Successor of Charitable Trust after Grantor Dies & Other Related Questions
C A Mattheiss made this Official Information request to Department of Internal Affairs
The request was refused by Department of Internal Affairs.
From: C A Mattheiss
Dear Department of Internal Affairs,
1. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2012 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
2. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2013 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
3. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2014 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
4. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2015 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
5. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2016 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
6. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2017 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
7. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2018 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
8. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2019 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
9. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2020 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
10. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2021 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
11. Please inform me who is/was the legal person in 2022 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
12. Please inform me who is the legal person in 2023 overseeing charities at your government department. Please provide their full legal name, including middle name.
13. Please provide me with information about what the Prime Minster's role is in overseeing Charities Services and charities in New Zealand.
14. When did the Ministry of Economic Affairs merge with the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment?
15. Who oversees Charities Services at the minister level?
16. Who oversees Charities Services' operations?
17. How does Charities Services determine who is the successor of a charitable trust after the grantor of the trust has died?
18. Are there any areas on the form for registering a charitable trust that specify who the grantor is and the successor trustee who would take the grantor's place if they should die or not be capable of operating the trust?
19. How does Charities Services determine who the grantor of a trust is, meaning what titles are permitted to explain who the grantor of a charitable trust is on your website profile page for each charitable trust? For example, chairperson, treasurer, secretary, etc... Please be specific on all terms accepted.
20. Is it required by Charities Services or MBIE that the charitable trust's deed explain who the grantor is and who the trustee successor is at the time it is made?
21. How many legal persons are required to be trustees for a charitable trust for it to be considered legitimately in operation?
22. Are there any requirements by Charities Services for a legitimate trust to remain active?
23. How long can a trust remain inactive before it is not allowed to be registered anymore?
24. How long can a charitable trust remain inactive before it is deregistered?
25. How does Charities Services handle charitable trust registration forms?
26. Are the lawyers/barristers/brokers or accountants who sign off as registered Crown agents allowed by Charities Services to automatically administer charitable trusts once the trust becomes a trust estate?
27. Where on the charities registration form does it state or explain that a charitable trust is a type of will of the grantor making the trust?
28. When a charitable trust is registered and a lawyer/barrister/broker/accountant signs off on it to register it for the grantor of the trust are they automatically considered to be the administrator of the trust because they are a Crown agent and registered?
29. Are all names of trustees or chairpersons for a charitable trust to be legal names or can they be non-legal names?
30. Can alias names be used in place of legal names on charitable trust registration forms?
31. Can alias names be used in place of legal names on charitable trust deeds?
32. Can alias names be used in place of legal names on charitable trust rules?
33. Can you please inform me what 'charity financial irregularities' mean? Please provide your definition of financial irregularities.
34. Do you have any areas on the forms you require for a charitable trust to be made or on the trust deed that specifies what type of trust the charitable trust is supposed to be, such as a revocable trust, an irrevocable trust, an accumulative trust, or if it is to be a testamentary trust? Please explain in full detail.
35. If a trust is unable to fulfill its contract or deed, do you deregister the trust or do you allow it to continue to operate? If you allow it to continue to operate under what conditions is it allowed?
36. Are legal partners of a trust grantor, whether married, civil or de facto, required to be informed of any trust instrument being made that may affect their property or shared property with the grantor?
37. Does Charities Services take into consideration USA FATCA tax regulations and requirements which the New Zealand Government has agreed to abide by when it comes to USA citizens and their spouses, civil union partners or de facto partners who hold New Zealand citizen status that must abide by these tax laws regarding property or income/donations made for any trust of over $10K? Please inform me of how Charities Services acknowledges this status and what they do by law to enforce FATCA laws when it comes to charities and USA citizens and spouses/partners of these citizens holding property in a charitable trust that may be legally considered shared property due to corpus and anima practices coming into place with the property as well as real property.
38. Is there any informed consent forms in place by Charities Services to inform those who are grantors making trusts that a trust is considered to be a will and also that a trust will supersede a will at the time it is made if there is no other will already in place? Please provide me with any forms required by law that inform grantors or partners/spouses of grantors that share this information.
39. What requirements by law are in place in New Zealand to inform alien spouses/legal partners of the charitable grantors making trust that their spouse or legal partner may be affected by a trust being made by them as well as their personal property? Are there any requirements by law that require the grantor to know this information? Are lawyers/barristers/accountants required by law to share this information with the grantor and the grantor's significant other before signing to make a trust before the trust is registered?
