Success Stories
Some real life stories on how we have changed lives
Story A
Background
Client A wanted to bring his whole family to New Zealand. The family had previously been on limited visas in New Zealand which did not allow them to continue to stay in New Zealand. There were previous bonafide issues. We represented the clients for their temporary visas while they were living overseas.
Results
Due to the documentation we provided and our interactions with the Immigration case officer, we were able to succeed in getting the temporary visas approved and without any limiting conditions. The family are now reunited in New Zealand and delighted to be together again.
Client A wanted to bring his whole family to New Zealand. The family had previously been on limited visas in New Zealand which did not allow them to continue to stay in New Zealand. There were previous bonafide issues. We represented the clients for their temporary visas while they were living overseas.
Results
Due to the documentation we provided and our interactions with the Immigration case officer, we were able to succeed in getting the temporary visas approved and without any limiting conditions. The family are now reunited in New Zealand and delighted to be together again.
Story B
Background
Client B had been unlawful and requested to be put back on a visa on two occasions but both Section 61 requests were declined. Our client came to us for help and we represented this client and were able to prove that our submissions were compelling enough to convince Immigration New Zealand that our client did not have any intent to become unlawful and that there were grounds for the client to be put back on a visa.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved a temporary visa for Client B so that our client was no longer unlawful. Our client was very happy considering that our client had been unlawful and stressed for many months prior to approaching us for help.
Client B had been unlawful and requested to be put back on a visa on two occasions but both Section 61 requests were declined. Our client came to us for help and we represented this client and were able to prove that our submissions were compelling enough to convince Immigration New Zealand that our client did not have any intent to become unlawful and that there were grounds for the client to be put back on a visa.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved a temporary visa for Client B so that our client was no longer unlawful. Our client was very happy considering that our client had been unlawful and stressed for many months prior to approaching us for help.
Story C
Background
Client C was declined a work visa due to bonafide issues. Immigration New Zealand were not satisfied that our client was a genuine visitor at the time the work application was made. Our client came to us for help and through our submissions, we were able to prove that the Immigration Officer who declined the application had not followed the decision making process and acted fairly.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved the work visa. Our client was very happy with the results because our client would not have been able to be approved without our expert advice.
Client C was declined a work visa due to bonafide issues. Immigration New Zealand were not satisfied that our client was a genuine visitor at the time the work application was made. Our client came to us for help and through our submissions, we were able to prove that the Immigration Officer who declined the application had not followed the decision making process and acted fairly.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved the work visa. Our client was very happy with the results because our client would not have been able to be approved without our expert advice.
Story D
Background
Immigration New Zealand had previous concerns about Client D’s partnership because they were living apart. Client D came to us for help so that we could represent Client D for a work visa application. In our submissions we proved that the couple were in a genuine and stable relationship and there were reasonable grounds as to why they were living apart.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved the work visa. Our client was very happy because the family would be able to continue to remain together in New Zealand.
Immigration New Zealand had previous concerns about Client D’s partnership because they were living apart. Client D came to us for help so that we could represent Client D for a work visa application. In our submissions we proved that the couple were in a genuine and stable relationship and there were reasonable grounds as to why they were living apart.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved the work visa. Our client was very happy because the family would be able to continue to remain together in New Zealand.
Story E
Background
Client E was a restaurant owner and came to us for help because of issues with an application for a work visa for one of the employees. Immigration New Zealand were not satisfied that the job offer was genuine and that this employer had made genuine attempts to recruit New Zealand workers. Through our documentation and evidence, we were able to prove that it was not the case.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved the work visa and Client E is no longer stressed about the restaurant’s staffing levels.
Client E was a restaurant owner and came to us for help because of issues with an application for a work visa for one of the employees. Immigration New Zealand were not satisfied that the job offer was genuine and that this employer had made genuine attempts to recruit New Zealand workers. Through our documentation and evidence, we were able to prove that it was not the case.
Results
Immigration New Zealand approved the work visa and Client E is no longer stressed about the restaurant’s staffing levels.
Story F
Background
Client F approached us because our client was declined an application to work as a specific Manager position. Our client wanted us to assist with reapplying for the same position.
Results
We helped the client lodge a new application and we were able to prove that the client was a Manager. The application was approved.
Client F approached us because our client was declined an application to work as a specific Manager position. Our client wanted us to assist with reapplying for the same position.
Results
We helped the client lodge a new application and we were able to prove that the client was a Manager. The application was approved.
Story G
Background
Client G approached us for advice about dealing with Immigration having concerns that the client's employer had not made genuine attempts to recruit New Zealand workers.
Results
Due to our advice on the step by step process of how to demonstrate compliance, the client was approved a work visa.
Client G approached us for advice about dealing with Immigration having concerns that the client's employer had not made genuine attempts to recruit New Zealand workers.
Results
Due to our advice on the step by step process of how to demonstrate compliance, the client was approved a work visa.
