Hi. Thank you for your professional opinion. It adds to the much needed confirmation and confidence in times like these. My visa was processed in the Chch branch, yes.
The issue with the drivers licence went like this:
1) It was in the job description written by my employer and also advertised as a requirement for the job.
2) While Iīve got a license from overseas and an international one, I forgot to upload evidence of it with the initial application.
3) It was then mentioned in the PPI letter, that Iīm not suitably qualified for the position offered because I havenīt provided evidence of my drivers licence. This is an ambiguous situation because since I hadnīt provided any previous evidence, the CO could not have predicted with certainty, that I hadīt converted my licence to a local license yet. However, since converting their license appears to be a general requirement for everyone whoīs stayed for more than a year in NZ, it wouldnīt have been much of an effort to mention this requirement in the PPI letter as well, by which time, my overseas license was already invalid for more than a month. There was an 1.5 months time period between me submitting my additional evidence and then getting the declining letter. Once I became aware of this requirement, it took me 5 days to pass the theory test, have the restricted license mailed to me 10 days after and now I plan to do the practical test this week – which would cross off one thing from my list of worries. So yeah, I canīt really blame the CO for this, it was initially a shortcoming from my part, but it could have been solved quicker and not be made a big deal with a bit of goodwill from the CO.
The only reason the SM report has been brought up every time, is the CO not being satisfied with my evidence of qualifying as a carpenter, but from what you mentioned about being atleast a minimum of evidence required by the INZ, I believe to have already satisfied that requirement.
I initially submitted:
1) Two letters from overseas employers. Both described the work Iīd done, had start and end dates, issue dates, contact details. One missed to mention "full-time employment".
2) Letter from a NZ employer which summed up the work Iīd done with him, when it had been done and a "call to action" to call and ask for more information/confirmation if required.
To prove my additional value to the INZ, I also provided evidence (academic transscript) of my undergraduate bachelor degree, which is literally 98% completed. It doesnīt directly correspond to construction, as it is in natural sciences but it does have more than a dozen completed courses in economics and law, which are one of the fundamental pillars of a functioning society and necessary in all walks of life, including construction. I also provided evidence of having completed a 1.5 month long entrepreneurial training. It is rather insignificant, maybe, but does provide some evidence of character. The final piece of evidence was a personal letter, connecting a few dots between all the submitted evidence, my motivations to become part of the NZ family and my willingness to contribute to the benefit of NZ.
In the PPI letter, the CO had copy pasted a list of jobs done by a labourer and said that my employerīs Job Position Description is more of a match with that. I can see why that happened. We hadnīt been as thorough with the Position Description as we should have been and that shortcoming was also fixed in our reply to the PPI letter. However, that was the 1st time, when the CO also decided to ignore all other evidence of the actual jobs done, which all corresponded with the carpenters duties.
I then submitted:
1) A detailed description of the job duties completed in NZ with illustrations, written by myself.
2) Another and a more detailed letter from my NZ employer.
3) A supporting letter from a nation-wide construction company, who was our main-contractor on a 4 million $ construction site, with a "call to action" to call him for more information/confirmation.
As Iīve described in my opening post, it was mostly all ignored.
With my reconsideration of a declined visa request, Iīve submitted:
1) A letter, politely pointing out the shortcoming of the decision-making by my previous CO and my intention to convert my overseas licence ASAP.
2) Additional photos of me on 2 different overseas construction sites, which correspond to the evidence submitted. It has not been mentioned or required by the CO earlier, but Iīm hoping it shows willingness to cooperate and tilts the balance in my favor.
I am mailing additional evidence tomorrow, to be added to the ongoing case:
1) A 3rd letter from my employer, explaining his willingness to provide me transport to and from work, until Iīve sorted things out with my licence. It also argues in favor of the fact that my ability to perform complex job duties is of greater importance, than the current issue with the formality of drivers license.
2) Evidence of the actual restricted NZ license Iīve received just 2 days ago and of an upcoming practical test, to show my commitment to satisfying all legal requirements.
3) A letter, made up of excerpts from various articles, sourced from different NZ news outlets and organisations related to the constrution industry. They all carry a similar message, but from a different angle. The MBIE (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment) has said that an additional 50-60k construction workers are needed until at least 2022. There also appears to be a shortage of apprentices. A special category work visa for the KiwiBuild project is being prepared to be able to import workers from overseas (mainly Asia). These also describe the actual value and benefits that builders immediately provide to the NZ economy with their work every day.
All in all, Iīm already here in NZ, employed with proven work experience. There is also demand for my skills. I think that should be seen as an advantage to applying from overseas with just verbal agreements, made with prospective employers.
While I do believe that there is reason enough to make a formal complaint, Iīd follow this path only if a person with experience in these matters, suggests taking this road.
I hope this example of a chess tournament with the INZ might give some useful hints to anyone else who finds themselves in a similar situation in the future.