Saturday, 2 February 2013
What happened to dave Maher ITSA's FOI Officer????
So what
has happened to Dave Maher the FOI Officer from ITSA who probably
disclosed too much to me in my Freedom of Information request
???????????
He was on holidays until the 7th
January 2013 then he returned to ITSA for some very important business (
I suspect it was my FOI ) and now he has gone again and will return
again on the 7th February.
In
his place is Matthew Osborne the principal legal Officer at ITSA who
needs a fuck up the ase for telling me that ITSA and Insolvency
trustee's had a discretion to breach the Bankruptcy Act.
Considering
Dave Maher made disclosures of the failure of management at ITSA and in
particular Adam Toma and Veronique Ingram, has Adam Toma assigned Dave
Maher off to a camp for re-education of FOI Officers?????????????????
How
very funny considering ITSA's record for intimidating anyone who
inquires into the conduct at ITSA...........................
Also Adam Toma, if you are reading this, and I believe you probably will,
I am still waiting for the you to have me charged as you threatened in 2009.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Monday, 14 January 2013
IPA protects corrupt trustee's
Apart from ITSA protecting the fucker Paul Pattison there had been complaints made to the IPA. As this is not a Government organization FOI does not apply.
Depending on the any facts of the matter reviewed, the overviews may be provided on a names or no-names basis.
Key lessons for all members are also identified.
IPA Action
The below overviews summarise, the outcomes of recent complaints and concerns dealt with by the IPA, including appropriate IPA member discipline decisions and/or actions that the Board has agreed should be published.Depending on the any facts of the matter reviewed, the overviews may be provided on a names or no-names basis.
Key lessons for all members are also identified.
Termination of IPA Membership – Mr Paul Pattison
by Narelle Ferrier | Sep 10, 2012
In accordance with clause 16.3(b) of the IPA Constitution, Mr Pattison’s IPA membership was automatically terminated on 23 April 2012 following the termination of his registration as a trustee in bankruptcy by ITSA. This arose from a recommendation of a disciplinary committee under the Bankruptcy Act that included an IPA member. The IPA understands that Mr Pattison intends to appeal the termination of his registration to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
Prior to the termination of Mr Pattison’s membership, the IPA had made decisions suspending his membership and his membership remained suspended up until the time of its termination.
The IPA has notified Mr Pattison, ASIC, ITSA and Mr Pattison’s accounting membership bodies, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and CPA Australia, of its determination.
The IPA Board resolved to report this decision and its reasons in accordance with IPA Regulation 25.
Prior to the termination of Mr Pattison’s membership, the IPA had made decisions suspending his membership and his membership remained suspended up until the time of its termination.
The IPA has notified Mr Pattison, ASIC, ITSA and Mr Pattison’s accounting membership bodies, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and CPA Australia, of its determination.
The IPA Board resolved to report this decision and its reasons in accordance with IPA Regulation 25.
my IPA
Loke Ching Wong/Paul Pattison/Adam Toma
Corrupt Trustee Paul Pattison was part of the Committee that made a decision to de-register Loke Ching Wong in 2008. In 2011 Pattison himself was also de-registered for doing the same as Wong How long had this committee been protecting Wong??
This story sounds very familiar with Adam Toma National Enforcement Manager protecting the corrupt trusteePaul Pattison....
This National Enforcement Manager at ITSA who is on the take needs a big cock up his arse!!!!!!!
AAT Confirms decision to cancel trustee’s registration The Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Wong v Inspector-General and others Wong v Inspector-General in Bankruptcy and others (V 200600930) Melbourne, 12 June 2008 (AAT) has affirmed the decision of the Committee formed by the Inspector-General to cancel the registration of Loke Ching Wong.
Whilst there are prior cases where the Court has cancelled a trustee’s registration this is the first time that an administrative decision to cancel a trustee’s registration, made by a Committee formed by the Inspector-General, has been the subject of review in the AAT. Senior Member Pascoe summarised the history of the matter at paragraphs 3 and 5:
As both parties agreed with the evidence on which the decision was based the AAT needed to consider whether this evidence warranted a cancellation of registration or a lesser penalty such as suspension.
The primary argument submitted by counsel on Mr Wong’s behalf was that the effective penalty of de-registration for ten years was too severe. It was accepted that some penalty was appropriate. An effective suspension of twelve months was proposed by varying the decision to allow Mr Wong to remain registered on condition that he hand over any existing appointments to another trustee and not undertake any new appointments for the suspension period.