Story H
Background
Client H was convicted of a serious offence. Immigration declined the client's character waiver and work visa.
Results
Due to our ability to persuade and provide clear reasons as to why Immigration should reconsider, the applicant was granted a character waiver and approved a subsequent work visa despite the application had little evidence on hand.
Client H was convicted of a serious offence. Immigration declined the client's character waiver and work visa.
Results
Due to our ability to persuade and provide clear reasons as to why Immigration should reconsider, the applicant was granted a character waiver and approved a subsequent work visa despite the application had little evidence on hand.
Story I
Background
Client I received an Immigration letter with concerns about his employer not making genuine efforts to recruit New Zealanders.
Results
We represented Client I and were able to persuade Immigration New Zealand that his employer did make genuine efforts to recruit New Zealanders. The work visa application was approved.
Client I received an Immigration letter with concerns about his employer not making genuine efforts to recruit New Zealanders.
Results
We represented Client I and were able to persuade Immigration New Zealand that his employer did make genuine efforts to recruit New Zealanders. The work visa application was approved.
Story J
Background
Client J is a NZ resident supporting a partner to come to NZ. Immigration New Zealand were not satisfied that the couple met partnership policy due to concerns surrounding their living arrangements. Immigration New Zealand declined the work visa offshore.
Results
Client J came to us for help and through our submission we were able to persuade Immigration New Zealand to approve a visa so that the couple could be reunited in New Zealand.
Client J is a NZ resident supporting a partner to come to NZ. Immigration New Zealand were not satisfied that the couple met partnership policy due to concerns surrounding their living arrangements. Immigration New Zealand declined the work visa offshore.
Results
Client J came to us for help and through our submission we were able to persuade Immigration New Zealand to approve a visa so that the couple could be reunited in New Zealand.
Story K
Background
Client K received an Immigration letter on concerns about not being paid the labour market industry rate.
Results
By following our advice Client K was able to satisfy labour market concerns and was approved a work visa.
Client K received an Immigration letter on concerns about not being paid the labour market industry rate.
Results
By following our advice Client K was able to satisfy labour market concerns and was approved a work visa.
Story L
Background
Client L lodged a residence application and received an Immigration letter on concerns about not being a Chef.
Results
We represented Client L and was able to persuade Immigration New Zealand that Client L was a Chef.
Client L was approved residency.
Client L lodged a residence application and received an Immigration letter on concerns about not being a Chef.
Results
We represented Client L and was able to persuade Immigration New Zealand that Client L was a Chef.
Client L was approved residency.
Story M
Background
Client M lodged a residence application and had 9 months to find skilled employment. Client had concerns that the skills and experience applied for was different from the new offer of employment.
Results
We represented Client M and was able to prove to Immigration New Zealand that Client M had the required skills to be granted residency.
Client M was approved residency.
Client M lodged a residence application and had 9 months to find skilled employment. Client had concerns that the skills and experience applied for was different from the new offer of employment.
Results
We represented Client M and was able to prove to Immigration New Zealand that Client M had the required skills to be granted residency.
Client M was approved residency.
Story N
Background
Client N wanted help trying to demonstrate to Immigration that the managerial position was skilled.
Results
We represented Client N and was able to demonstrate to Immigration that the client is in skilled employment and is eligible to be approved under the Essential Skills Category The work visa was approved.
Client N wanted help trying to demonstrate to Immigration that the managerial position was skilled.
Results
We represented Client N and was able to demonstrate to Immigration that the client is in skilled employment and is eligible to be approved under the Essential Skills Category The work visa was approved.
Story O
Background
Client O overstayed in New Zealand for a couple of months and wanted help to become lawful again.
Results
We represented Client O and was able to demonstrate to Immigration that the client should be considered under a Section 61 request. The client was approved a work visa.
Client O overstayed in New Zealand for a couple of months and wanted help to become lawful again.
Results
We represented Client O and was able to demonstrate to Immigration that the client should be considered under a Section 61 request. The client was approved a work visa.
Story P
Background
Client P received a letter from Immigration with concerns about the employer making genuine efforts to recruit New Zealand workers and was about to be declined.
Results
Through our submissions , we were able to demonstrate that Client P had a strong case to be considered for a work visa approval. The client was approved a work visa.
Client P received a letter from Immigration with concerns about the employer making genuine efforts to recruit New Zealand workers and was about to be declined.
Results
Through our submissions , we were able to demonstrate that Client P had a strong case to be considered for a work visa approval. The client was approved a work visa.
Story Q
Background
Client Q works on a fishing vessel and due to the strict requirements regarding fishing crew, we represented Client Q.
Results
We were able to help Client Q get a work visa approved through our submissions.
Client Q works on a fishing vessel and due to the strict requirements regarding fishing crew, we represented Client Q.
Results
We were able to help Client Q get a work visa approved through our submissions.
Story R
Background
Client R was approved residence and then got into a situation where the resident visa expired and Client R subsequently became unlawful in New Zealand.
