Survey shows more newcomers choose immigration consultants over lawyers — and that can be risky, experts say

Andrés Barrios says he’s still in the process of restarting his life in Mexico, after failing to secure permanent residency in Canada in 2021.

The 39-year-old had dreams of working in Vancouver. Instead, he’s now the lead plaintiff in a proposed class-action lawsuit that alleges his former immigration consultant collected thousands of dollars in fees from dozens of migrant workers for an allegedly fake COVID-19 related immigration program.

Those allegations haven’t been tested in court and the consultant, Liza Lucion, denies them.  

Barrios said the result of the allegedly fake program is that he and other newcomers had to leave Canada altogether, their immigration dreams dashed. 

“It still shocks me,” Barrios told CBC News from his home in Mexico City. “We felt anguish. We felt very angry, frustrated.”

The legal challenge comes as more newcomers are choosing the services of immigration consultants over lawyers, according to a new survey commissioned by CBC News.

The survey, conducted by market research firm Pollara in November, asked 1,507 people who arrived in Canada in the past 10 years about their immigration experiences and found 33 per cent used consultants, while 16 per cent used lawyers. A national survey of that size would normally have a margin of error of +/- 2.5 per cent.

Immigration experts say newcomers may prefer consultants because they’re convenient and affordable. But they also say the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (CICC) hasn’t done enough to punish bad actors in the industry. 

They also say victims need better recourse, including a compensation fund promised years ago that has yet to come to fruition. 

“I’ve worked with excellent immigration consultants, but the problem is that there are bad actors that are unscrupulous,” said Vancouver immigration lawyer Jae-Yeon Lim, who also teaches immigration law at Queen’s University to those seeking to become consultants. She clarified that she was speaking about her own experiences with clients and not on behalf of her employers.

Kelly Ernst, chief program officer for the Centre for Newcomers, said his organization helps people who have experienced difficulties with both consultants and lawyers.

“It isn’t a function of consultants per se, but it’s more of a function of people representing another person for money and then that money gets in the way,” he said of the problem.

3 more lawsuits

Lucion’s licence was suspended indefinitely by the CICC in 2022, after the regulator received seven complaints about the alleged COVID program scheme.

Lucion declined an interview with CBC News. Her lawyer Melanie Samuels said Lucion did not intentionally mislead clients, but that they misunderstood what she told them.

“There’s, I think, a profound misunderstanding of what happened. Of course, they’re painting her as the devil, that she was trying to loop them in for thousands of dollars, and she actually did applications. Whether they were successful or not, there’s no guarantee in immigration anyway,” Samuels said.

Lucion is facing three other lawsuits, including one that alleges she kept practising despite her suspension, and that she advised a woman to work illegally without a valid work permit.

Lucion has denied all of the allegations against her. They have not been proven in court. 

Promise of a job

Eoin Logan, who represents some of the people suing Lucion, said newcomers choose consultants over lawyers because they believe they are cheaper and easier to find.

There are over 12,000 immigration consultants as of 2022, federal government data shows, compared to about 2,000 lawyers who work primarily with immigration clients, according to the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association.

In a lawsuit filed in 2024, Mexican citizen Diana Plascencia alleges she suffered severe mental distress after Lucion and Lucion’s then-husband Jose Guadalupe Garcia Hernandez promised her a job in data analytics in 2021 at Intercore, a company they co-owned, that could lead to permanent residency — but ended up giving her a job as a construction labourer.

Plascencia would not qualify for permanent residency working the construction job, according to Logan, who represents her.

Plascencia had a valid work permit that was going to expire in October 2021, the claim says. It says she kept working even after her work permit expired because Lucion advised her that her permit with Intercore was pending and it was OK for her to keep working, according to the suit.

Lucion filed multiple work permit applications for Plascencia without her knowledge, the suit alleges, which were rejected by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). Lucion denies this allegation.