It was further submitted that the matters identified by the Committee were either errors of judgement or simple mistakes. It was argued that, as trustee under Part X arrangements, there was limited time and ability to make full enquiries. It was suggested that the legislation in relation to these arrangements contemplated the need to make a judgement call within a limited time frame. Counsel for Mr Wong submitted that there was no evidence of dishonesty or personal gain, only possible negligence. The Tribunal was urged to accept that Mr Wong had learned by his mistakes and the possibility of any further lapses is most unlikely.
The Inspector-General submitted that:
The AAT made the observation that it was tempted in a form of suspension of less than the statutory period of ten years and could in its view achieve this pursuant to sub-section 155I(3) if it were to decide that Mr Wong’s should cease to be registered if he failed to meet certain conditions, suggesting the conditions that could be imposed might include:
This would have the effect of leaving Mr Wong registered as a trustee. Senior Member Pascoe referred to Muir v Bradley (1984) 57 ALR 155:
In affirming the Committee’s decision he went on to conclude:
This story sounds very familiar with Adam Toma National Enforcement Manager protecting the corrupt trusteePaul Pattison....
This National Enforcement Manager at ITSA who is on the take needs a big cock up his arse!!!!!!!
AAT Confirms decision to cancel trustee’s registration The Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Wong v Inspector-General and others Wong v Inspector-General in Bankruptcy and others (V 200600930) Melbourne, 12 June 2008 (AAT) has affirmed the decision of the Committee formed by the Inspector-General to cancel the registration of Loke Ching Wong.
Whilst there are prior cases where the Court has cancelled a trustee’s registration this is the first time that an administrative decision to cancel a trustee’s registration, made by a Committee formed by the Inspector-General, has been the subject of review in the AAT. Senior Member Pascoe summarised the history of the matter at paragraphs 3 and 5:
- Eight matters in which estimated remuneration and costs of Mr Wong in his report to creditors was lower than the amount in his work in progress at the time and lower than his actual final fees. The final fees varied from 11 percent to 244 percent in excess of the estimate.
- Taking remuneration in excess of that fixed by creditors in five administrations.
- Banking estate monies in Mr Wong’s firm’s bank account instead of a required special interest-bearing account on six occasions.
- Use of proxies to pass a creditors’ resolution relating to Mr Wong’s remuneration in wording different to that previously sent to creditors.
- Systematic and unnecessary registration of estates for GST involving unnecessary work and incorrect banking of GST refunds.
- Failure to disclose a second and higher valuation of a property in a report to creditors.
- Failure to disclose to creditors a possible valid claim of a creditor and likely invalid claims of three creditors.
- Failure to investigate validity of claim for lien.
- Representing that a petitioning creditor’s taxed costs had been paid at the date of the report when they had not been so paid.
- Failure to properly calculate the income contribution by a bankrupt.
- Incorrect classification of interest earned as a charge.
- Failure to put resolution to appoint a committee of inspection notwithstanding a clear majority of creditors seeking to have such a committee appointed.
3. In 2004, the Bankruptcy Regulation Branch of the Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia (ITSA) undertook an inspection of 23 files relating to bankruptcy administrations conducted by Mr Wong. By letter of 5 April 2005, Mr Wong was advised that a number of errors had been identified and he was requested to respond by 2 May 2005. After an interview and his letter of response, Mr Wong was advised by letter of 14 October 2005 that the Inspector-General had formed a belief that he had failed to exercise the powers, or carry out the duties of a registered trustee properly. He was requested to provide a written explanation of why he should continue to be registered as a trustee. The Inspector-General did not accept the written explanation and pursuant to s 155H of the Act, convened a Committee to consider his registration. After four days of hearing between June and August 2006. The Committee provided a report dated 5 September 2006 in which it decided that Mr Wong should cease to be registered as a trustee under the Act.
5. In its report, the Committee made a number of specific findings detailing breaches under various sections of the Act including sections 19, 109, 139W, 140,162, 165, 168, 169 and 189A. The report was lengthy but the breaches found can be summarised as follows:
- 1 Wong v Inspector-General in Bankruptcy and others (V 200600930) Melbourne, 12 June 2008
As both parties agreed with the evidence on which the decision was based the AAT needed to consider whether this evidence warranted a cancellation of registration or a lesser penalty such as suspension.
The primary argument submitted by counsel on Mr Wong’s behalf was that the effective penalty of de-registration for ten years was too severe. It was accepted that some penalty was appropriate. An effective suspension of twelve months was proposed by varying the decision to allow Mr Wong to remain registered on condition that he hand over any existing appointments to another trustee and not undertake any new appointments for the suspension period.
