Providers named after failing to meet HDC recommendations

Providers named after failing to meet HDC recommendations: Decisions 22HDC03019 and 23HDC01424.

The Health and Disability Commissioner (HDC) has taken the unusual step of naming two providers who have not complied with recommendations made in decisions issued by the HDC.

HDC promotes and protects the rights of people using health and disability services, as set out in the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights (the Code).

Two consumers (Mr A and Mrs B) complained to HDC about services they had received from Nicholas Stoneman and the New Zealand Disability Trust (NZDAT). Mr Stoneman was chairman of the NZDAT at the time.

Mr A and Mrs B’ complaints raised concerns about poor organizational processes, a lack of policies and procedures, Mr Stoneman and the NZDAT’s exploitation and treatment of vulnerable consumers, and their poor engagement with the complaints process. HDC undertook an investigation. In October 2024, Mr Stoneman and NZDAT were found to have breached the Code and not provided Mr A and Mrs B with an appropriate standard of service.

In her decision, HDC Deputy Commissioner, Rose Wall, recommended Mr Stoneman provide both complainants with a written apology and comply with a number of other recommendations. Despite repeated follow up from HDC, Mr Stoneman and NZDAT have not complied with any of the recommendations.

"In failing to meet any of my recommendations, Mr Stoneman and NZDAT have failed to comply with their legal obligations under the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994. They have demonstrated a lack of commitment towards improving their practice.

"In the circumstances, I consider Mr Stoneman and NZDAT pose a risk to other vulnerable consumers. I have therefore decided to re-issue the decision and name them."

Ms Wall said anyone who had received substandard treatment from a practitioner should contact HDC if they wished to submit a complaint.