40. How often are trusts that remain inactive audited having no donations or income after 1 year?
41. Are Charitable Trust viewed as irrevocable once the grantor of the trust dies?
42. Once the charitable trust is irrevocable, does Charities Services allow the remaining trustees to change the status of other trustees by removing some trustees and adding others as they like?
43. How does Charities Services know who the trustee successor is for a registered charitable trust? Please clearly explain or provide forms if there are any available.
44. Please provide Charities Services' definition of what an irrevocable charitable trust is once the grantor of the trust has died or becomes legally incapacitated.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to your response at your earliest convenience but no later than 21 working days.
I would have appreciated being able to legally justify this document but I was not able to.
Cordially,
C A Mattheiss
From: OIA
Department of Internal Affairs
Tēnā koe C A,
Thank you for your OIA request to the Department of Internal Affairs (included with this email)
The Department will provide its response to your request as soon as practicable and within twenty working days. The 20th working day is 17 August 2023
Please note that in cases where the Department’s response provides information that is identified to be of general public interest, the response may also be published on the Department of Internal Affairs website. If the Department publishes its response to your OIA request, all personal information, including your name and contact details, will be removed.
Nāku, nā
Michelle Reed (she/her)
Lead Advisor Official Correspondence | Information Management and Privacy
He Ringa Manaaki | Workplace Services Group
He Pou Aronui | Organisational Capability and Services
Te Tari Taiwhenua | Department of Internal Affairs
Level 3, 45 Pipitea St | PO Box 805, Wellington 6140, New Zealand | http://www.dia.govt.nz/
show quoted sections
From: SDO Official Correspondence
Department of Internal Affairs
Kia ora C A Mattheiss,
Please find attached the response to your Official Information Act
Request.
Ngā mihi
Huey Lim| Advisor Official Correspondence
Te Pāhekoheko, Kāwai ki te iwi | Operations, Service Delivery and
Operations
Te Tari Taiwhenua The Department of Internal Affairs
7 Waterloo Quay, Wellington
[1]www.dia.govt.nz
References
Visible links
1. http://www.dia.govt.nz/
From: C A Mattheiss
Dear SDO Official Correspondence,
There appears to be some withholding of information from the Department of Internal Affairs about truthful information regarding the trust creation processes that appear to be of a highly unethical and unprofessional nature in New Zealand or can be. This not only includes charitable trusts but also other trusts. By international standards of law when making a trust, the trustmaker or settlor as often called in New Zealand is to be notified they are the trustmaker and not the lawyer or other registered professional to conceal this information from them and give them a phony or false title to detract them from knowing the truth, that they are the trustmaker of their trust. The registered lawyer, barrister, broker or accountant appears in New Zealand to take over this role for their client to exploit and abuse their client's trust estate once they are dead and gone, whether that be a charitable trust or another type of trust. They tend to also make their friends or associates the co-trustees or the successor trustee of the trust without telling the actual trustmaker- their client what they are doing. I do not believe this is a fairly widespread or common practice in any other Western countries except for maybe Australia and Northern Canada. Laws have been changed in the UK to inform the creator of the trust of the terms and conditions of making a trust as well as the definitions of roles. This does not seem to be common practice in New Zealand and, therefore, the entire trust process can be used as an operation to take advantage of the client of all their property and assets, especially if they use their home address as the trust address and the lawyer or other registered professional signs off on the registering process and the Attorney General, who at this time is Mr David Parker, seals it. This allows them to be the Trust Administrator without ever informing their client of it, who most likely does not know the appropriate titles when making trusts- this is why they hire a supposed professional to help them, not to scam them or to provide them false and misleading information.
Mr Parker was asked to step down as the Attorney General for falsifying legal documents on his company's registration forms to save only a few hundred dollars per annum. he is now back in the saddle again. Under the DIA, both Mr Parker and the Prime Minister are accountable for these significant trust discrepancies to be allowed within the legal system and under the Acts and laws of New Zealand. Under the Charities Acts, I would like to find out why the trustmaker is not required to be informed of their role by law, that they are the actual trustmaker of their trust. This appears to be a severely deceptive practice to me and would fall under a breach of the Fair Trading Act 1986 for any professional to do even the Attorney General who is actually responsible.
Instead of regulating charities or charitable trusts, the former Prime Minister, Ms Jacdina Aadern, deregulated them further to not have to report their fund spending even more than before when there were few regulations in place to begin with and few audits made.
