Attachments in support of submission 1 to the Senate Inquiry into Dispute Resolution in the Justice System:
FOS needs to be examined by a Royal Commission into its entire operations: Senators.
FOS’ legal counsel said to see the police: we went to the FBI & SEC and US Federal Reserve Bank:
Inadequate Discovery conceals crime: we support an Australian equivalent of the US’ CFPB:
Ombudsman advises customers in the SEC Whistleblowers who went to FOS NAB CBA Auckland Savings Bank and the Legal Ethics Board that there may be “corrupt conduct” in leaked intentions to “lean” of possible prosecution witnesses in international investigations. Victims of the Culture of Cover Up seek all types of compensatory damages, including for the infliction of mental illness from the “Deny Until they Die” tactics.
Sample FBI counterterrorism and national security report form to report to the International corruption unit of the FBI: “I thought they were insane”, says Mr Elliot Sgargetta, “but everything they said about the FBI must be true. The hush up deed was worth around $1,000,000 but it looked unethical and possibly illegal”.
Real task forces:
Fraud Mistake and Unconscionable Conduct:
Should rules of evidence and rules of procedure be brought into line with the community’s idea of what is required to void transactions based on, for example, mortgage fraud rings like that in the R v Jordanou proceedings that Bill Shorten and Claire O’Neil covered in their video of victims of the racket?
Reinstate Grand Juries?
Should grand juries be reinstated in light of findings that law enforcement and regulators failed to investigate systemic bank crimes? In Victoria it seems that the State Government abolished grand juries 30 years ago which seems to coincide with that described by many as a protection racket for the banks.
Customers and ‘whistleblower protection’ groups etc should get compensation for reporting tip offs from officials, like the legal ethics board staff who were appalled at what the bank law firms got away with.
Royal Commissioner Hayne’ observations about systemic problems with FOS et al:
Former Victorian Premier John Cain’s letter to the editor complaining about the CBA Open Review Scheme in 2015: can banks be trusted to run their own dispute resolution scheme?
Former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser’s letter regarding the CBA Open Review Scheme: can banks be trusted to handle their own dispute resolution scheme?
Senator Williams’ questioning of ASIC about an army of lawyers and receivers charging over $462,000 over an alleged debt of $28,000. If the lawyers and receivers are officers of the court, do ethics obligations prevent overkill? Have courts allowed overrepresentation that ultimately “uses the shareholders cheque book” to enrich officers of the court and to assuage the egos of corporate bullies? It is submitted that policymakers regulators and the legal system were part of a culture of cover-up and denials and cost-cutting that inflicted psychiatric injury which should be retrospectively compensated by policymakers regulators and the legal system.
Headline in Chinese international news regarding the falsified file notes prepared by the lawyer for FOS whose roles include positions on esteemed boards that advise government in banking matters. It is submitted that all FOS decisions should be retrospectively reopened, assessed by a board which includes community-based advisors, with the outcome adding compensation for all manner of damages including psychiatric damage which follows on from having to deal with concealment of evidence and blocking tactics. It is also submitted that, given that FOS staff worked for financial institutions that are being referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and may have engaged in cartel like conduct, that a genuinely independent dispute resolution scheme not employ those who may have been involved in cartel -like criminal activity.
Are small law firms intimidated by banks and by legal ethics boards? Attached is the Letter from the CBA lawyers to Ms Suzi Burge’s lawyer threatening referral to legal ethics board’s and threatening adverse costs orders against her and her lawyer in the event that the court did not see fraud misrepresentation mistaken unconscionable conduct. Ms Burge maintains that her own barrister (who presumably is subject to the same ethics and cost consequences) pressured her to sign a settlement, and she maintains that the Court was advised by the CBA barrister that her defences were likely to succeed however the Court directed her, being a homeless and impoverished mother, to raise her defences in another Court with the result that the property was foreclosed on.
Letter to Ms Burge and CBA’s Secretary/Lawyer David Cohen from the Banking Oath: are bank lawyers dismissive of their legal ethical obligation to resolve disputes early and without recourse to litigation that financially benefits law firms connected to FOS?
Screenshot from Senator Dastyari’s examination of claims that CBA was involved in FOS’ decision, as confirmed in questioning lead Ombudsman Mr Phillip Field at the Hayne Royal Commission, that FOS decided to not use its powers to forgive/cancel loans in their entirety.
Is FOS an arbitration scheme that was devised by lawyers and bankers and funded by bankers and staffed by bankers to look like a truly independent government Ombudsman scheme? Were arbitration clauses disguised to look like a Royal Commission’s terms of reference rather than being put to the public as a bank-operated arbitration scheme controlled by banks? Was FOS part of a cartel-like operation under a board of directors and lawyers at the centre of the problems that the Hayne Royal Commission touched on?
Are arbitrators liable in Australia like elsewhere if they watered-down criminal activity to something called maladministration and refused to investigate allegations of criminal a ctivity?
Are FOS arbitrators exposed to prosecution in foreign jurisdictions if FOS is seen to be a biased pro-bank contrivance that conceals criminal activity?
Are arbitrators and their associates liable as a cartel -like operation?
Should victim of crimes schemes get compensation for victims? Banks claim to be the victim of crimes, however the defrauded customers never see a cent.
Given the lawsuit by US pension funds against the CBA for concealment of its role in transferring funds for Al Qaeda and international organized criminal organisations, can Australian bankers face US charges for racketeering as ventilated by customers of the Legal Services Board and Commission under APRA and under directors from the CBA’s audit firm or counterterrorism and anti-money laundering?
Do crime rings enlist the services of the legal services board to obtain files from lawyers who act for investigative reporters who, coincidentally, are subject to repossession proceedings by the same bank that was lending money to convicted underworld figures?
Compensation should be paid for psychiatric illnesses, stress, lost opportunities etc that flow from “misunderstanding” cases and employing the “Deny Deceive & Lie Til They Die” to induce PTSD and a sense of hopelessness and doom.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Attachments to Sub1 Justice Inquiry
1 year 4 months ago #4297