It was further submitted that the matters identified by the Committee were either errors of judgement or simple mistakes. It was argued that, as trustee under Part X arrangements, there was limited time and ability to make full enquiries. It was suggested that the legislation in relation to these arrangements contemplated the need to make a judgement call within a limited time frame. Counsel for Mr Wong submitted that there was no evidence of dishonesty or personal gain, only possible negligence. The Tribunal was urged to accept that Mr Wong had learned by his mistakes and the possibility of any further lapses is most unlikely.
The Inspector-General submitted that:
- an effective 10 year de-registration period was that chosen by Parliament in enacting section 155A;
- the breaches by Mr Wong were while acting in a capacity of trustee and involved regular, culpable and negligent conduct in that capacity over several years;
- Mr Wong’s errors of judgement or mistakes favoured him in taking remuneration in excess of that estimated or capped and no mistakes favoured creditors;
- the retention of public confidence required the cancellation of registration; and
- conditions contemplated in s 155I(2)(b) and 3(b) were matters such as undertaking a course of study but not an effective period of suspension of less than ten years.
The AAT made the observation that it was tempted in a form of suspension of less than the statutory period of ten years and could in its view achieve this pursuant to sub-section 155I(3) if it were to decide that Mr Wong’s should cease to be registered if he failed to meet certain conditions, suggesting the conditions that could be imposed might include:
- “that he does not continue with or accept any appointment as trustee for two years and, for those appointments accepted in the third year, provide to the Inspector-General full details of remuneration including creditors resolutions, his reports to creditors showing estimated remuneration, work in progress records and invoice for payment.”
This would have the effect of leaving Mr Wong registered as a trustee. Senior Member Pascoe referred to Muir v Bradley (1984) 57 ALR 155:
- “It is accepted that a trustee under the Act has an onerous duty. At times the estate will not have sufficient funds to provide an adequate remuneration. Particularly in Part X arrangements, the trustee has limited time and limited coercive powers. However, as stated in Muir v Bradley (1984) 57 ALR 155:
“a trustee in bankruptcy is a person who must command and retain the confidence of the Court, of the creditors and debtors in bankruptcy proceedings and of the general community. His competence must be, and remain, of a high order.”…”
In affirming the Committee’s decision he went on to conclude:
- “….having fully considered the report of the Committee, the acceptance of the factual findings of that Committee and the number of breaches relative to the number of files inspected it would be inappropriate to allow Mr Wong to retain his registration. The only alternative is an effective suspension for a period of less than that provided in s 155A(4). Parliament has specifically provided for a 10 year period in that section and, unlike many other Acts of Parliament which have registration provisions, does not otherwise specifically provide the Committee with power to suspend.”
Saturday, 12 January 2013
The Year that was!! veronique Ingram ITSA/ APS Commission/ Commonwealth Ombudsman
2012 started off with a charge as Veronique Ingram,
Inspector General in Bankruptcy and the fat mong Alison Larkins , acting
Commonwealth Ombudsman were referred to the Australian Public
Service Commission under S 41(f).
Regardless that there was considerable evidence of the failure of both Commonwealth Government Agencies to comply with their obligations the Commissioner Steve Sedgwick and the skanky Ethics Manager fucked over the matter.
It was then discovered that all the complaints made under S41(f) and also by Whistleblower for the past 3 financial years had also been fucked over.
Under FOI I asked the APS Commission for their Investigation policy. They then told me that the Australian Public Service Commission did not have one. Karin Fisher emailed me and told me to take down all my blogs as they were highly OFFENSIVE.
I emailed Ms Fisher back and told her to SUCK IT UP and she could "COME KISS MY ARSE"
Regardless that there was considerable evidence of the failure of both Commonwealth Government Agencies to comply with their obligations the Commissioner Steve Sedgwick and the skanky Ethics Manager fucked over the matter.
It was then discovered that all the complaints made under S41(f) and also by Whistleblower for the past 3 financial years had also been fucked over.
Under FOI I asked the APS Commission for their Investigation policy. They then told me that the Australian Public Service Commission did not have one. Karin Fisher emailed me and told me to take down all my blogs as they were highly OFFENSIVE.
I emailed Ms Fisher back and told her to SUCK IT UP and she could "COME KISS MY ARSE"
There was one complaint that the APS Commission
had received that was Investigated by Robert Cornall OA. Cornall was
Attorney General's secretary for 8 years. This makes this old fucker ineligible
to carry out any investigations for the Government because of conflict of
interest. It also appears this fucker also received an order of Australia for
LICKING AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT ARSES!!!!!!!!
