The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website
Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In

Vcat / Conflict of interest

1 Australia Review updated:

I went to Consumer Affairs Victoria to complain. Despite the blatant rip-off the so-called watch dog abused me in retaliation?

Thus I researched CAV and came accross the below facts and conflict of interests.

VCAT lists (Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) are wholly funded by corporations via state government funds.

The OWNERS CORPORATION LIST (Via the Victorian Property Fund -managers), the BUILDING AND PROPERTY LIST and PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT LIST(Via Domestic Building Fund -developers); and the GUARDIANSHIP LIST (Via the Guardianship Administative Fund).

Consumer Affairs refuses to act against those funding the lists, and instead says to complain to VCAT. Indiciduals are then get hammered by VCAT to stop them complaining

Australia - the land of the legal criminal.

Dont believe it?

Owners Corporation List bias from the Herald Sun newspaper. http://www.smh.com.au/national/rip-o...205-2dwj0.html

Planning List bias from The Age newspaper http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/re...20-1m39cz.html

Vcat

Wi
Jun 6, 2015
Sort by: UpDate | Rating

Comments

  • Go
      25th of Jan, 2016
    0 Votes

    VCAT ruled over my farcical case. (Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal)
    This included a massive range of ongoing issues:
    #1.The Member B. Josephs failed to uphold his earlier ruling that I he would not allow an owners corporation lawyer to ambush me with specific fresh claims.
    #2. He used this ruling to deny me due process and discovery, stating as the above claims would not be tables, that related documents were irrelevant.
    #3. The Member permitted the lawyer to testify a string of false allegations. He failed to correct or even query these claims that contradicted with documented fact. At one stage he stunned the lawyer by encouraging him to defend his client against documented & presented fact. This was in a bid to defend actual Tax fraud. The Members’ offer was so ludicrous that the lawyer refused to take it up. Instead he just stared back at him mouth ajar.
    #4. When the situation got desperate for the lawyer, the Member permitted him to intimidate with rude, loud and truculent interjections. With unconcealed disparity, the Member later randomly cruelled me as I moved my pen, stating that I must always keep my eyes on him.
    #5. He denied my defence stating that my documents had not been earlier tabled. He refused to view my documents. When I queried this he leaned forward and warned me, “Don’t say a word, or else”. In contrast he accepted the lawyers evidence as fact, despite it being hearsay, and being denied by myself.
    The above is a token sample of the cases running issues.
    I understand this stooge no longer sits at VCAT. Too late VCAT, he’s already exposed your sway. From what I’ve heard and witnessed he’s no different to fellow VCAT members when the tribunal’s interests conflict (Original post). He’s just foolhardy by brazenly exposing it.

  • Co
      25th of Apr, 2018
    0 Votes

    Categories FAQ Tips & Tricks Questions Photos
    SUBMIT A COMPLAINT

    Law & Civil Rights Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal [VCAT] Customer Service VCAT corrupt - prrof
    VCAT corrupt - proof / VCAT corrupt - prrof
    1 Victoria, Australia Review updated: Apr 24, 2018
    5 comments
    Is the VCAT owners corporation list corrupt?

    I give you 10 facts.

    Fact 1. The owners corporation law allows managers to transfer money from the owners pool to their own private bank account. This means if a manager steals money from the pool, the Police will not act, as by the law it’s perfectly legal (OC Act, Section 27)

    Fact 2. Due to how VCAT interprets privacy laws, some owners corporations can not even access their own accounts. They are forced to trust the manager.

    Why does VCAT & the law refuse to allow owners to access their own owners corporation account???

    Fact 3. Managers take the interest of the owners account and pay it to the Victorian Property Fund. From this fund more than a million is paid to VCAT yearly. (Eg: SCA Annual Report AGM 2014 page 18. VCAT Annual Report page 53).

    Effectively, managers are stealing the owners money to pay-off VCAT.

    Owners know nothing of this.

    Fact 4. In 2012, the VCAT President invited managers and their lawyers to meet him on a regular basis. Since this time they have regularly met and discussed how VCAT should run cases. (Eg: VCAT Annual Report 2013-14, page 28).

    Owners are not permitted to attend.

    So can VCAT’s President be relied upon to protect owners when meeting with the managers and their lawyers?

    Is he fair?

    Fact 5. The VCAT president himself was involved in a controversial tribunal case against a property owner.
    A water company cuts off the water to a property making it worthless. The water company then forces the owner of the property to sell it to them, dirt cheap. When the owner appeals for justice, the tribunal ruled that the water company had the right to do this, and orders the owner to pay all legal costs for complaining.

    Yes, it was our VCAT President who represented the water company.

    How did he do it?

    It certainly appears that the VCAT president deliberately fabricated a mass of evidence against the owner, and presented it as fact to the tribunal. It appears the judges were fully aware of the fraud. Details of this extraordinary case, and what the President and judges got away with, is on the website courtsontrial.com

    This is not an official legal website however, if the fraud allegations are false, how could someone openly get away with making false claims against our esteemed VCAT President?

    Fact 5. VCAT, with the manager’s funding it, the user group, and the Presidents dubious past, and more, appears loaded with conflicts of interest

    So do owners get a fair go at VCAT?

    Fact 6. Owners win less than 5% of cases at VCAT (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VCAT/).

    Fact 7. This Age article titled “Rip off managers” highlights the bias against owners (http://www.smh.com.au/national/rip-off-body-corporate-managers-stay-registered-[protected]dwj0.html).

