Havick! Great to have you still there, bought a smile to my face as I sipped on first mouthful of coffee here at the pancake parlor.
A couple of comments while I'm here.
Please be assured everyone that I am commencing the process as i said I would. There is no doubt in my mind that CASA has forced my hand on this, and it is there preferred option.
A major hurdle to me will be those findings of the Ombudsman Office, and I am proceeding with some FOI requests.
A further hurdle is to find the right lawyer. I have spoken to one, but despite his expertise and experience in this topic, he was unable to pursue the matter as CASA is an existing client.
I have contacted the Victorian Law Society and their referral service which was of limited value. Almost appeared to generate 5 lawyers at random, with no substantive linking of experience and expertise, and i did speak to two of them.
For those outside of Victoria, there is an interesting case here where a man called Andrew Cook owned a company called "i-cook" i believe. A government employee set him up, his business was closed, and it appears in hindsight that he was "done over". The matter continues, and he ran aginst Daniel Andrews in Mulgrave last election. Presumably his legal firm would have experience in similar matters. I contacted the law society again trying to seek the name of his legal firm, or his contact details, and they could help me with neither. I will; still pursue this path, as I would like to meet with and talk to Mr Cook. If anyone by any chance has any contact details< i would be appreciative. I don't Facebook and don't really know how to use it, and would far prefer to keep it that way.
Please be assured I will keep you updated.
A couple of considerations for anyone that gets in a protracted dispute with CASA and drawing on my my last 5 years.
CASA will drag it out, and i know that the consensus will be NO! You dragged it out. Ok. lets meet half way. Something I will say, and I still stand by is that in order to make this matter progress promptly much of the background work has been done, and the evidence and people are readily available to me.
CASA would not meet with me prior to the investigation being finalised, and legal advice was to wait for that Report, and it was foolish to proceed without it. That Ombudsman investigation could have and should have taken less than 5 months, for it still to limping along after 5 years demonstrates the impotence of that Government Department. Rather than make me angry it really saddens me because the failures of that department is unacceptable as its impacted on others as identified by the robodebt investigation, and not only me.
On FOI requests. CASA have 30 days to respond. They then have other options up their sleeve to gain an additional 30 days, creating a two month delay. It only needs to be utilised several times, and there goes a year. My advice to anybody that is making an FOI request is that they also include this wording as I do now in my requests. The common one is to say that the request involves third parties and they have to consult. This usually arrives on or just before the first 30 day expiry, and results in another 30 days. The truth is that on receipt of that initial request CASA already know that it involves 3rd Parties, yet they wait 30 days to advise you. My suggested text if you make a request. More for your records and as a demonstration of "intent" or lack of, I suggest
" in order to afford me natural justice and procedural fairness, may I respectfully request that immediately your Office becomes aware that this request involves third Parties and will require a 30 day extension, could you advise me as soon as practical after you become aware. Rather than wait to the end of the 30 day limit to advise me. I appreciate that you are entitled to utilise that extension, but I believe that its intended to provide more robust responses rather than be utilised to create unnecessary delays'
One other final point. You can push hard, and to be honest I must say I have been somewhat surprised. My strong preference would have been for CASA to initiate legal action, but they have steadfastly avoided it. I thought that at least Mr aleck would have had a go. If it had of been me on a $500,000 package for over two decades, and someone made statements about me, and if they weren't true, and my Employer would act on my behalf, I would tell em to jam their job, and i would go after them personally. Unless of course I was guilty.
Anyway folks, great to have you hanging in there still. Cheers. I am moving forward.