Priya: When the answer is “no” — but the explanation still matters

Priya applied to the ATO to access her unclaimed superannuation, to help cover the costs of a medical condition. When the ATO refused her request, the response she received was brief and generic.

From Priya’s perspective, nothing in the letter explained why her circumstances didn’t meet the release requirements, or what had been considered.

We reviewed the ATO’s decision and the relevant information. In this case, the ATO had applied the law correctly — Priya did not meet the eligibility requirements for the funds to be released.

We worked with the ATO to test whether a more meaningful explanation could be provided in future. Importantly, we demonstrated that it was possible to give a tailored, plain‑English explanation that addressed Priya’s specific situation.

As a result, the ATO provided a detailed written explanation setting out how the decision was reached and why the law couldn’t operate – just the way Priya had wanted.

While the original outcome didn’t change, Priya could make sense of the decision. She felt heard and reassured that her circumstances had genuinely been considered.