‘A total lie’: Lucion

The lawsuit also alleges Lucion continued to represent herself as a consultant and continued to request payments from Plascencia after her licence was suspended — an allegation that Lucion called “a fabrication and a total lie” in a counterclaim.

She denied advising Plascencia to keep working after her permit expired.

She said she did her due diligence when making work permit applications and that the decision to accept the applications was up to IRCC.

She said Plascencia failed to provide certification to prove she could do the analyst role and so was not automatically placed in that job.

“We will be defending that, obviously, vigorously,” Samuels said.

Lucion had previously announced her intention to run for nomination as a Conservative candidate in the next federal election but her lawyer said she’s no longer pursuing that in light of the legal challenges.

Hernandez, who is no longer co-owner of Intercore, failed to file a response to the claim and was ordered by a judge in December 2024 to pay Plascencia damages that have yet to be determined.

His lawyer did not respond to requests for comment.

Overhaul of regulatory body

In 2019, the federal government announced an overhaul to the regulatory body for immigration consultants and the creation of the CICC, which opened about two years later.

Since 2004, two other bodies were not able to effectively regulate consultants because they lacked legislative authorities, the federal government said in briefing notes obtained by CBC News.

CICC was given powers to investigate complaints made against consultants and to publish the names of those being investigated on the college’s website.

It has undertaken more than 70 disciplinary actions against consultants, ranging from fines and suspensions to revocations of licences, according to IRCC.

The college has issued about $300,000 in fines and ordered a total of about $365,000 in restitution to be awarded to clients.

But lawyers Logan and Lim have concerns about the length of time the college takes to discipline consultants.

For example, CICC suspended Lucion about 30 months after the college received complaints about her, during which she was able to continue practising.

“The rules on paper are good. There’s a very good code of conduct. But the actual enforcement of these rules has been lacking,” Logan said.

In another case, a consultant was disciplined in 2023 relating to complaints from 2016. (The regulator transitioned into the CICC for part of that period). 

Another consultant was suspended in 2024 in relation to complaints made in 2019 and 2020. 

“The impact is that they’re re-traumatizing the victims through these lengthy processes … for something that should have been done in a more expedient manner,” Lim said, adding that victims may lose their legal status in Canada and have to leave before the issue is resolved.

CICC declined interview requests from CBC News. In a statement, it said its goal is to handle complaints in a fair and efficient manner.

“Procedural fairness requires due diligence and careful review of the unique elements of each complaint,” said spokesperson Stef Lach.

“This rigorous process allows the college to properly assess all complaints about licensees and take appropriate regulatory action to protect the public.”

No compensation fund

A victims’ compensation fund was also supposed to be established at the CICC, but it’s still not operational.

IRCC, which is responsible for drafting regulations for the fund, told CBC News that the regulations were available for review and public comment until Feb. 4. The compensation fund will be operational after the regulations come into force, according to IRCC. The government agency said the prorogation of Parliament will not impact the consultation or drafting processes. The college said it will also have to develop bylaws for the fund.

Logan called the delay in establishing the fund a “big failure,” noting its absence means victims might have to go through lengthy civil court proceedings to recoup their money.

Robert Russo, a lecturer specializing in immigration law at the University of British Columbia, said the lack of regulations raises questions about the powers of the CICC, similar to issues faced by past regulatory bodies.

“I’m worried that they’re simply carrying over many of the same things that created the problems,” he said.

IRCC said it is “committed to upholding the integrity of our immigration programs and protecting our systems against fraud and misrepresentation.”

But as the government acknowledged in briefing notes obtained by CBC News, “no model of regulation, even by the government, has the ability to completely eradicate the activities of unscrupulous” consultants.

As for Barrios, he says he wishes he could return to Canada — but that will be an uphill battle because he says he needs to start his immigration application all over again.

“I have a huge desire. It’s a society I want to live in,” he said. “But I’m not finding any way to go back … I don’t know how to go back.”