Abiodun has been an immigration consultant for the past four years. He holds an L3 Class of

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

Abiodun has been an immigration consultant for the past four years. He holds an L3 Class of License (RCIC-IRB) and practices in the area of family class applications and sponsorship appeals before the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD). Before becoming an RCIC Abiodun worked for three years for a lawyer practicing in the area of immigration appeals and Judicial Reviews at the Federal Court.  

Abiodun has recently assisted Hannah, a Canadian citizen, in a family class application to sponsor Jimmy, a citizen of Ireland.  

A few years back, Hannah went to Ireland to study medicine at the National University of Galway, Ireland, where she met Jimmy with whom she fell in love. Eventually, Jimmy came to Canada as a visitor and Hannah and Jimmy got married in a small private ceremony. The couple hired Abiodun to assist them with an application for permanent residence in Canada under the Spouse or Common-law Partner in Canada Class.  

Abiodun did an excellent job with the application and Jimmy received his permanent resident status in relatively short order. The couple was extremely happy with the knowledge, work, and dedication that Abiodun demonstrated throughout the process and held him in high regard for any future immigration needs.  

Hannah and Jimmy contacted Abiodun in mid-March with the great news that Hannah was expecting a baby and was due for delivery on May 15. The couple wanted Abiodun to look after Jimmy's parents, Sean and Maggy, Irish citizens, in their process of applying for an Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA) to be able to attend the delivery of their first grandchild. They told Abiodun that the future grandparents were ecstatic about the news and were looking forward to being present during their first grandchild's birth.  

Abiodun had never done an eTA Application before, but he felt comfortable enough to assist with this as he believed it was a fairly straightforward process.  

However, when Jimmy told Abiodun that Jimmy's father Sean had issues with the police about 28 years ago, Abiodun was not sure what to do. He was not familiar with criminal record issues.

Abiodun decided to get the information from Sean directly and make a decision afterward as to whether he could research it enough to advise Sean. Thus, he booked a free consultation with him to discuss the matter and sent a simple Consultation Agreement to Sean for review and signature, and scheduled a virtual meeting with him via Zoom.  

Sean had attended a party and had a few drinks and was driving on a rainy night 28 years ago. After passing a truck, he noticed a barricade ahead with a police car.  Sean hit the brakes and slid into the back of the police car. He was given a breathalyzer test and later convicted of DUI (Driving Under the Influence) and Careless Driving.  He was fined, had his license suspended for 6 months, and was given 4 years' probation.  

Abiodun told Sean upfront that he did not practice in the area of criminal inadmissibility and did not feel comfortable advising on the matter, especially in light of the tight timeline for Sean to be able to come to Canada by May 15, so he would give him a referral to someone else.

However, Sean insisted that Jimmy could do the simple online eTA application for him and they just wanted some advice on a couple of specific questions.

Abiodun was torn and did not want to disappoint the family. He told Sean that he would do his best but that if any complications developed, he would refer Sean to a colleague who practiced in the area of criminal inadmissibility. He would not charge a fee for his advice.

Abiodun told Sean and Jimmy that his best advice was to answer 'Yes' to the question about prior convictions and give whatever details they could and wait and see what happened. Jimmy submitted the application and provided the correct information about Sean's previous charges and convictions as per Abiodun's advice.

The application was submitted on March 31st. This was ideal because Sean and Maggy were leaving on a three-week vacation in South America on April 1st and would not be available during this period.

Three days later, Jimmy received an email from IRCC requesting him to submit Sean's court records for all charges and convictions.  There was nothing Jimmy could do until April 21st when Sean and Maggy returned home. But he contacted Abiodun for advice.

Abiodun was not sure how to handle this and told Jimmy he was no longer able to assist them and provided a reference of a colleague who practiced in the area of criminal inadmissibility.  

In late May, Abiodun received an email from Sean as follows:

Dear Abiodun,  

I was not able to be present at my first grandchild's birth on May 15 because of you. Indeed, you did not charge me initially for the consultation and afterwards for the advice to submit the ETA Application, but you should have known from the beginning that I needed to obtain the court records. You were aware I was leaving on vacation and did not know or tell me to address this before leaving. Being that the conviction occurred about 28 years ago, it takes at least 4-5 weeks for the court to produce the certified records and I was not able to get them in time to be able to come to Canada. My new counsel told me that I should have ordered my records from the outset and there would have been enough time. I know you did not charge me, but I still hold you responsible. You should have been aware of this and should have advised me of such.  

I had made plans to be in Canada for the birth of my first grandchild and Maggy and I had also booked the plane tickets and the hotel and were looking forward to this.   

I hate to do this, but I will make a formal complaint to the College about how you handled the matter and hope at least some good comes from this so that other people would not be suffering the same.  

Discuss the scope of licence and scope of practice relevant to this scenario.
Is the fact that Abiodun did not charge Sean any fees relevant? Discuss.
Section 19(2)(a) of the Code defines what it means to be competent to take a case (experience, knowledge, etc.). It is often necessary for a consultant to assess their ability to meet this standard in a given situation. What are some factors that Abiodun should have taken into account to assess whether he was, or could quickly become, competent enough to advise Sean? What should he have considered?
What were Abiodun's options under the Code to address the client's inquiry? What do you think was his best option, and why?
Does Sean have grounds to file a complaint to the College about Abiodun's handling of his matter? Yes, or no? Explain.