Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 57

Thread: Email from CO raising issues on my character

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    India
    Posts
    110

    Default Email from CO raising issues on my character

    Hello,

    INZ has sent me a strongly worded email that raises questions on my integrity. They believe that I do not meet the character requirements as they feel I have taken the assistance of an unlicensed advisor during my EOI and ITA filing process.

    The email (in the form of a word document) starts off like this

    "We have made an assessment of your application and at this stage we are not satisfied that you meet all the criteria of the SMC immigration instructions to warrant an approval of your application."

    And it goes ahead like this

    "We note that at this stage you meet the age, qualification, skilled employment, work experience, health, English language and settlement requirements. We have assessed you as being eligible for 130 points.
    However, to be eligible for residence to New Zealand, the immigration instructions require you to meet the good character requirements. We have information that suggests that you do not meet the character requirements."


    This is not true. I have not taken any immigration advice for my SMC applications process. The above point was raised during our telephonic interview last month and the CO expressed her concern and suspicion as the presentation style (covering letter) of the ITA application matches with that of the unlicensed immigration advisor. I collated the information and certain document templates available on the internet and created a cover letter that briefly summarized my case (5 pages) explaining my claim of the points and an elaborate list of various documents sent along with the application. While I gave them a couple of sites (enz.org is one among them) that appeared at the top of my mind during my interview as my input sources to compile the information and sequence the document, it apparently was not good enough for the CO to be convinced.

    While the first half of the INZ document made me feel that they have decided to reject my application, towards the end of the document, it was also mentioned that

    "We have not made a decision on your application at this stage. We invite you to make comments or provide further information in response to our concerns.
    You may provide further information by 29 March 2013."


    While I appreciate INZ's concerns and reasons that had led them to believe that I have used an unlicensed advisor, how do I put forward my case? The only thing that I can think of is to reiterate in writing what I told the CO during my interview. While I can provide links of the sites (Google results for "immigrant visa cover letter" and "Immigrant visa cover sheet", past postings in enz.org etc.) that I referred to and collected data as part of my applications filling process. Beyond this I do not know what more tangible and convincing information that I can put forward as part of my response.

    Have any of the fellow forumites experienced a similar situation? Your inputs will be of great help to me.

    Thanks and Regards

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    37,811

    Default

    I'm so sorry to hear this. This is a horrible thing to happen to you.

    how do I put forward my case? The only thing that I can think of is to reiterate in writing what I told the CO during my interview. While I can provide links of the sites (Google results for "immigrant visa cover letter" and "Immigrant visa cover sheet", past postings in enz.org etc.) that I referred to and collected data as part of my applications filling process.
    I think this is a very good idea. If you give all the URLs to the websites that you looked at, to help you with putting together your letter, they should be able to see why some of the language that you used is like the unlicensed adviser's. You could print off documents and highlight where phrases came from. But it is so difficult to prove a negative. Is there some way you can get a copy of your email record (showing no contacts with this adviser), from the provider because just printing off your own I guess someone could say you could have erased something?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Hi,

    Very sorry for you. In fact, I also did similar thing. I have provided a cover letter which contains points details, education, experience and other reference details.

    Now I am also worried after hearing this.

    Regards,
    Raju.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    India
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JandM View Post
    Is there some way you can get a copy of your email record (showing no contacts with this adviser), from the provider because just printing off your own I guess someone could say you could have erased something?
    Thanks for your suggestion, JandM. I'd not rather show the email trace as that can be questioned further ad you rightly pointed out. I'm also speaking to my friends who know about the kind of effort I put in on this to take their views as well. As this is a very specific and tricky issue, there is no one right way to proceed. I need to weigh all the opinions and collate my response. Hope my response does not synchronize with an earlier response that INZ would have received and I end up explaining that as well :-)... LOL...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    3,697

    Default

    Sorry, I think I'm missing the point here. Is there any part of their letter which explicitly states about using advice? From the partly pasted email above, it doesn't mention anything about the advice. Only indication is "We have information that suggests that you do not meet the character requirements.", is there something else which they know and not just about immigration advice?


    This whole line ("We have not made a decision on your application at this stage.......") is a standard in all communications received from INZ, so just focus on the first point - perhaps giving them links, printouts/scanned pdf copies etc will help in this case

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    .
    Posts
    110

    Default

    "We have information that suggests that you do not meet the character requirements.", is there something else which they know and not just about immigration advice?
    I had same first reaction as sun777.

    Questioning regarding migration agent was in the interview & it would be on record in the interview transcript already. I presume you have denied it & denial was not convincing to INZ, is your opinion & you could be right or wrong on this.

    However there is no information is quoted by you here/mentioned by INZ on which you are required to given comment or react upon so no reaction can be given other than generic response that I am innocent & having good character.