Although New Zealand has signed an agreement with the Americas to follow FATCA laws and to enforce them in New Zealand, Kiwi legal partners or spouses are still not informed of having to be provided information to report to the IRS in America if their significant other trust yields more than $10,000.00 per annum as the American Citizen of Kiwi partners or spouses who are legally affected by this. Your DIA seems to not care about what New Zealand has agreed to do to maintain good relations with the US Government.
I would like this matter about trustmakers not being told they are the trustmakers. which I have also struggled with, to be publicly known in the international community so that people are aware of the dangers of giving funding to or making a trust in New Zealand and also of the lack of appropriate informed consent not required when making a trust. There appear to be underdeveloped practices and policies for the most part in New Zealand that do not even meet up with other Western Nations.
The questions I needed answered were stated to me to be legal questions by the DIA but the Attorney General should be able to answer those questions for me since he is an attorney who oversees all registered attornies in New Zealand. I would like to receive answers to my previous questions about trusts from the current Attorney General, who is also a part of the DIA and is the protector of all charities in New Zealand. The Attorney General has publicly announced he is the protector of charities in New Zealand. Yet, the charities are not required by law to state who their trustmaker is. So who is the Attorney General actually protecting? Is it the idea or framework of a charity, or is it the trustmaker of the charity who owns all the assets and property of the charity? Does the Attorney General make the claim of protecting charities because he believes the Government and their registered professionals have a right to take over any charity and make themselves the trustmaker of it, or is it the trustmaker he is to be protecting who made the charity and owns all its assets and property? Is the AG protecting the registered professionals to make this claim with a vested interest in the profits or proceeds of the charity or trust once the trustmaker is dead and gone so he himself and others can cash in on the charities' properties and assets on behalf of the New Zealand Government? Is this possibly how the former Prime Minster, Ms Jacnda Ardern went from being worth $1 million to $17 million in 2 years or similar acts to these? By law, who is protecting charities' trustmakers in New Zealand? In other jurisdictions, this is to be the Attorney General but apparently not in New Zealand because he appears to allow exploitation and abuses of trust processes to take place and also their assets and property to be taken by registered supposed professionals, including the Police under the Ministry of Justice and their other departments such as Coronial Services who often refer to medical staff as overdosing patients at hospital to be "a natural causes of death."
This may have to do with their trust estate and the supposed professionals getting ahold of it, which I refer to as neocolonialism or a modern-day form of Naziam happening in New Zealand today. It is highly questionable for the DIA not to answer my questions because they are stated to be legal questions that re-confirm the discrepancies happening or being allowed to happen by the DIA and the Attorney General in New Zealand. This is with regard to trusts and the processes of making one and what happens to them after the trustmaker dies who was never told by the supposed registered professional they were the trustmaker.
I therefore appeal the DIA's unwillingness to answer all of my questions and require the Attorney General to answer the ones they have referred to as being "legal" and unanswerable because of it. Those questions are on my first OIA request letter and the DIA answered they would not answer them in their response. I am very concerned that the New Zealand Government is operating in a cartel-like fashion under the current Labour Government and their DIA, especially when it comes to trusts and their making processes.
I must mention that there is a conflicting interest with the current Attorney General in an estate case or shall I say Trust Legacy case I am involved in, who has literally threatened me in an email which I hold.
Thank you for your time.
Cordially,
C A Mattheiss
From: SDO Official Correspondence
Department of Internal Affairs
Kia ora C A Mattheiss
Thank you for your email.
As advised in our response dated 15 August 2023 to your official
information request, legal questions are not within the mandate of
Charities Services. Many of your questions were akin to legal advice and
we are unable to help you with these matters. Which is why you were
advised to seek independent legal advice on these matters.
Should you be interested, for the purposes of the Official Information Act
1982 (the Act), the definition of “Official Information” is outlined in
section 2 of the Act.; [1]https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/publ...
You have the right to seek an investigation and review of our decisions
about your request by the Ombudsman pursuant to section 28(1) of the Act.
The Office of the Ombudsman can be contacted by writing to PO Box 10-152,
Wellington or by email to [2][email address].
