Sharks lie in wait for the unwary

By WARREN GAMBLE

From a small Auckland city office, Glory International promised the desperate a new world.

In its advertisements in Chinese-language newspapers, the firm boldly claimed to provide open work permits and marriage arrangements.

But for many clients, these hopes were never realised.

Instead, a law firm which picked up some of the pieces said that in its later dealings Glory took up to $60,000 for applications it never even submitted to the Immigration Service.

After more than a year of broken promises and broke clients, the effervescent female director fled home to China late last year.

Auckland lawyer Patrick McGuire said she had charged up to $10,000 for return residence visas - a three-page application most people could easily fill in for an $80 fee.

In another case, she had charged $60,000 for a residency application which had not been sent to the Immigration Service.

Another client handed over a six-figure sum to help a business colleague come to New Zealand, but got only part of his money back.

Mr McGuire said the woman was skilled at finding plausible reasons for delays, sometimes backing them up with forged documents.

Former clients were reluctant to come forward, but one told Mr McGuire the woman had been arrested in China after crossing someone with police connections, but later skipped bail.

The vulnerability of immigrants was also highlighted in a 1998 case when a South African family were deported after problems with their immigration agency.

Brian and Carol West settled in Taupo with their four daughters in 1996 after paying the agency, New Zealand Opportunities, $3300 to handle their applications.

But the company disappeared, leaving dozens of prospective immigrants stranded. Mr West's agricultural diploma was then found not to be recognised in New Zealand, invalidating his residency bid.

Legitimate consultants say arranged marriages - set up at either end - are still advertised in Chinese-language papers here. The ads themselves are not illegal, and proving a marriage is not genuine can be difficult.

Another common dodgy practice, lodging a refugee-status claim to obtain a work permit for clients who think they are waiting for residency, has slowed. That is due to a recent law change which means that once a refugee claim is lodged, it cannot later be switched to another residency category.

Complaints about exploitation led to Immigration Minister Lianne Dalziel releasing a discussion document last month on options for setting enforceable standards for consultants.

Among them are simple registration, certification by a statutory body with a disciplinary process, and a licensing regime with entry exams.

Complicating any regime is the large number of overseas consultants, who, New Zealand-based operators contend, are far more likely to exploit immigrants.

At present, anyone can set up as an immigration consultant.

Besides broad consumer-protection laws and disputes-tribunal remedies, the only specific regulation was introduced last year in an amendment to the Immigration Act. It provides a maximum $5000 fine or three months' jail for anyone who wilfully misleads or acts negligently or unprofessionally, including charging excessively, in assisting an immigration application.

Mr McGuire, whose firm handles applications, said the movement of people was an "ingenious industry."

"Every method and combination has been tried to get people from one place to another."

While many were genuine cases, others were not up front about their circumstances and went for consultants who dealt in an underhand manner.

While it was well known that there were crooks among immigration operators, one of the main reasons they flourished was delays within the Immigration Service.

"If you put in an application and it is still being processed 18 months later, what a wonderful opportunity for fraud because you just tell every client it's with NZIS."

Mr McGuire also alleges corruption within the service, involving officers on the take in return for granting residency applications, but did not have specific examples.

The service disputes the claims, saying only one officer is before the courts out of more than 500 staff receiving more than $35 million in application fees a year.

"Where people handle money, there is always potential for corruption," said a spokesman. "However, there are strict procedures in place to minimise the risk."

According to the spokesman, most applications are processed in less than six months, although some take up to nine months or more. The longer delays are usually caused by insufficient or incorrect information, or documents needing to be verified.

Consultants and industry sources say it is widely acknowledged that the service has too few officers, leading to bottlenecks in Auckland, where 25 to 30 residency applications are received every day.

Former Minister of Immigration Tuariki Delamere, now an Auckland consultant, said understaffing was the service's greatest problem.

But the biggest delays occurred when the Qualifications Authority made its checks - "Things go down there into a black hole."

The authority checks people's qualifications with overseas education bodies.

The Immigration Service spokesman said that in recent months there had been a concerted effort to clear the backlog and improve processing of temporary entry permits.

"The NZIS believes it can offer as professional a service as most consultants, and for the basic cost of the application fee [up to $1100],"he said.

"Some consultants deliberately paint the NZIS in a bad light to persuade an applicant to use their services - at twice or three times the basic cost - even though the application might be quite straightforward.

The Association for Migration and Investment represents more than 90 consultants, but does not have a unified position on regulation.

A board member and spokesman, Bill Milnes, said there had been little response to the association's call for member opinions, perhaps reflecting the nebulous nature of the options.

He believed that while some form of control was needed, regulation should not penalise bona fide consultants.

Even if registration were compulsory, unregistered consultants could evade it by getting their customers to apply under their own name.

Mr Milnes said a workable system could involve registered consultants getting priority from the service in processing their clients.

Australia has a licensing regime with entry examinations and industry training, but Mr Milnes said he doubted whether our Government would fund it.

The industry, made up of mainly small operators, could not afford to either, without loading big costs on to clients.

Mr Milnes said that for a family of four wanting to immigrate under the general skills category, a consultant's bill could range from $3000 to $4000. The Immigration Service fees would be about $2000 of that.

His firm and others offered a full refund if applicants were turned down.

Consultants often had the language skills and the experience to advise the best approach, particularly if an immigrant came from a country deemed high-risk by the service.

"I would get maybe one complaint about another consultant a month, but I would get at least one a week about the Immigration Service."

A police officer who investigated dubious immigration dealings last year, Detective Tim Chao, from the Auckland Asian crime unit, had no doubt that consultants should be regulated.

He favoured a licensing system, including background checks on criminal records and character.

But he said the Immigration Service also had to improve its checks on fake documents and whether marriages were genuine.

The immigrants - a Herald series

Participate in our online forum