Ivett Kerekes and Andras Laszlo and Ivett Kerekes with their sons Szilard, left, Andor, right, and Gergo, front. Photo / David Haxton
Ivett Kerekes and Andras Laszlo and Ivett Kerekes with their sons Szilard, left, Andor, right, and Gergo, front. Photo / David Haxton
An extremely hardworking Hungarian family, contributing a lot to the Kāpiti community, is devastated after having their residency visa application declined.
Couple Ivett Kerekes and Andras Laszlo and their sons Andor, Szilard and Gergo arrived in New Zealand from Hungary six years ago under an entrepreneur’s visa.
The family wanted to set up a meat and dairy product export production business to European markets but their plan didn’t go as expected as supply chains shrunk when an open trade policy with China began and wasn’t helped later on when Covid-19 created chaos around the world.
To carry on and make money, they started the popular Hungarian-themed restaurant called Anzil while distributing quality dairy and dried meats to local farmers’ markets.
They also bought the PartyPerfect Catering business which has been very successful.
“All of these enterprises have been successful and achieved through hard work,” Ivett said.
The entrepreneur’s visa wasn’t renewed but changed to a special-purpose work visa as they tried to keep up with various requirements.
Meanwhile, they worked towards gaining New Zealand residency but on November 28 their application was declined, meaning they have 42 days to present their case to a tribunal which would determine whether they can stay in New Zealand or not.
“Our family are heartbroken, we have worked hard, paid tax and we love this country, and this action is simply not fair.”
She said the residency application was declined for three reasons.
Ivett Kerekes. Photo / David Haxton
“The first was that we didn’t invest enough money, which we had, then there was the profitability of the business, and the third was the consistency of the business plan.”
Kerekes said they had dealt with seven different Immigration New Zealand case officers.
“Each time it took us back to the start, answering the same set of questions.
“We have been lost in the labyrinth of immigration.”
Kerekes said the couple’s 7-year-old son Gergo came to her and said “do you think they believe we’re not good enough?”.
“It was such a simple sentence, but maybe it is what they think.
“I don’t know how to convince them.”
She said although the export side of the business plan hadn’t worked out, everything else had.
The family was also confused, especially as so many immigrants had been granted residency in New Zealand.
She said the entrepreneur’s visa was very inflexible and should be cancelled.
Thousands of people on social media have rallied to support the family by signing a petition to support their residency battle and prove the family’s work was viable and needed.
Labour’s Ōtaki MP Terisa Ngobi and National’s Hutt South List MP Chris Bishop have asked Associate Immigration Phil Twyford to use his ministerial special discretion and grant the family residency.
Former prime minister Jim Bolger, who knows the family, said, “This family have served the Kāpiti Coast magnificently in their various commercial endeavours.
“They are fine people and they would make excellent permanent New Zealand citizens.
“The country would be all the richer to have them as citizens in our community.”
Immigration New Zealand responds
Immigration New Zealand border and visa operations general manager Nicola Hogg acknowledged the difficult situation the family were in.
“The public support shown for Mrs Kerekes and her family highlights how well regarded they are in their community, and I acknowledge that this recent immigration decision will be disappointing for them.”
She said when an individual applies for an entrepreneur work visa, they need to submit a detailed business plan.
“This business plan details what industry they will operate in and how they will either contribute to economic growth by helping experienced businesspeople grow, or establish high-growth and innovative businesses that have export potential.
“When they then go to apply for an entrepreneur resident visa, they need to provide evidence that their business has realised all of the elements that were set out in their existing business plan, including meeting one of the above benefits which in this case was export potential.
“We appreciate that Covid lockdowns have impacted many businesses, however, the business plan that Mrs Kerekes provided as part of the entrepreneur visa applications/requirements was for an export business, not a café, and this application was submitted in February 2020, prior to Covid.
“They did not complete any exports in that time nor since and therefore did not meet the requirements of their business plan.”
Hogg said Immigration New Zealand’s (INZ) role as a regulator was to apply and assess applications against immigration policy instructions as set by the government.
“Entrepreneur applications are assessed based on a number of factors including consistency with the business plan, evidence of capital investment, revenue, and jobs created.
“INZ has no ability to grant residence as an exception to immigration instructions and can’t balance or make a decision on an application on factors that sit outside immigration instructions such as community standing.
“Unfortunately, Mrs Kerekes and her family did not meet all of the business requirements in the immigration instructions of the entrepreneur residence visa.
“Their business operates as a café, not an export business as detailed in their business plan, and they did not meet the revenue forecasts, capital investment amount, or the points scale which is calculated as part of the assessment.”
Hogg said INZ wrote to the family’s licensed immigration advisor on July 26 this year highlighting a number of concerns with the application and provided them with the opportunity to provide evidence to address the concerns and therefore allow their application to potentially be approved despite not meeting all of the requirements.
“Unfortunately, the response INZ received from the LIA did not sufficiently alleviate the concerns that the business did not meet the necessary requirements.
“Unfortunately, community involvement is not taken into consideration when assessing these types of visa applications as it is not a requirement of the visa category.
“It is possible that support officers who lodge immigration applications may have been perceived as case officers, as Mrs Kerekes’ application has been assessed by five case officers in total.
“I understand the frustration that the family may have in regard to the change in immigration officers assessing their application.
“The immigration officers assessing an application can change for a number of reasons.
“Like any organisation, people move to different teams or take on new roles either internally or externally which results in applications needing to be transferred to another immigration officer.
“When an immigration officer changes, the applicant is informed and contacted by the new immigration officer to establish that relationship at the earliest opportunity.
“The assessment of an application does not start over with each new immigration officer, and there is continuity of management, technical advisors, and head of operations across these applications.
“The technical advisor who quality-checked this particular application and had final oversight of the decision remained the same throughout the entirety of this application.
“Again, I would like to express that we understand that the outcome of this application is not the outcome the family were hoping for and is distressing for them.
“We encourage Mrs Kerekes and her family to continue working with a licensed immigration advisor to assess their options.
“In the decision letter provided to the applicants, it states that they can appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal within 42 days of the decision being notified to them.”