Nâku noa, nâ
Micheala Ngaia [3](ia/she/her)| Official Correspondence Manager
Te Pâhekoheko, Kâwai ki te iwi | Operations, Service Delivery and
Operations
Te Tari Taiwhenua The Department of Internal Affairs
[4]www.dia.govt.nz
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this requestAct on what you've learnt
Similar requests
OIA Request for Incorporated Societies Information & Procedures on New Zealand Companies' Website
To Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment by C A Mattheiss
C A Mattheiss left an annotation ()
Dear Public:
The Department of Internal Affairs, the Attorney General as of early 2023, and others allow Trust Estates to be exploited and abused by lawyers/barristers/brokers and accountants registered in New Zealand under the Law Society and the Trust Act and others because Ms Jacinda Ardern and Mr David Parker have purposefully deregulated Trusts even more than before to allow these exploitations to happen. Any person who is a registered professional and registering a trust on behalf of their client to be sealed by the Attorney General under the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment is not required by law to inform their client they are the Trustmaker or Settlor of their Trust, nor if their Trust is an Intervivos Trust or Living Trust or another type of Trust. This allows the registered professional to make themselves the Trust Administrator or their friends whom they had signed the Trust deed with their client, the Trustmaker or Successor Trustee of the Trust, without ever informing their client when they were alive. The Trust Act has been made by lawyers/barristers and Members of Parliament who allow Trust scheme operations to take place in New Zealand without any law and order and under legal fictitious practices to deceive clients/members of the public of the truth and others close to them who often do not know the terms and conditions of making a Trust but rely on the professional to tell them—these practices are prohibited in the Americas and Southen Canada. Often these registered professionals in New Zealand will offer their clients their services for free with hidden costs to be able to take their client's Trust Estate over in the future and they then can dispose of or not lodge any will their client may have made so they can obtain all their client's property through the Trust deed alone as the Trust Adminstrator which means the same as the Trustmaker. They often do not want their client to have a will or a pour-over will so that they can have easy access to everything in their client's estate often with the assistance of the Police under the Ministry of Justice. They are not required to go through probate despite any discrepancies or questionable acts they have done in New Zealand to their client and their client's loved ones. They abuse their authority and take advantage of their client's situation and given this right under the Ministry of Justice.
The public needs to be warned that any Trust made within New Zealand territory is prone to be a Trust scheme operation and, therefore, a person who wants to make a Trust of any kind in New Zealand should not allow any registered professional to sign the registration form/application for them but only themselves, friends and family to do this, preventing the Attorney General to endorse the Trust with the registered professional's business address on the application as the firm who actually owns it by ONLY putting their address on their client's Trust and stamping their business name or address on it which is also viewed as a seal in New Zealand. The Police and Ministry of Justice will then allow this supposed professional address to be the owner and administrator of their client's Trust without them ever telling their client they are while living.
This practice is common in New Zealand and many families and loved ones have lost their entire estates or part of them from this kind of exploitation and abuse being allowed by the registered New Zealand lawyers/barristers/brokers and accountants who are being allowed to get away with it. This is a highly unethical and unlawful practice, at least in comparison to other jurisdictions outside of New Zealand that are apparently more developed, it is.
There is no real law and order with making any type of Trust in New Zealand today and due to this anything can happen to the creator of a Trust by Police and Coronial assistance under the Ministry of Justice which is being allowed to happen.
It is November 2023, nearly 2024, and New Zealand is still allowing highly unethical and questionable activity to take place with the Trust Estates of those who have died by supposed registered professionals. This includes the Chief of Coroners and the Health and Disability Commissioner, who is a former coroner. Both of them work under and with the Ministry of Justice.
Consequently, there is a serious problem under the New Zealand Ministry of Justice taking place today that allows unfair, unjust, unlawful and unsophisticated as well as barbaric practices to take place regarding the property of others by Police as this happened in Germany and England during the dark ages but still now in modern times in New Zealand. Properties are being unlawfully and unethically confiscated by registered lawyers/barristers/brokers and accountants in New Zealand which is a type of aristocratic hierarchy just as others' property was confiscated and stolen in the past by Lords and Barons who believed they had the divine right to do so under the Crown.
Every person who creates a Trust in New Zealand needs to be informed by a new law of the terms and conditions of signing a Trust and that they are the actual Trustmaker or Settlor of their Trust. They also need to be informed of specifically what type of Trust they are making before it is made.
The Trustmaker title of a Trust is also known as the Director, Trust Administrator, Trustor, Creator, Founding Trustee, etc. When one is not informed by the registered professional in New Zealand and taken advantage of then this should be made a crime in New Zealand with punishment, heavy fines and consequences which currently does not appear to be the case. Rather the Ministry of Justice supports the supposed registered professional(s) and not only allows them to exploit and abuse their own client's property once they are dead, but supports them and intermeddles in the processes themselves which makes them fully liable.