I then requested the Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation policy
under FOI
George Masri( Senior Assistant Commonwealth Ombudsman ) emailed me back and told me the Commonwealth Ombudsman does not have an investigation policy because the Commonwealth Ombudsman does not do investigations. Clearly I might not be the brightest star , but for George Masri to tell me this he must be wanking his cock and needs a good fuck up his arse.
An independent report from KPMG also slammed Fairwork Australia for
lack of standards in investigations and
failure to investigate in key areas in
the Craig Thomson matter.
This clearly indicates that the Government has no control of
Government Agencies.
It was also revealed that the
NSW Crime commission had been splitting the proceeds of crime between lawyers instead of it being returned to the Government
This had been occurring for TWENTY YEARS before the Fuckers at the
NSW Government finally put a stop to it.
The chief Legal Officer said he had simply misread the ACT. This
sound very familiar with Matthew Osborne
doing the same. Osborne also needs more
than a cock up his arse.!
Australia got a new Commonwealth Ombudsman who is
being paid $380,000 a year to fuck over
complaints . If anyone is also wondering
why the Banking system is so fucked, look back and you will see that this
fucker , Colin Neave was also the Banking Industry Ombudsman and until recently
the Financial Services Ombudsman. Mr Neave would have shit up his fingernails
for sticking his fingers up all Government department's bum.
I also asked the Commonwealth Ombudsman under FOI to give me a copy
of the 578 complaints made about the Commonwealth Ombudsman in 2010-2011. They
emailed be back and said they didn't know what I was talking about. Funny how
the fuckers suddenly go blank when asked a question they do not want to answer.
It was also discovered that Adam Toma , the National Enforcement
Mnanager is on the take. It is particularly fortunate also that this fucker is
on ITSA's Audit Committee so he can cover this up. Cheryl Cullen another fat
skank at ITSA is also on the ITSA's Audit Committee. She needs a big fuck up
the arse also for telling me ITSA has the DISCRETION to mislead me.
Veronique Ingram was question by Senator Williams and Senator
Brandis.
Ingram said she was unaware of any intimidation by ITSA and
generally said she was fucking unaware of anything.
I requested under FOI a copy of ITSA's investigation policy on the
22nd July 2012. ITSA refused to reply to me. Eventually I contacted
the Information Commissioner who informed the fuckers at ITSA of their
obligation.
Adam Toma ripped his skirt off when he was told this.
As I already had an FOI with ITSA Mr Mircevski asked me to ask them
how many complaints ITSA had received about the corrupt Trustee Paul Pattison .
On the 7th December 2012 I was to have received my FOI
however I had to contact again the Information Commissioner to get a reply from
ITSA.
Dave Maher from FOI attempted to tell me that my FOI had been sent
to the wrong address. So……… he can kiss my fucking ARSE!!!!!!!!!
As if it was a Christmas present from ITSA the FOI arrived in my
letter box on Christmas eve.
Clearly it would have killed the fuckers at ITSA to give me the
information I requested. Who would know that someone in Bankruptcy Regulations
was protecting the fucker Paul Pattison who Veronique Ingram was very vague
about. These fuckers at ITSA had received 9 complaints on Pattison in the 12
months before he resigned as a trustee. 5 of these warranted investigation. It
is extremely unclear whether these were actually investigated. It was also
found that Bankruptcy Regulation has no investigation policy or standards.
However the fuckers at ITSA attempted to tell me that Enforcement and
Regulation use the same policy. Adam Toma and Dave Maher can come his my fucking
arse as their functions are vastly different. Obviously they are wanking their
cocks to try and tell me this.
So I put another FOI into ITSA and requested who handled all the
complaints about Pattison and to give me the names of all the names of all the
ITSA staff that handled complaints about ITSA in the past 3 years and how
complaints that warranted investigation was investigated, taking into
consideration that Bankruptcy Regulation has no investigation policy.
So........... was Paul Pattison being protected by ITSA because he
had cut a deal with Adam Toma????????????????
So how very fucking funny when the cock in the legal Department
Mathew Osborne is advising that section 134 gives ITSA and the trustee's
discretion to fuck everyone over!!!!!
So everyone at ITSA, Commonwealth
Ombudsman and the Australian Public
Service Commission..............................
KISS MY ARSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Monday, 7 January 2013
Reply to ITSA's FOI
Dave Maher
FOI Officer ITSA
GPO 821
Canberra
2601
7th January 2013
Dear Mr Maher,
I refer to the FOI response I received from ITSA on the 24th December 2012 which was three weeks late.. I note that ITSA attempted to apologize claiming it was sent to the wrong address. Considering ITSA would not have wanted me to have access to any of the information I requested I quite rightly would consider this to be deliberate..
