The Benefits of Consulting a Certified Immigration Specialist Before You File

Clients use a licensed NZ immigration adviser's services only after they have been rejected in their application, been given a long Potentially Prejudicial Information letter or having experienced delays in what was an otherwise "straightforward application", through which the requirements and requirements become more apparent, yet the case for those simpler options are no longer available and time frames have passed; the status has become unlawful; and the same information and documents have been sent to INZ and rejected. The remaining options of reconsiderations, tribunal appeals, Section 61 requests and directions are more restrictive, slower and tend to be more costly to prepare.

There is another way I advocate: Having a licensed adviser check over the situation before the first application is filed can make all the difference. For a significant number of work, partnership, student, visitor, and residence cases, that earlier check is what separates a clean approval from a file that later needs to be rescued. Immigration Matters, run by licensed adviser Jagjeet Singh Sidhu of Papatoetoe, has seen both the former and latter; the contrasts in workload, time and options on the table can be stark.

My licence is held by the Immigration Advisers Authority, and I have a Level 7 Graduate Certificate in New Zealand Immigration Advice. Since I have migrated to New Zealand myself, I have several years' experience working in Immigration New Zealand as a documentation officer. This gives me a bit of a balanced perspective in considering applications. While published instructions are one factor, knowing how they actually work their way through to job descriptions, dates of relationship, evidence of funds and genuine requirements is something else. An experienced assessment side adviser often picks up on nuances that later form the grounds for a decline or detailed inquiry.

Perhaps an applicant has an offer of employment from an approved employer and an apparent attractive wage which seems, at first glance, to be acceptable. But, at closer inspection, anomalies can appear: the duties are not exactly consistent with the nominated ANZSCO, the wage is just below a recently updated threshold, or the employment check undertaken by the employer was not sufficiently robust to substantiate the offer. These are not particularly technical and in fact are the most frequently asked questions and refused cases in Accredited Employer Work Visa's. However, they are fixable pre-lodgement by a change of position description, confirmation of the appropriate level of pay, or by waiting for a better offer. After lodgement, you may have to deal with a decline and then decide whether a variation, a new application, or a different pathway is still realistic.

Partnership applications follow a similar route. A couple might be in a genuine relationship, but still appear for interview, as the evidence does not substantiate a claim of living together continuously, both being dependent on each other financially or keeping in touch during periods of separation. Culturally arranged marriages, previous temporary visas or time apart when either party was overseas can be of particular concern. Drawing up a timeline of what is likely to be material to a potential adviser on first appraisal can help as to what is potentially useful and what is not. Photographs or a tenancy agreement are helpful, but do not necessarily allay every concern alone. Putting together on file contemporaneous communications, remittances, joint travel, social recognition etc. in a self-contained chronology before lodgement is more likely to avoid the receipt of a Potentially Prejudicial Information letter.

Each of these visa types – student, visitor – pose their own set of recurring issues with regards to funds, intention and evidence of ties. An offer of place or a sponsor letter may seem enough until it is put through its paces in relation to the particular instructions and the sort of indicators that draw a referral to see a decision maker. Residence pathways under the Skilled Migrant Category or Green List require even more precision around occupation, salary, and work experience. These specifications have developed over recent years and will continue to do so, so advice or self-assessment using old thresholds or lists could well lead to a non-conforming application by the time the case is actually considered.

But the benefit of a preliminary licensed review is not limited to avoiding refusals. It also involves deciding whether an application should be submitted at all, in the light of the evidence available. Immigration Matters is open about this. If the evidence and instructions do not put a reasonable prospect of success, that fact is made clear well in advance of committing to significant preparation fees. We do not advise speculative applications so that clients can blindly put in "piles of paper" with the expectation that there is a volume of data that will cover for lack of relevance. If a course of action is possible then the outline of the evidence is precise: That information must be included, that explanation and those problems should be addressed. The end product is an application that is fully illustrative rather than generously voluminous.

The process is simple. An initial consultation of the file – whether it be done face to face in the Papatoetoe office, over the phone or skype for clients residing in New Zealand or overseas – is held to discuss current visa position, what is being proposed, what was done previously, and what material is available. The adviser then recommends whether the file can be processed, what other material will be needed, and what risks remain. If the matter is already complex, such as a prior decline, unlawful status, or a partnership under question, the same assessment identifies which procedural options are still open. If lodged, this is done by the licensed adviser and Immigration New Zealand communications are managed as part of the service.

There is a myth that only unusual or expensive matters require licensed advice. But information for common temporary visas is often detailed enough so that a small mistake or omission from one of the myriad of particulars can cause a delay or refusal. An applicant relying on a public-facing web page and a set of template checklists can easily miss a new change in a minimum wage requirement, an occupation description, or a new evidence requirement. A licensed adviser who knows what to look for and is in a position to know what past decisions have been about can often make this crosscheck quickly, and for many clients, is the key to ensuring that a first filed application does not become a refused application.

One more tangible factor to consider is the cost of change over the long term. Although a solid application will incur professionals' fees, these are typically less costly than the marriage now being refused plus reconsideration or appeal and then collecting more documents in a relatively short period, and the personal trauma of being without status in the country. On top of this, you will find as occurred in the case of a partner's data deficiency that could have been overcome by means of extra 6 months of documentary evidence, which is frankly very unlikely to happen after a breach.