    It humorously refers to a manager who was repeatedly taken to VCAT . The manager even admitted charging owners for water supplies to individual car parks. In another case he allegedly took $10, 000 from an owners corporation’s account that had sacked him, because it was summer and he wanted air conditioners to cool himself (Not listed in article).

    VCAT continually refused to rule against him. After an outcry he finally he lost a case, and in the article says he only lost because he did not turn up. With this statement, he appears to be ‘bang on the money’.

    If VCAT, its president, judges, lawyers or even employees read or hear this, they will act horrified.

    “You’re saying VCAT’s corrupt, how dare you… vexatious!

    Vexatious is the argument that lawyers use when their crook has no defence. It’s a boring, lazy, cliché defence. It takes no skill, research or effort to claim vexatious, and it appears it’s exactly how VCAT deals with ‘difficult’ owners (VCAT Act, Sections 75, 79, 109)

    Fact 8. When VCAT rules an owner as vexatious, it not only dismisses the case But orders the owner to pay all the manager’s legal costs. This can cost the owner from hundreds up to $30, 000, or more. Not only does the owner lose the case, not get back owed money, and be ordered to pay all costs, but the same manager is free to carry on ripping off the same owner

    Fact 9. An overwhelming majority of lawyers not in VCAT’s inner circle, despise VCAT for its lack of due process, fairness and natural justice.

    A final fact

    Fact 10. Lawyer James Johnson, a solicitor and barrister of the High Court of Australia, has openly referred to VCAT as a criminal Star Chamber, and the corrupt nature of the VCAT President and others at VCAT, by name. (http://jamesjohnsonchr.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/all-the-attorney-generals-men-vcat-political-crime-spree-show-trial-j1342011/).

    VCAT and its members are just another proud ‘lawyer joke’.

    VCAT owners corporation list - exposed

    Pe peter cuterjar Jan 5, 2015
    More VCAT corrupt - proof Complaints & Reviews
    Barry Josephs, McCabe Terrill and VCAT - Corruption [27]
    VCAT owners corporation list - exposed - Corruption [4]
    Vcat - Conflict of interest [1]
    Vcat - Gregory Garde [1]
    Victorian Civil And Administrative Tribunal - Their 'orders' are worthless [1]
    Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal [VCAT] - vcat - "responsible to no one and answerable to no one..."
    Vcat - Owners Corporation list - tips for self representing
    VCAT Tribunal - Edited hearing audio [1]
    VCAT Tribunal - conflict of interest [1]
    VCAT Owners Corporation List - Rip of owners to help managers [1]
    Sort by: Date | Rating
    Comments
    To  tommidson 9th of Jan, 2015
    0 Votes
    VCAT - pathetic.

    Reply

    Reply
    Ga  Gary Faye 15th of Jan, 2016
    0 Votes
    The VCAT Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal is an Absolute Toothless Tiger, a big fat toothless CAT! Their 'members' (aka wanna be judge but without the brains or the legal clout)are incapable of intelligent thought let alone deciphering law! They are also dogs who are always on the side of the dollar, ignoring basic law and contractual terms. They are NOT the judiciary, they are not the law. They ultimately have to rely on the courts to reinforce their 'orders'. In other words they are A JOKE, and only set up to pretend to be the law. The entire semi legal structure and style is frankly a joke- it is only a matter of time that people realise that it is nothing more than a public wasting of our tax money. What use is a ' semi legal' but not really juridical organisation anyway, its an administrative system to allow high paying jobs to useless 'members' that are in fact nothing more than a butt without its powers. When these butts get lost they cower behind their desks, pull faces and bully. When challenged they deny the law and edit the hearing audio. They leave situation untenable because of their lack of care and ability. No one with honour works at VCAT, and those who support it, such as its inhouse lawyers etc, are nothing but another legal joke.

    The tribunal is funded by the below

    Residential Tenancies Fund
    Domestic Building Fund
    Victorian Property Fund
    Retail Tenancies Fund
    Health Boards
    Guardianship and Administration Fund
    Legal Practice List

    If the opposing party pays money to these funds you are stuffed. VCAT follows the dollar. Pay VCAT through the above funds and you literally can’t lose a case.

    Reply

    Reply
    Ho  hood4 17th of Mar, 2016
    0 Votes
    I laugh at VCAT, its President, members, and its so-called Act.
    Do you want to see a legal joke in action? Go to a VCAT hearing where VCAT is funded by one party as above.
    The law means nothing - Absolutely ridiculous, a baby tribunal...

    Reply

    Reply
    Ro  Robin Paren 23rd of Apr, 2018
    0 Votes
    VCAT continues to allow the abuse of disabled self representing litigants complaining about discrimination. You end up copping more abuse than what you first complained about. I have considered killing myself.

    Reply

    Reply
    Co  corruptvcat 12 hrs 53 mins ago
    0 Votes
    1. I have a VCAT Order made by Mr I Lulham. Mr Lulham made a decision that was materially different to the subject matter (concerning a fire safety issue). The other party to the case was a State Government Department. Why did Mr I Lulham sign the order as a VCAT Member, only to be promoted to a VCAT Deputy President four months later?

    2. Why was ordinary VCAT Member Campana promoted directly to Deputy Head of the Residential Tenancies List a few months after making a VCAT decision in favour of former Prime Minister, Tony Abbott's daughter?

    3. After appealing Senior Member Barker's decision (in favour of a State Government Department) to the Supreme Court my pro bono barrister was offered a position as a sessional VCAT Member. That wouldn't have anything to do with Ms Barker being promoted to the position of Head of the Residential Tenancies List in this period would it?

Post your comment