Immigration is the area of law where a casual answer does the most damage. A wrong steer about a route, a deadline or an application fee can cost someone their right to work, their studies or the ability to stay with their family.
Here are the myths about what an immigration firm's website can say.
Myth 1: general information about visa routes is harmless
Reality: routes change, requirements change and what applies to one nationality does not apply to another. Someone reading a general summary and acting on it may apply under the wrong route or miss a requirement entirely. The website should describe the firm's services and direct people to official government guidance.
Myth 2: it is fine to estimate whether someone qualifies
Reality: eligibility depends on immigration history, previous refusals, absences, income, relationships and current rules. Guessing is advice, and the same boundary applies across regulated professions, as described in why a law firm website must never give legal advice and what a mortgage website must never tell a buyer.
Myth 3: reassurance is kind
Reality: telling a worried person their case sounds strong, or that a refusal is easily appealed, is the opposite of kind if it turns out to be wrong. Honest uncertainty, with a fast route to an adviser, serves them better.
Visitor: My application was refused last week. Can I appeal? Assistant: Whether an appeal or another route is available depends on the refusal decision itself, so an adviser needs to read it. The services page explains how consultations work and what they cost. Could you share the date of the decision, what it relates to and whether it states any deadline? Please also check the official guidance linked on the page while the team responds.
Myth 4: deadlines can be discussed generally
Reality: deadlines in immigration are strict and vary by decision type. A website should never state a deadline for someone's situation. It should capture the date on the letter and treat the enquiry as urgent.
Myth 5: fee information is too complicated to publish
Reality: consultation fees, fixed fees for common applications and what is excluded, such as government fees and translations, are exactly what enquirers need to plan. Publishing them removes a real barrier.
Myth 6: an assistant cannot help with anything meaningful
Reality: it can answer service and fee questions, explain what documents to bring, reply in the enquirer's own language and capture key dates at three in the morning, which is when these enquiries arrive, as described in visa enquiries from around the world at every hour.
Myth 7: vulnerable enquirers can be handled like any other
Reality: people who are detained, facing removal or fleeing danger need immediate routing to urgent legal help and official services, never a standard reply.
Myth 8: the website can speak for the adviser
Reality: an assistant must never suggest what the firm will do or promise an outcome, which is the general rule set out in what an AI receptionist must never promise.
Myth 9: translated pages are enough
Reality: publishing information in several languages helps people find you, but it does not make the information applicable to them. Someone reading a summary in their own language may trust it more, not less, which makes accuracy and clear signposting to official guidance even more important.
How SpideyChat handles it
SpideyChat for law firms answers only from your published pages, declines every advice question and captures dates and details for your team. You can see handover on the demo, and plans are on the pricing page.