    I do not see any evidence given in your post that INZ has said, that source of character matter is migrant agent issue or limited only to that issue.

    Hope its only some confusion & you come out clear

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    India
    Posts
    110

    Default

    [QUOTE=Sun777;475841]"We have information that suggests that you do not meet the character requirements.", is there something else which they know and not just about immigration advice?

    Here is few more paragraphs from the email which makes it clearer about INZ's concern and why they have such a concern

    We have discovered that it appears you have provided false and misleading information. We note that you have indicated in the expression of interest (EOI) and application form that no agent or consultant has represented your application and/or provided you clerical assistance. You have indicated that no one has assisted you in understanding our immigration instructions and the compilation and submission of the information on the application.

    However our internal checks have revealed that an unlicensed immigration advisor by the name of XXXX has assisted you in completing and submitting your EOI and the application form, putting together the documents and information, presentation of the documents and submission of the application.

    We have already discussed during our telephonic interview on 14 February 2013 the features of your application that have led us to believe that you have received assistance from XXXX. We note the substance and style of your application reveals XXXX involvement.

    Particularly noteworthy are your responses to the following questions in
    both the EOI and the application form:

    A20. Have you received immigration advice on this application?
    No

    B20. Have you, in the course of applying for a New Zealand visa/permit, made any statement
    or provided any information, evidence or submission that was false, misleading or forged, or
    withheld material information?
    No


    Further you have signed the following declaration in your application form:

    ‘I understand that if I make any false statements, or provide any false or misleading information, or have changed or altered this form in any material way my application may be declined, I may lose any right to appeal any declined decision, any residence visa or permit granted may later be revoked and I may also be committing an offence and liable to prosecution, a fine and imprisonment.

    You have also left the below declaration blank:

    Declaration for person assisting the applicant to complete this form

    Given this, it appears that you have given false and misleading information and have withheld material information regarding the involvement and the part played by XXX in your application. Hence, presently it appears that you are unable to meet the minimum character requirements to warrant an approval of your application.

    Considering all of this, as of now it seems that in the course of applying for a New Zealand visa you have provided inaccurate material information pertaining to assistance/guidance that you have sought and received from XXXX.

    Due to the reasons outlined below, we would not consider a character waiver as you fall within the purview of SM3.5, quoted for your reference:

    With the information presented so far, we note that you have withheld the
    identity and the role of Opulentus Overseas Careers in the submission of
    your EOI and this associated application.

    Instructions at SM3.5.b state that information relating to a claim made in an EOI that is factually inaccurate and is relevant to the issuing of an invitation to apply or the assessment of a resident visa application will be considered misleading unless the principal applicant can demonstrate that there is a reasonable basis for making that claim.

    Despite an opportunity during the telephonic interview with you on 14 February 2013 you have not been able to provide a reasonable basis for this incorrect claim.

    Accordingly within the ambit of SM3.5, presently your application for a resident visa under the skilled migrant category cannot be approved.



    I have specifically masked the name of the unlicensed advisor's identity with "XXXX" as I do not think it is right to make the identity of the advisor public in this forum at this stage. After these paragraphs, they have asked me to provide an explanation before 29 March 2013 failing which they would consider my application in its current state which means INZ is unlikely to approve my application.

    While I know this XXXX entity as an organization with more than 12 years of existence in India with branches across multiple cities. They do overseas job placement assistance, student and settlement visa processing for Australia, Canada and a few other countries. They are indeed not licensed immigraiton advisors for New Zealand.

    Any further suggestions based on this additional information would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks in Advance.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    37,811

    Default

    But are you now saying that you did consult XXXX about your application? Or did you just look at their website?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    .
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sramn View Post
    created a cover letter that briefly summarized my case (5 pages) explaining my claim of the points
    Whatever your reply to them later, you may have to include convincing explanation for above also, to get out of this mess. How you got that idea of 5 pages cover letter if not using this particular agent, who might also be having similar style of cover letter & hence the problem for you now.

    At this stage, as they have not shared any data that they might have got in their internal check, other than mere resemblance of the documents in presentation & content.

    If they have any evidence that you were contacting or was being contacted by this agent or did any money transfer (you might have given your bank statement as proof to address etc with some suspicious entry), then you may find it difficult to convince them on the story that resemblance is only case of rare co-incidence.

    Only resemblance to me is not conclusive proof that you have used their services but then, I am not INZ so only their opinion (and data they have) matters. All the best

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    India
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JandM View Post
    But are you now saying that you did consult XXXX about your application? Or did you just look at their website?
    No JandM. XXXX has nothing to do with my ITA application. They are a well known consultants in the city and from their website claims, I understand they are licensed advisors for Australia, CAnada. NZ is not mentioned in their list. However, they do have a page for NZ. Not sure if they do nom immigrant visas for NZ.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •