iSAYSO
New Zealand Superannuation / pension entitlement / disputed legal form / request for lawful authority / Treasury notice
Cover Note: The ILAW looked into the pension for NZ with cconsiderable detail.
What we discovered is that the M12 form that applicants fill out at the MSD is a very very clever document of deception. Its fraud.
You will be all aware of the courts play on the word YOU and YOUR and US.
Have a look at the wording in a very short group of paragraphs , the responsibility of the MSD is turned around onto the applicant. What is your benefit becomes theirs, to administer for you. So they if asked by the Justice Dept for payment of a fine that you had no chance to contest, they deduct from your entitlement.
They have the nerve to take tax from your pension as well!
What the hell for, you have paid tax to earn that, and save that. Its not theirs, its not income, its a lifes saving for working hard.
If the form was not clearly explained to you, then the contract is void. Thats contract law.
So below a beneficary has gone about seeking entitlement , without being entrapped by a fraudulent document. This will go to the high court.
FORMAL NOTICE FROM ***********
New Zealand Superannuation / pension entitlement / disputed legal form / request for lawful authority / Treasury notice
To:
Chief Executive, Ministry of Social Development
Ministerial and Executive Services
Ministry of Social Development
Copy to:
The Treasury
Minister for Social Development and Employment
Minister for Seniors
Office of the Ombudsman
Controller and Auditor-General
From: ********
Email: *********
Date: 17th June 2026
Subject: Beneficiary — demand for payment of pension, disputed legal form, and request for lawful authority
I write in response to MSD’s letter dated 16 June 2026, sent on behalf of the Chief Executive.
This is a formal notice from me personally.
I want my New Zealand Superannuation/pension paid to me directly and immediately.
I do not refuse to provide identity information.
I do not refuse to provide bank account details.
I do not refuse to comply with any lawful requirement.
What I dispute is being required to sign a legal or administrative form where MSD has not identified the law that makes that form compulsory, and where I am concerned the wording shifts responsibility, risk, or legal consequences onto me rather than keeping responsibility with the Crown agency making the decision.
MSD’s letter dated 16 June 2026 states that MSD received the documents I submitted to *********** Community Link on ********2025. MSD also says those documents were not accepted in place of a completed NZS application.
That is not a sufficient legal answer.
MSD is now required to identify the lawful authority for its position.
Please answer the following directly:
1. What exact section of the Social Security Act 2018, regulation, welfare programme, delegation, policy, or other lawful authority requires me to sign MSD’s preferred NZS form before my pension can be paid?
2. Is MSD saying the form is legally mandatory, or only MSD’s preferred administrative process?
3. If the form is legally mandatory, what is the legal status of the form?
4. What legal consequences does MSD say arise from signing the form?
5. What legal consequences does MSD say arise from refusing to sign the disputed form?
6. What exact information was missing from the documents I submitted on 31 October 2025?
7. Why were my documents not treated as an application, an incomplete application, a request for assistance, or a reviewable decision?
8. Who made the decision that my documents could not be accepted?
9. When was that decision made?
10. What review rights were triggered?
11. Why was I not paid or assisted to correct any alleged defect, if MSD considered the documents incomplete?
12. What lawful authority allows MSD to withhold, delay, refuse, or block payment of my pension where I have supplied or am willing to supply identity and verified bank account information?
13. Who, if anyone, is currently receiving, controlling, redirecting, withholding, delaying, or benefiting from any pension payment that should be paid to me?
14. Will MSD pay my pension directly to me now?
15. If MSD refuses, please provide a final reviewable decision with reasons.
For clarity, I dispute the form.
This is not a refusal to apply.
This is not a refusal to identify myself.
This is not a refusal to provide bank account details.
This is not abandonment of my entitlement.
It is a refusal to be forced into signing a disputed legal form that MSD has not proved it can lawfully require.
I also refer to the documents delivered to ********Community Link on ********2025. MSD has now confirmed those documents were received. MSD was also put on notice that there is an Affidavit of Service confirming delivery. MSD cannot treat this matter as if I simply failed to engage or failed to provide documents.
If MSD says those documents were insufficient, MSD must identify precisely what was missing and why MSD did not treat them as an application or incomplete application requiring assistance and correction.
I also put MSD on notice that there is evidence concerning the events at *********Community Link, including video/audio evidence and affidavit evidence. I understand there are serious concerns about assault, abuse, slander, and the way Crown agents or Crown-contracted personnel behaved in a public office.
MSD must preserve all records relating to:
1. my attendance or documents at **********Community Link on or about 31 October 2025;
2. the documents I submitted;
3. any claim that the documents were lost, not located, rejected, returned, or later found;
4. any internal decision that the documents were not accepted;
5. any incident record, staff note, security note, contractor record, client note, risk note, or internal communication;
6. any reference to me, ******** ********, or any person assisting me as “sovereign citizen,” “aggressive,” “risk,” “non-compliant,” or similar;
7. any decision to reject documents because of wording, seals, stamps, identity description, or alleged legal invalidity;
8. any communication with Police, security contractors, Ministers’ offices, Treasury, or any other agency.
If MSD says any documents were treated as “sovereign citizen” documents, MSD must identify the exact document, exact wording, decision-maker, legal authority, and legal consequence. A generic explanation is not enough.
Treasury is copied because this concerns public money appropriated for pension payments and the lawful administration of New Zealand Superannuation. Treasury is not being asked to manage my client file. Treasury is being put on notice that MSD appears to be refusing or delaying payment unless I sign a disputed legal form that MSD has not shown is required by law.
The Ombudsman is copied because MSD has not answered the real legal question and has not given adequate reasons.
The Controller and Auditor-General is copied because this may concern systemic administration of public money and pension payment processes.
I now require MSD to:
1. pay my pension directly to me immediately;
2. confirm whether payment will be backdated to the date I first took steps to apply or the date MSD received my documents;
3. identify the lawful authority for requiring the disputed form;
4. identify exactly what information MSD says was missing;
5. explain why my documents were not treated as an application or incomplete application;
6. provide a final reviewable decision if MSD refuses payment;
7. preserve all records and evidence;
8. correct or retract any unsupported adverse internal record.
Please respond within five working days.
If MSD does not identify lawful authority for its position, I will treat the continued refusal, delay, or obstruction of payment as unreasonable administrative action and reserve all rights to complain further to the Ombudsman, Treasury, the Auditor-General, Ministers, and/or the Court.
Yours faithfully,
**********
********************
*******************