The majority of clients coming to an immigration adviser are not first timers. They usually have a job, a partner, a course offer or a family member wishing to visit. What they are not sure about is whether what has been written down about them corresponds with what an Immigration New Zealand officer will be seeking from that file on the day it is opened.
That’s where many simple examples get trickier. The description on a contract won’t match the ANZSCO code the officer wanted. Feeling like a couple are a solid unit to each other doesn’t always translate into a solid couple on paper, if the evidence that binds is lacking. Going on a course that’s completely disconnected from previous employment won’t seem to have many ramifications at the time, until they make the gap in residence situation impossible to bridge. These are not exceptions – these are normal applications that fall over, or are refused, because they answered the wrong question.
Jagjeet Singh Sidhu at Immigration Matters has spent five years reading the same files officers read every day. Prior to this he was a working at India’s Central Bureau of Investigation. He has held a full Immigration Advisers Authority licence since 2014. This means he’s experienced what officers will consider for a job description, a relationship chronology, or a letter about past illegal status. That experience won’t mean an application will be successful- no one with a licence can guarantee a grant- but it does mean it is put together differently.
And the practical difference is made immediately. Initial discussions begin with the rules as they stand, not last year’s blog post or template email, or random paper copy. Policy has been modified numerous times in recent years. It is well worth knowing that the Skilled Migrant Category is no longer one points pathway. There are now alternative routes besides the Green List, not to mention various wage and qualification band revisions. An adviser describing the old approach is using outdated guides! When assessing at Immigration Matters we look to the operational manual as it exists today, and the customer leaves the first meeting knowing whether there is a viable pathway to proceed on, whether to wait, change occupations, or whether the application just isn’t worth paying to lodge.
When applying for work visas, the details really matter. The Accredited Employer Work Visa is the most popular pathway to skilled work, and check, the wage limit, ANZSCO match and employers’ accreditation need to all fit. If the contract job title doesn’t match that in the manual, some explanation is needed to show what the job really is. When conditions need to be different in changing roles, mapping them all accurately is important, again. These same rules cause problems for parents and siblings applying for visitor visas where the bona fide story is thin, or the sponsor’s documents are thin, and the officer simply cannot find what they need to make a decision.
Partnership documents are a different matter. The number of photos of the couple together is not the basis of the decision. Immigration New Zealand does not issue a partner visa because the two individuals declare they are in a relationship. It does so when the documentation indicates a real and stable shared life is present. That’s more than photos of the couple together and a few exchanged emails. Shared accounts of money spent, reports of day to day life, and evidence of a life established together are examined. If a file has been interrogated or a prior application has been declined the response must counter the reason for the concern, rather than simply regurgitate the documents submitted before. Developing that bundle takes time and an understanding of what has worked on previous files.
Most of the work at Papatoetoe Office involves complex cases. An unlawful person will not be able to submit a standard visa form. Section 61 of the Immigration Act is not an entitlement to a visa, but a request that the Minister or delegated officer may consider. An appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal is only worthwhile if it is done within the short time limits. The two potentially prejudicial Information letters require a rigorous answering. Ministerial request and special directions only have worth when the facts justify them. In those situations the benefit of someone having previously sat on the other side of the file is that they are aware of the likely reading of the material by the decision maker. The strongest legal argument can still be presented even if the result cannot be assured.
Students encounter another challenge. It is not enough to gain entry and demonstrate bank balance. Officers need to consider if the course is logical within the work history and if the reason provided on the form is reasonable. A bad course choice affects capacity on post-study work conditions and future options to settle. The comments that count are those provided prior to enrolment rather than once the visa is granted and limitations are realised.
We assist clients already in New Zealand and overseas clients. Appointments may be done face to face at 137 Kolmar Road in Papatoetoe or via phone or video. The first step may be an assessment against the client’s current instructions. A person may arrive with the documents they already have: a passport, the last Immigration New Zealand letter, a job offer, relationship evidence; and walk out more informed about whether to proceed and if so what evidence they will actually need to provide. If their circumstances are simple, that is acknowledged openly and the fee remains modest. If not, their issues are clarified before they may pay for a file that was not worthy of being opened.
This is why there is licensing. For instance, under the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act only a licensed adviser or an exempt person, typically a practising lawyer, may provide immigration advice. So if you seek help from friends, travel agents or anyone who is not licensed on social media then you are not in a safe position. If the advice turns out to be wrong then the applicant has to carry the rejection and sometimes other penalties too. The only way to be sure that the immigration adviser is authorized to act is to look up the public register of Jagjeet Singh Sidhu, license 201400260.
Some users talked about its bluntness. Files which had been refused or challenged were revisited and judged by the real instructions, not hopeful assumptions. Replies to officers were formulated with the same issues in mind. Sometimes the result was quicker than expected, because the problem disappeared as the page revealed what was lacking. Sometimes the advice was to wait, or to go somewhere else, rather than apply for a declaration which was sure to be turned down. Both of these come from one approach, the page-read as an officer would read it, followed by what is actually possible.
Immigration rules will continue to be different: wage levels, occupation requirements, residence routes have all been altered over recent years and will be again. The constant is, officers still open the file and glance to see if the application fits the instructions applying at that time. An adviser who has done that work from the inside, and who still checks the current setup before advising, lessens the risk that a file falls over for reasons that could have been picked up too.
