no error on the part of the Ministry in allowing XXXX to make his own decision as to whether he would apply for New...
...overseas clients $635,769.49 are less than the total fees Mr Standing received. [63] Mr Standing is facing complaints before this Tribunal that he procured the payment of fees and failed to perform work; in many cases those fees were deposited into offshore bank accounts. [64] This information is sufficient to raise a concern that Mr Standing has received a substantial body of fees which have not been accounted for. [65] Accordingly, the Tribunal puts Mr Standing on notice that if he...