There appears to be no respect for the dead under the Crown Law legal system today due to the fact that it is under English Law and excludes Roman Law for which it was founded. Nevertheless, English Law has filtered out the Roman practices of respecting the soul and the afterlife of the dead. Coronial Services does not include loved ones to be included in the Coronial Services processes but only family in reference to bloodline, but not non-bloodline nor non-registered legal spouses or partners, who fall under common law to be a legal spouse over a duration of time.
Urgent attention is needed in New Zealand at this time by the public and officials to change the New Zealand Trust Act before more members of the public fall victim to the New Zealand Ministry of Justice's right to allow registered professionals in New Zealand to deceive their own clients and use larceny of trick and acts of deception of them to exploit and abuse their client's Trust Estate(s) for their own benefit and interest.
Due to the lack of critical thinking not taught adequately in colleges and universities within New Zealand as well as the lack of ethical integrity and standards to an extreme extent, Kiwi people of New Zealand are not doing anything to stop these inhumane and unethical practices of Trust Estate exploitations and abuses from taking place by registered professionals in New Zealand. This has been going on for 40 years or more and no one is educated enough about Trusts or willing to stop it. People are afraid to speak out of fear and retaliation from the legal system as well as the risk of false reports and accusations being made against them by those who hold positions of authority under the Ministry of Justice and Crown Law.
There is no protection in New Zealand for those who have fallen victim to these great atrocities and unlawful acts being allowed by New Zealand Ministers at the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Internal Affairs, which some may be receiving kickbacks from by allowing.
New Zealand has become a lawless country and those who are registered are given registrations to abuse their authority and to do whatever they like to those they wish to victimise and exploit as clients or the loved ones of their dead clients. New Zealand is not a safe country nor an ethically operated one due to Trust Estate scheme operations being allowed to take place by those who hold positions of authority over others under the Ministry of Justice. Trust Estates need to be monitored and regulated by an ethical Government and should be taxed to be protected from exploitation and abuses by the present legal system or those registered within it which New Zealand is currently allowing to take place.
These unsophisticated and barbaric practices being allowed to take place to Trust Estates and property of those who are dead in New Zealand, reveal that New Zealand is still a very underdeveloped country despite what people say or beleive outside of New Zealand who has never lived there or stayed long enough to find out about Trust Estate scheme operations to know that what I have written here is factual. Because nobody wishes to believe barbarianism is still being practised by those who hold positions of authority in New Zealand.
A current situation taking place where an elderly person has been tricked and is being taken for a ride for their entire estate is a famous orchard in Cromwell New Zealand, which has an over $70 million estate property value. The original owners of the property, monies are being invested without their knowledge or consent and those handling the matter are being allowed by the Department of Internal Affairs and Attorney General to abuse the situation to an extreme extent. They have also taken over the original owners' Trusts by making themselves the Trust Administrators or Directors of them and not naming the owner as the Trustmaker or Settlor, purposefully, as it has been done in Mr Lewis Verduyn's case. Because the owner can still talk and work, though quite elderly, people will blame the owner for allowing what will soon happen to happen but not place accountability on the professionals involved. The New Zealand Police are also involved and many questionable acts have taken place and will continue to unless the law is changed to require the Trustmaker of their Trust to be named before signing and making their Trust. In New Zealand, those in power are acting as if they are Lords and Barons of the past, who do not want the law of the Trust Act to be changed as it has been changed in the Americas and most of Canada for many years to prevent the exploitation and abuses of Trust Estates from taking place.
New Zealand society appears to not see the Trust Estate problem because they are not aware of it overall or what the laws and practices are in other countries, so they believe that not naming the Trustmaker is perfectly okay and only the trustee need to be named which is allowing the exploitation and abuses of Trust Estates to take place. Ignorance is bliss for many.
Ms Jacinda Ardern and Mr David Parker as well as King Charles, III and, Mrs Cindy Kiro are completely and fully responsible, as well as other former and current ministers under the Crown, who have allowed Trust Estate scheme operations to take place within the New Zealand territories. This includes Mr John Key and Ms Helen Clark, the former prime ministers because these Trust Estate scheme operations took place also under their administrations. The Public around the world needs to know this information.
The American Governments and Canadian Governments need to warn their residents and citizens not to invest in Trusts within New Zealand territories until the law is changed under the current Trust Act to name the Trustmaker or Settlor of any Trust made in New Zealand by them.
Cordially,
C Mattheiss
Link to this