Clients and peers have asked why Platinum Point's AUPP membership is no longer listed. The answer is straightforward, and it's documented. This post sets out the governance concerns we raised during the 2026 renewal process, what we asked for, what we received in response, and the decision we made as a result.
I've kept this account factual. The evidence — correspondence, formal notices, and responses — exists in writing. I'm not interested in relitigating it at length; I'm interested in being transparent with the people who trust us with their care.
Why we joined in the first place
New Zealand has no mandatory licensing for professional piercers — no regulatory body, no minimum training standards, no oversight mechanism that distinguishes studios operating at a clinical standard from those that don't. The burden of quality assessment falls entirely on clients, most of whom don't have the knowledge to evaluate what they're being offered.
A professional association that admitted studios against documented standards, held members accountable to those standards, and removed members who fell short would have genuine value in that environment. It would give clients a meaningful signal rather than a logo. It would give the industry a self-regulatory mechanism before external regulation fills the gap. And it would provide a professional community for studios operating at the same level.
Those were the reasons we joined AUPP. They were also the lens through which we evaluated what we encountered during the 2026 renewal process.
What the renewal process revealed
The 2026 renewal process required studios to submit updated business information — supplier invoices, stock details, pricing — as part of AUPP's membership audit. Before completing that submission, I raised three formal governance questions on 27 February 2026.
The questions were specific and practical: what safeguards existed to ensure that renewal documents were reviewed only by neutral administrators, shielded from board members with a direct commercial interest in the information? What were the formal recusal protocols? Could AUPP provide a current conflict of interest policy or code of conduct?
Those questions were not asked in bad faith. They were asked because the answer mattered to whether completing the renewal was a reasonable thing to do.
The structural conflict of interest
AUPP's board includes members who operate piercing studios in the same markets as member studios — including, at the time of our renewal, at least one direct competitor in the Auckland market. The membership renewal process required studios to submit commercially sensitive business information to an organisation whose governance structure gave board members — some of whom are competitors — potential access to that information.
This is a structural conflict of interest. It is not an allegation of wrongdoing against any individual. It is a description of a governance architecture that, in my assessment, was not designed to prevent the kind of information access that would be commercially harmful to members.
Absence of documented safeguards
In response to my formal requests, AUPP did not provide a conflict of interest policy, evidence of data access controls, or a non-conflicted auditor for our renewal. The one accommodation offered was that pricing could be redacted from invoices. No documentation demonstrating how member data was protected from board members with competitive interests was produced — because, as far as I was able to determine, no such documentation existed.
An organisation that collects commercially sensitive business information from member studios, and whose board includes operators of competing businesses, requires robust written policies governing data access, conflict identification, and formal recusal. The absence of those policies is a governance gap that I could not overlook.
Obligations under the Corporations Act and Privacy Acts
AUPP LTD (ACN 668 050 637) is an Australian company limited by guarantee, subject to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Section 183 of that Act imposes a duty on directors not to improperly use information obtained through their position. Section 180 requires directors to exercise their powers and discharge their duties with reasonable care and diligence. In my assessment — and I am describing my observations, not making formal legal determinations — the governance structure I encountered did not reflect active engagement with those obligations.
On 3 March 2026, alongside my redacted renewal documents, I formally served a Privacy Act notice under both the Privacy Act 2020 (NZ) and the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), requesting access to any internal records, assessment notes, and correspondence relating to my renewal. I also lodged a formal written objection regarding the conflict of interest. Neither notice was acknowledged.
How the process concluded
My formal objection and Privacy Act notice, submitted on 3 March 2026, received no substantive response. Sixteen days later, an automated membership termination notification was sent — to my personal email address rather than my business address, where it was filtered as spam. I responded within four minutes of seeing it, noting that my renewal documents were ready and that I had been waiting for acknowledgement of my March correspondence before submitting them.
The Board's final response declined to confirm whether the formal objection or Privacy Act notice had been recorded, refused to extend the grace period, and stated the matter was resolved. The renewal documents I had prepared were never submitted.
I raised these concerns through proper channels — in writing, with specific requests, in good faith, and before the renewal deadline. The process that followed did not provide the governance assurances I had asked for. That is the sequence of events.
The business decision
Displaying an AUPP badge on our website makes an implicit representation to clients: that Platinum Point has been vetted against AUPP's standards and that those standards are meaningful. For that representation to be honest, I would need confidence in the governance structure that underpins the credential.
Based on what the renewal process revealed — the structural conflict of interest, the absence of documented member data protections, and the handling of formal governance questions — I did not have that confidence. The decision to not proceed with membership was a direct consequence of that assessment. It was not a difficult one.
What remains unchanged
Platinum Point's standards were not derived from AUPP membership, and they are not affected by its absence. They predate it.
Every piercing at Platinum Point uses implant-grade titanium (ASTM F136) or solid 14ct and 18ct gold for healing piercings, and BVLA jewellery for healed upgrades. Sterilisation follows pharmaceutical-grade protocols — a direct application of my background as a Clinical Trials Aseptic Pharmacy Technician to autoclave cycles, spore testing, and single-use sealed-needle procedures. Every appointment includes a genuine anatomy assessment, a full aftercare briefing, and a booked complimentary downsize appointment. We are appointment-only and specialist-only.
New Zealand currently has no external body capable of reliably verifying those standards on behalf of clients. That is an industry-wide problem that a well-governed professional association could help address. Until such a body exists, the most honest thing we can offer is transparency about what our standards actually are — not an endorsement from an organisation whose governance we have reason to question.
If you want to know how we operate — what materials we use, how sterilisation is handled, what training underpins the work — ask us. We will answer precisely. That has always been our position, and it hasn't changed.
Frequently asked questions
What is AUPP?
AUPP — Australasian United Professional Piercers — is an industry association for body piercers operating across New Zealand and Australia. It is incorporated as an Australian company limited by guarantee (ACN 668 050 637) and positions itself as a credentialing and standards body for the piercing industry.
Did you try to resolve this before ending the membership?
Yes. I raised formal governance questions in writing before completing the renewal, proposed a constructive alternative (a neutral non-conflicted auditor for the renewal documents), served a formal Privacy Act notice, and had redacted renewal documents ready to submit. The renewal was not progressed because the governance questions I raised were not answered — not because I chose to walk away from the process. The membership lapsed during a 16-day period of non-response.
Does Platinum Point still meet professional piercing standards?
Yes — and those standards exist independently of any association membership. We use ASTM F136 implant-grade titanium and solid gold jewellery for all healing piercings, operate to pharmaceutical-grade sterilisation protocols, conduct anatomy assessments before every placement, and include a complimentary downsize appointment with every piercing. These standards predate our AUPP membership and are unchanged by its ending.
Should I factor AUPP membership into choosing a piercing studio?
Membership of any professional association is only meaningful if the governance behind it is sound. My experience of AUPP's governance is what prompted this statement. Beyond that, I'm not in a position to assess other studios — that judgment belongs to clients. What I'd recommend: ask any studio directly about their jewellery specifications, sterilisation methods, and training background. Those questions will tell you more than any badge, from any organisation.