System Message:

Australian Immigration Daily News

Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Posted by on in General
A recent decision of MARA dismayed me regarding our practice's compliance of Clause 5.1 . It is foolhardy of this agent to breach other Clause of the Code. But the Mara concluded the Agent's charge was not reasonable as little work had done from the prospective of MARA .( Para 134 ) I think it went too far.
It  raised a question that how much work we should do to reasonably charge $1000 ?if my consulting fee is $1000 per hour, I think it is nothing wrong as long as my client is happy to pay.Given the Migration law is a very complicated area, the precise advice for client is priceless.
 
The other parts of the decision is also appalling in my opinion.
Para 141  Encouraging and assisting clients, for a fee, to prolong their lawful stay in Australia has a direct and profound negative effect on the integrity of Australia’s Protection visa and migration programs. It also tarnishes the reputation of the migration advice profession. As such, I find that the Agent has breached his obligations under clause 2.23 of the Code. 
 
Helping the client get a lawful stay in Australia is the essence of migration service in my opinion. It is a matter of Executive and Legislature to close this loophole if they wish. Why did this agent breaches Clause 2.23 of the Code ?
 
Para 145  the Agent does not appear to have made any attempt to do so.37 The Agent’s failure to encourage his clients to approach the Department to regularise their status,..., constitutes a further breach of clause 2.23 of the Code.
Are we obliged to encourage client to approach the department under Code 2.23? For some clients, keep hiding may be in the best interest of them in some instance 
 
I can not agree MARA's standing of Clause 2.23 and 5.1 in this case. It is particularly machiavellian of MARA trying to put this agent down. The agent may made some mistakes, but a decision of cancellation is obviously disproportionate.  You can see where this could go, can't you.  We should do something about it.
 
As we are in a period of uncertainty , an agent may fail to continue deliver the service due to a lot of reasons, I think Australian government should set up an agent fee protection service in migration service industry liken tuition protection service in international education industry. It is in the best interest to protect vulnerable customers and reputation of industry. Any RMA's client will be compensated or transferred to another RMA if the RMA is sanctioned by MARA.
 
Do you know what should I do if I would like to push this idea into reality ?
 
TPS link
 
Last modified on
Hits: 1407 1 Comment
Rate this blog entry:
1
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio

Immigration blog

Bizcover Banner
Government Approves Pilot Trial to bring back International Students
Flinders University has confirmed that the Federal...
Continue Reading...
South Australia Extends Their Interim Allocation of BIIP and GSM into November
South Australia (along with a number of other Stat...
Continue Reading...
Federal Court Cases - Migration Law - 22 October 2020
Minister for Immigration and Border Protecti...
Continue Reading...
NSW Business and Skilled Migration Update
The following email was received today: NSW Busin...
Continue Reading...