Can migration agents use client testimonials?

Can migration agents use client testimonials?

Short answer: yes. A client who writes you a review after their decision comes through, and is happy for you to share it, is content you are allowed to post.

That surprises people, and the reason it surprises people is worth understanding, because it is also the reason most marketing tools will quietly delete your best content.

This is general information, not legal advice.

The ban you have heard about is not yours

Australia does ban testimonials in advertising, but it bans them for regulated health services. That prohibition lives in the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law, and it is why your dentist cannot put a patient review on their website even when the patient begs them to. We have written that rule up in detail here.

Migration advice is not a regulated health service. The Migration (Migration Agents Code of Conduct) Regulations 2021 contain no equivalent blanket prohibition on testimonials. Your reviews are yours to use.

The confusion is understandable. Both professions are registered, both are regulated federally, both have codes of conduct, and a lot of general marketing advice written for "regulated professionals" flattens the two together. It is wrong, and it costs migration practices their single most persuasive asset.

What the Code does govern

Being allowed to publish a testimonial is not the same as being allowed to publish any testimonial. The Code does not restrict the format. It restricts the claim.

Two sections do the work:

Section 15 deals with false or misleading statements. A review that overstates what happened, or that reads as a general promise about outcomes, does not become safe because a client typed it rather than you.

Section 26(1) deals with what an agent must not state or imply in connection with their business. Two limbs matter for reviews:

• s26(1)(b) covers implying a special or privileged relationship with a government official. "They know the right people at Immigration" is a breach in a five star review exactly as it would be in your own headline.
• s26(1)(c) covers stating or implying that you can procure a particular decision. "They guaranteed my visa and delivered" is the same problem in a client's voice.

The obligation most agents do not know they have

Section 26(2) puts a duty on the agent to take reasonable steps to ensure that people in the business do not make the statements s26(1) prohibits.

Practically, that means the exposure is not only what you write. It is what your intake coordinator writes in a DM, what a junior posts on the practice account, and what goes out under your name from an agency running your social media. "Somebody else typed it" is not a defence you want to be relying on.

What a safe testimonial looks like

Good reviews for a migration practice describe the experience of being a client, not the outcome as a product.

These are fine:

• "She told me the truth about my chances before I paid anything."
• "Every email got answered the same day, which mattered more than I expected."
• "He explained why the other pathway was a bad idea instead of just taking the work."

These are not:

• "They guaranteed my PR." (s26(1)(c))
• "100% success rate, ask anyone." (s15)
• "They have contacts inside the Department." (s26(1)(b))

The pattern is simple. Honesty, responsiveness and process are safe to praise. Outcomes and influence are not.

Four practical rules

1. Ask before you publish. Get consent in writing, and keep it. This is not a Code requirement in itself, but it is the difference between a review you can defend and one you cannot.

2. Do not edit the words to make them stronger. Trimming for length is fine. Sharpening a claim is how a compliant review becomes a false one, and now you wrote it.

3. Read the review against s15 and s26 before it goes up. If a client has written something generous but non-compliant, you can thank them, ask if they are comfortable with a shorter quote, and use the part that is safe.

4. Put your registration number on the post. A testimonial post is still advertising your services, and s25(2) applies.

Why the tool you use matters

Most compliance-aware content tools on the market were built for clinics, because that is where the strictest rule is. Their testimonial handling is a hard block: detect a review, strip it out. Point one of those at a migration practice and it will remove content you are entitled to publish, every time, without telling you why.

SwayBlu treats the two verticals as what they are. On a migration account the testimonial gate does not fire, so your reviews stay. The wording check still runs, so a review that implies a guaranteed outcome or an inside relationship gets flagged like any other line, with the clause it is worried about and a replacement to consider.

Testimonials are yours to use. The words still need reading.

Related reading

• Where your MARN has to appear, and why a website footer is not enough
• Can dental practices use patient testimonials? AHPRA rules explained
• SwayBlu for migration agents

---

SwayBlu is a content tool, not a legal or migration advice service. Its checks flag likely issues against the Migration (Migration Agents Code of Conduct) Regulations 2021 and are not legal advice. You are the publisher of record, and final compliance of anything you publish is your responsibility. SwayBlu is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting for the Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority or the Department of Home Affairs.