She was unhoused and needed help. Her advocate exploited her, watchdog finds

Tuesday, 9 June 2026

Christchurch woman Chelsea Taylor wants an advocate to “stop taking advantage of vulnerable people” after she contacted the NZ Disability Advisory Trust for help navigating WINZ benefits, but was later charged $2,616 for services over 13 days.

The Health and Disability Commissioner has found disability advocate Nick Stoneman financially exploited Christchurch woman Chelsea Taylor.

Commissioner Rose Wall recommended Stoneman provide a written apology to Taylor and complete learning on Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights Code.

The Ministry of Social Development plans to restrict Stoneman from acting as an agent and to notify all his current clients about alternative support networks.

Stuff wants to tell the inspiring and powerful human stories that touch real people. To share the stories you think deserve to be told, fill in the form at the bottom of this story.

A Christchurch woman says she feels vindicated after the Health and Disability Commissioner found a disability advocate financially exploited her, mistreated her, and failed to properly engage with her complaint.

Chelsea Taylor complained to the HDC in April 2025, raising concerns she had been invoiced thousands of dollars by Nick Stoneman and the NZ Disability Advisory Trust (NZDAT) after seeking help with her Work and Income benefit. She later went public with her concerns in a Stuff story.

Chelsea Taylor engaged Nick Stoneman to help her navigate Work and Income New Zealand benefits.

The HDC decision does not name Taylor, Stoneman or NZDAT, but Taylor confirmed to Stuff she is the complainant referred to as “Miss A”, and Stoneman is the advocate referred to as “Mr B”.

In a decision published on June 8, Deputy Health and Disability Commissioner Rose Wall found Stoneman breached Taylor’s right to be free from financial exploitation and her right to be treated with respect.

Wall also found NZDAT breached the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights by failing to have a written complaints policy, failing to respond to HDC’s requests for information, and failing to engage in the complaint process in a fair, simple, speedy and efficient way.

Stoneman and NZDAT have been referred to the Director of Proceedings to decide whether any further action should be taken.

Wall also recommended Stoneman and NZDAT provide Taylor with a written apology, develop policies and processes to guide their advocacy work, and complete learning on the Health and Disability Services Consumers' Code and complaints management.

Taylor, who has an intellectual disability, autism, ADHD and reactive attachment disorder, said the decision confirmed what she had said from the start.

“I was right all along. I wouldn’t have gone to the media, to Labour, and everything if I wasn’t,” Taylor said.

Disability service navigator Nick Stoneman.

She hoped the decision would stop Stoneman “taking advantage of people”.

Invoices, rent and a complaint

Taylor approached Stoneman in January 2025 for help with her Work and Income benefit and allowances.

At the time, Stoneman was senior disability service navigator and chairman of NZDAT.

According to the HDC decision, Stoneman told Taylor her existing support from CCS Disability Action was “useless” and that “they didn’t do a good enough job”.

He encouraged her to cut ties with CCS and her support worker and to sign NZDAT’s engagement letter, which included a fee schedule.

Taylor told the HDC she signed the letter despite not really understanding what she had signed because of her intellectual disability.

Wall said Taylor then cut ties with CCS and her support worker, so she had no independent support person when she signed the document.

Taylor was unhoused at the time, and Stoneman suggested she move in with him.

In a letter to Work and Income, Stoneman declared the rent was $250 a week, although he charged Taylor $356, the decision said.

After Taylor moved into Stoneman’s home in February 2025, she was given two invoices from NZDAT and Stoneman, dated January 29 and February 7, totalling about $2600.

The invoices itemised advocacy services provided by Stoneman, including meetings and communication with Work and Income about Taylor’s benefit.

Taylor told the HDC she was concerned because she had never had to pay for advocacy services in the past and did not expect to be charged.

Taylor says it was after moving into his home on February 3, 2025, that Stoneman told her she would be charged for his services as a disability navigator.

She said she was “kicked out” within a week after what Stoneman called a “breach of rule”, and that he demanded she pay rent until the end of a three-week notice period.

Taylor refused to pay the additional rent or the invoices, and later complained to Work and Income, HDC and police. She also decided to go public with her complaints and contacted Stuff.

Wall found it was highly inappropriate for Stoneman to negotiate a contract with Taylor, who was a vulnerable consumer with an intellectual disability.

She also found it was highly inappropriate for Stoneman to invite Taylor to live with him while he was her agent.

“In my view, Mr B would have derived personal monetary benefits from the arrangement,” Wall said. “Given Mr B’s role, he should have been aware of the inappropriateness of his actions in this circumstance.”

Taylor says she signed a letter from NZDAT that outlined the costs but, because of her intellectual disability, didn't fully understand she would be charged.

The decision said Taylor received multiple threats from Stoneman after making complaints.

Those included a voicemail telling Taylor she was in “very serious trouble” for publishing something that “didn’t need to be published”, calling her an “evil little witch” and saying “you will rot”.

Screenshots submitted to HDC showed Stoneman gave Taylor one hour to “withdraw her allegations” or he would press charges, including for stalking and harassment.

He also told Taylor “your reporter won’t have a job, you and her have f….d up badly and will pay the price” referring to the stories published by Stuff at the time.

Wall said Stoneman knew of Taylor’s background, including her intellectual disability, when she signed up for services with the charity.

Wall said multiple records submitted to HDC, including media statements, showed Stoneman knew Taylor’s background, including her intellectual disability, but called her derogatory names, used inflammatory language, accused her of lying, made threats against her and minimised her concerns.

The Ministry of Social Development plans to restrict Stoneman from acting as agent and notify all his current clients about alternative support networks.

“I consider that Mr B did not treat Miss A with the dignity and respect anyone, particularly a vulnerable consumer in her situation, deserves,” Wall said.

The HDC said it tried to get information from Stoneman and NZDAT several times after Taylor complained, but Stoneman said they would not respond and no requested material was provided. Because HDC had received no evidence or further statements from Stoneman beyond those communications, its decision summarised Stuff’s April 2025 article as evidence of statements he had made at the time.

Work and Income clients contacted

The Ministry of Social Develoment (MSD) told HDC that Stoneman, acting on behalf of NZDAT as an agent, provided navigation services to Taylor for about a week in late January and early February 2025.

MSD considered whether an offence had occurred under section 292 of the Social Security Act, but no charges were laid.

However, MSD told HDC it intended to apply a restriction on Stoneman acting as an agent for other clients.

It said Work and Income had begun identifying all clients who had appointed Stoneman or NZDAT as an agent or authorised advocate, and was taking steps to notify those clients and recommend alternative support networks.

The decision said two previous similar complaints involving NZDAT and Stoneman had also raised concerns about poor organisational processes, lack of policies, potential exploitation and treatment of vulnerable consumers, and poor engagement in the complaints process.

In those cases, both Stoneman and NZDAT were found to have breached the code.

The HDC said an amended version of the report naming Stoneman and NZDAT would be released after the Director of Proceedings process because of ongoing public safety concerns and the need for public awareness.

Taylor said she had not had any contact with Stoneman since Stuff’s coverage.

“I don’t talk to him at all,” she said.

Stoneman and NZDAT were approached for comment.

Have you got a powerful story to share? Tell us in the Google form below.