We finally received a copy of the reply of INZ through their lawyer.
Instead of receiving the file with the documents that the NZ officer would review, we only received a reply dated on 16/9/2014. It didn’t surprise us.
But in our perception the letter had a threatening tone. If it was an attempt to scare us off, well, it had just the opposite effect. If someone tries to scare off people by mentioning that they can successfully defend their case and that they would charge the other party with all costs (38.000 NZD), well it looks to us that they can’t. Certainly if they use a threatening tone.
What the letter mentioned regarding counterproof and timeframes, was something we already expected to be the reaction of the opposite party. As mentioned in our previous blog post immigration needs to come forward with sound and credible counterproof.
The letter mentioned that immigration doesn’t accept to come forward with sound and credible counterproof. And they don’t want to work on a particular timeframe whereas we are only given 4 weeks to reply.
Don’t these 2 points sounds like they are trying to get out of the case without loss of face, no matter what. It surely looks like a huge injustice.
We always had to come up within a particular timeframe with sound and credible evidence. And we always did.
And now that they need to come up with sound and credible counterproof they refuse to do so.
Where is the justice in New Zealand?
With this statement it looks clear that immigration doesn’t want to admit they received unreliable information. Is it so hard to admit it? Is it because loss of face? That would be mostly unacceptable and very unfair and against the law.
It seems to us they want to win the case with weak counterproof or no proof at all. So there the prejudice still remains, despite our strong evidence.
The letter mentioned also that a fraud investigator would be used. That is logic to us and we understand that very well. But what documents will they give that fraud investigator to look at? The unreliable, manipulated and stolen emails? How will a fraud investigator be able to give a clear view on that? He can’t because those documents are unreliable. And it seems to us that the counterparty is forcing to get a statement of the fraud investigator anyhow, even on the unreliable documents. How insane is that? That is just forcing a way to win in a cunning way.
And regarding court proceedings, they want us to drop the appeals before further costs are made, but on the other hand, they want to defer their decision on pursuing payment of costs until the case is finalised. That is no balance at all.
And all this the counterparty considers as reasonable and fair!!!!! Come on, let us stay serious. There is nothing fair and reasonable since the beginning of this case. As mentioned before we only have experienced obstacles, mistakes and outright injustice.
If immigration says they can defend their case succesfully, then why refusing to come up with credible and sound counterproof, why refuse to reply in a particular time frame, why force us to drop the appeal? All this kind of refusal and force used against us, shows immigration is not able to defend their case succesfully.
It should be noted that because of the non-cooperation of immigration, the non-consideration of our strong evidence by immigration, the delays caused by immigration, the blind belief of immigration in false allegation of a mental ill and gay-hating New Zealander, this has caused us already a fortune and that has ruined our lives already.
There is no justice at all. It is a game of money. Our savings against the money of the Tax Payer in NZ.
There is no justice at all. It is a game of prejudice and interpretation. Rules and requirements are only interpreted.
Unless you are rich, then rules and requirements are put aside. It doesn’t matter then if you have a convicted background and if you don’t meet the good character requirement. Money clears the way.
Important advise to anyone who wants to visit New Zealand : It is a beautiful country but be aware that they only let you in because you can spend money. For the rest there is nothing but corruption and discrimination, although they try to hide this at their very best. We found out the hard way now.
We even think that the Human Right Act 1993 – prohibited grounds for discrimination have not been considered.