It also appears ITSA or you, are also attempting to have me believe that Enforcement and Regulation use the same investigation policy. This is highly peculiar as both Enforcement and Regulation have vastly differing roles.
Thank you for you verification of the qualifications of staff at both Regulation and Enforcement. Therefore any failure to investigate fraud ,corruption and serious corrupt conduct at ITSA could be seen as deliberate.
It is now abundantly obvious to me that ITSA was attempting to protect the corrupt trustee Paul Pattison.
Therefore please supply me with the following information under FOI.
In the period 2010-2011 there were 9 complaints made about Paul Pattison.
5 of these warranted investigation.
What was the names of ITSA staff that dealt with these complaints?
If any of these complaints were investigated please supply me with the names of the person who did the investigation.
In the 12 month (2009-2010) period prior to these complaints being made how many complaints did ITSA receive about Paul Pattison? Please supply me with the dates that these were received by ITSA. How many of these warranted investigation and if any were investigated and by whom?
In the next 12 month period(2008-2009) how many complaints did ITSA receive about Paul Pattison? How many of these warranted investigation and was any investigated and by whom?
In the 12 months(2007-2008) prior to this how many complaints did ITSA receive about Paul Pattison. What were the dates these were received ? Did any of these warrant investigation and if so were these investigated and by whom?
In the 12 months prior to this(2006-2007) how many complaints were received about Paul Pattison? Again how many warranted investigation and were these investigated and by whom?
In 2009-20010 ITSA received 44 complaints about the Official Trustee. Please advise me who handled each of these complaints. 4 of these complaints were found to be justified. Were these investigated and by whom?
In 2010-2011 ITSA received 47 complaints about the Official Trustee. 9 were found to be justified and required investigation. Were these complaints correctly investigated as required by the AGIS and by whom?
In the period 2011-2012 ITSA received 31complaints about the Official Trustee. 6 warranted investigation . Who investigated these and did it comply with the AGIS standards?
Under Freedom of Information please supply me with the names of all trustee's that have either resigned from ITSA or have been de-registered in the past 7 years Alongside each name please supply me with the number of complaints ITSA had received about them. Please also supply me with the dates they were received and if they were investigated.
This should include the Trustee's that resigned as mentioned in ITSA's 2011-2912 Annual Report and particularly the Trustee ITSA de-registered.
Under FOI please supply me with the member of ITSA's staff who authorized George Adler for overseas travel .
Further to this ITSA has failed to publish my request for information on complaints on the corrupt Trustee Paul Anthony Pattison on the disclosure log. ITSA would be aware that this contains no personal information nor does it reveal any information about any business, commercial , financial or any professional affairs. Clearly this would be another attempt by ITSA to cover up atrocious corrupt conduct at ITSA, also corruption and fraud by private trustees .
Thank you
Fiona Brown
Friday, 28 December 2012
FOI Australian Public Service Commission
As the Australian Public Service
Commission has fucked over everyone who made a complaint about Agency
or Department Heads or by whistleblowers except one which was
investigated and covered up by the fucker Robert Cornell AO who had been
the Secretary for the Attorney General Department for 8 years I have
now asked for the names of the people who took the time to complain to
the APS Commission.
I will then be able to look these people up on the electrol roles and ask them for a copy of their complaint and post it on this blog.
This will show how the Commissioner Steve Sedgwick and the skanky ethics manager fuck over anyone who complains and brings it to the attention of the APS
Subject: RE: FOI Request [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:45:19 +1100
Hi Chris,
Thank you for your email on whistleblowers.
As you are unable to provide me with a copy of the complaints to the Australian Public Service Commission by Whistleblowers and also under S41(f) of the PS Act for the past 2 financial years because the APS Commission claims this would breach confidentiality and therefore are exempt from FOI could you please supply me ( under FOI) with the names of the people that made these complaints and the states they live and I will contact these people direct.
Thanking you
Fiona Brown
I will then be able to look these people up on the electrol roles and ask them for a copy of their complaint and post it on this blog.
This will show how the Commissioner Steve Sedgwick and the skanky ethics manager fuck over anyone who complains and brings it to the attention of the APS
From: fionabrown01@hotmail.com
To: foi@apsc.gov.auSubject: RE: FOI Request [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:45:19 +1100
Hi Chris,
Thank you for your email on whistleblowers.
As you are unable to provide me with a copy of the complaints to the Australian Public Service Commission by Whistleblowers and also under S41(f) of the PS Act for the past 2 financial years because the APS Commission claims this would breach confidentiality and therefore are exempt from FOI could you please supply me ( under FOI) with the names of the people that made these complaints and the states they live and I will contact these people direct.
Thanking you
Fiona Brown
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)