Migration lawyer Samuel Brouff had a feeling "something was up" when he cycled from Surry Hills to the CBD office of the now-disgraced education consultant Get Qualified Australia.
It was March this year and his client Santiago Rillo, from Argentina, was urgently waiting to receive a Certificate IV in commercial cookery, a requirement to ensure the extension of his Australian visa.
More NSW News Videos
The vocational education disaster
It's been labelled by some ministers as a disaster and in need of a total overhaul, but can TAFE and vocational education be fixed? Eryk Bagshaw reports.
"I was dealing with Get Qualified (GQA) directly on behalf of my client. I was told there was to be a new skills facilitator on their case and after that communication went dead. It was at this time they moved their operations offshore to the Philippines," he said.
"It was a distressing and very stressful time, only a few days before my client's visa expired, so I rode my bike to their office on Castlereagh Street, went up to the 19th floor and it was deserted, save for three or four members of staff."
Mr Brouff said it was upon seeing the "50 to 100 work stations empty" he realised his client's certificate "was never going to come".
"Not only did it cost his employer $1800 for the Certificate IV he never received, Mr Rillo's partner had to pay $990 for a student visa, plus $3000 for a Certificate III in Business to underpin that visa, in order for them to be able to stay in Australia."
Three months later Mr Brouff describes the experience as "professionally embarrassing".
The tale is just one of many revealed by former clients of Get Qualified Australia, since its demise earlier this year.
!["It was a distressing and very stressful time": Migration lawyer Samuel Brouff who dealt with GQA on his client's behalf.](http://web.archive.org./web/20170718050851im_/https://www.fairfaxstatic.com.au/content/dam/images/g/x/0/c/0/1/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gx09fs.png/1498658845030.jpg)
On Friday the Federal Court found the Recognition of Prior Learning consultant made false or misleading representations and engaged in unconscionable conduct in its supply of services.
The judgment was the result of legal proceedings brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, in response to a large number of consumer complaints.
![David Barclay, on the Sunshine Coast, who paid $1300 for a Certificate III in painting and decorating, before he found ...](http://web.archive.org./web/20170718050851im_/https://www.fairfaxstatic.com.au/content/dam/images/g/r/e/9/s/w/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gx09fs.png/1498658845030.jpg)
Fairfax Media has previously detailed such complaints, like that of David Barclay who paid $1300 for a Certificate III in painting and decorating, before he found out he was not in fact eligible for it.
In March it was declared the company was "unable to pay its debts" and would be voluntarily wound-up.
![Get Qualified Australia offered a range of qualifications for the Skills Recognition and Recognition of Prior Learning ...](http://web.archive.org./web/20170718050851im_/https://www.fairfaxstatic.com.au/content/dam/images/g/r/6/o/f/u/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gx09fs.png/1498658845030.jpg)
A hearing on relief against both Get Qualified and its chief executive officer Adam Mazen Wadi will be held on a date set by the court.
In a statement to Fairfax Media, Mr Wadi described the result as "far from being fair."
![Tarni-Jordan Pereira lost $1200 to GQA after applying for a qualification in childcare.](http://web.archive.org./web/20170718050851im_/https://www.fairfaxstatic.com.au/content/dam/images/g/x/0/e/t/t/image.related.articleLeadNarrow.300x0.gx09fs.png/1498658845030.jpg)
"GQA was not able to make it to the court room due to the ACCC starving the company [of] its financial resources, which could have paid for our legal expenses. GQA would have defended itself if we got to the court room."
Former GQA client Chris (who has asked not to use his surname), said he fully agreed with the court's finding, but said in some ways it fell "short".
"Whether it's $1000 or $100, it's a lot of money. People who forked out to gain skills and certification to improve their life have now been put in an even worse position," said Chris, who lost $1100 through an RPL process with the company.
"I'm OK, I've got a well-paying job now ... but the court action does sort of fall short. Unfortunately I found it was like fighting an uphill battle. I'd never go through an RPL process again."
Tarni-Jordan Pereira lost $1200 to GQA after applying for a qualification in childcare. When it never came through, she lost her job.
Ms Pereira said, for former clients, the court's finding will not mean much.
"It's just words. We're all still out of money. What's their punishment?" she said, adding that it will still cost her "thousands" to obtain the qualifications she needs, which she will most likely do through a university.
"I'm just really disappointed in the way it has been handled."