Results
Client R approached us for help and we were able to get the resident visa reinstated through our submissions.
Client R was approved residence and then got into a situation where the resident visa expired and Client R subsequently became unlawful in New Zealand.
Results
Client R approached us for help and we were able to get the resident visa reinstated through our submissions.
Story S
Background
Client S wanted to improve their current position to one that would be able to gain residency.
Results
Client S approached us for representation and we were able to get Client S approved a work visa in an occupation that would be eligible for residency.
Client S wanted to improve their current position to one that would be able to gain residency.
Results
Client S approached us for representation and we were able to get Client S approved a work visa in an occupation that would be eligible for residency.
Story T
Background
Client T was declined a visa by Immigration New Zealand.
Results
Client T got us to represent Client T and through our submissions we were able to satisfy Immigration New Zealand that the previous declined visa was due to poor representation by another adviser. The client was approved a subsequent visa.
Client T was declined a visa by Immigration New Zealand.
Results
Client T got us to represent Client T and through our submissions we were able to satisfy Immigration New Zealand that the previous declined visa was due to poor representation by another adviser. The client was approved a subsequent visa.
Story U
Background
Client U came to us for assistance in writing a document. Client U had been sent a Potentially Prejudicial letter by Immigration New Zealand declaring that there were concerns that the client had intentions to undertake employment. The application was about to be declined.
Results
Through our submissions we were able to help the client get a further visa approved.
Client U came to us for assistance in writing a document. Client U had been sent a Potentially Prejudicial letter by Immigration New Zealand declaring that there were concerns that the client had intentions to undertake employment. The application was about to be declined.
Results
Through our submissions we were able to help the client get a further visa approved.
Story V
Background
Client V was refused entry into New Zealand due to convictions. Client V was represented by us.
Results
Through our submissions we were able to get the client's visa approved and the client was allowed entry back into New Zealand.
Client V was refused entry into New Zealand due to convictions. Client V was represented by us.
Results
Through our submissions we were able to get the client's visa approved and the client was allowed entry back into New Zealand.
Story W
Background
Client W was refused two visas. Immigration had concerns that the client did not meet bonafide requirements.
Results
We represented Client W and was able to get the client a new work visa approved.
Client W was refused two visas. Immigration had concerns that the client did not meet bonafide requirements.
Results
We represented Client W and was able to get the client a new work visa approved.
Story X
Background
Client X was refused one visitor visa and two Section 61 work visas. Immigration had concerns that the client did not meet both visitor and work visa requirements.
Results
We represented Client X and a work visa was subsequently approved.
Client X was refused one visitor visa and two Section 61 work visas. Immigration had concerns that the client did not meet both visitor and work visa requirements.
Results
We represented Client X and a work visa was subsequently approved.
Story Y
Background
Client Y approached us for representation because the client had concerns that the employer had issues with Immigration before due to genuine attempts to recruit New Zealand workers.
Results
Through our submissions we were able to get the client's work visa approved.
Client Y approached us for representation because the client had concerns that the employer had issues with Immigration before due to genuine attempts to recruit New Zealand workers.
Results
Through our submissions we were able to get the client's work visa approved.
Story Z
Background
Client Z approached us for representation because Immigration were concerned that the client had provided false information on the application form.
Results
We were able to resolve the concerns and get the visa approved.
Client Z approached us for representation because Immigration were concerned that the client had provided false information on the application form.
Results
We were able to resolve the concerns and get the visa approved.
Story AA
Background
Client AB approached us for representation because the client had issues with an employer and needed help with obtaining a new work visa in a different location as a Chef.
Results
We were able to resolve the concerns and get the visa approved.
Client AB approached us for representation because the client had issues with an employer and needed help with obtaining a new work visa in a different location as a Chef.
Results
We were able to resolve the concerns and get the visa approved.
Story AB
Background
Client AC approached us for representation because the client had a previous residence application declined under the same employer and same position.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved with the same employer and same position despite the residence application being previously declined.
Client AC approached us for representation because the client had a previous residence application declined under the same employer and same position.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved with the same employer and same position despite the residence application being previously declined.
Story AC
Background
Client AD approached us for representation because the client had issues with proving the level of responsibility required as a Hotel Service Manager.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved due to our expert knowledge.
Client AD approached us for representation because the client had issues with proving the level of responsibility required as a Hotel Service Manager.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved due to our expert knowledge.
Story AD
Background
Client AE approached us for representation because the client worked for a large chain that had several Chefs.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved due to our expert knowledge.
Client AE approached us for representation because the client worked for a large chain that had several Chefs.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved due to our expert knowledge.
Story AE
Background
Client AF approached us for representation because the client had issues proving responsibility as a Retail Manager.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved with our expert knowledge.
Client AF approached us for representation because the client had issues proving responsibility as a Retail Manager.
Results
We were able to get the residence application approved with our expert knowledge.