Post by spaceyone on Jun 20, 2011 12:03:31 GMT 7
This is the accompanying email I recently sent to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, along with the reports I had created about the falsities contained within the records of my disability employment agency.
It had taken 7-8 months of making applications and having to fight the rejections to be allowed to view the file. My FOI rights were denied all through. Once I did have the evidence I created the above mentioned reports about their inaccuracies. Proof of these allegations had previously been sent to this Office, and others.
I had originally complained to the Privacy Commissioner in October 2010. The result of their investigation into these matters, and more, has been to exhonerate the employment agency completely.
I have been advised that it is now up to me to challenge that finding in the Federal Court, if I want to have any of these charges found instead to be proven.
This email addresses the reasons he quoted to me when he advised he was about to close the file on my complaint, unless I submitted more evidence, and find them innocent. I have been advised today that they are still choosing to appear to be blind.
Dear Mr JXXXXX
I acknowledge your last letter and its contents. I wish to advise, however, that I am finished with this game of pass the buck and denial of any responsibility for the acts of misconduct committed by On-Q Human Resources and Centrelink staff, against myself.
We both know that these organisations broke many laws, and you are aware of what they are. I do not need to read your brochures and play another game of me having to describe their actions within your own terms. Especially when one considers all relevant agencies are so reluctant to conduct any fair investigation, or follow through with any action.
You claim that On-Q HR is allowed to loose one form. But you fail to address the matter of AB withholding the forms from me for so long in the first place. With the aid of the On-Q records, I am able to demonstrate the date he asked me to drop the forms to him, phone requests to retrieve same, and finally his note that he had just left them at reception for me to collect.
He did in fact loose two forms. The DSP application package consists of three booklets. The TDR, Personal Details and Income and Assets. AB only returned the TDR. Three minus two equals the loss of two documents. You also fail to address any foul play within this process, as handled by him.
You state that I did give him permission to contact my Osteopath. You quote a consent form which I had already pointed out was a forgery. I have always admitted that I gave him permission to collect verbal information from my Osteopath, for me to hand in with a DSP application, at his suggestion that I should “take a letter from us (On-Q) to the chiro (Osteo) to gain specific info” (On-Q file record dated 6/5/10).
However, at no time did I give him permission to take three months to do this. I also did not give him permission to keep my DSP forms for three months, and had in fact requested that he return them promptly for lodgement by myself.
What is most obvious though is that I would not have given him permission to fail to share that information with me in an unfactual manner, once he did obtain it. I did not give him permission to withhold a printed copy of it from me and/or the JCA officer. I did not give him permission to misquote it, and then try to hide it.
AB admits in the On-Q records that he has the information, which had been faxed to him the day prior by my Osteopath, and emailed the Osteopath to thank him on 26 July. This was at 3pm. That gave AB 2 hours of that day to phone me and tell me that he had the report, in time for the JCA the following day. He had that same two hours, plus until 12 noon the next day, to do the same. He had those same 5 hours to have printed out the report onto On-Q HR letterhead, as I had indicated in a response to his query as to what to do with it, once he received the report.
Why did he not have that report waiting at reception for me the following day, ready for my JCA interview? Why did he approach the JCA assessor, hours before my appointment with her, and advise her that I had no evidence of my illness when he had that report in his possession? Why did he not give her a copy of the report for her records, to back up her reasons for a rejection of my DSP application?
He states in the On-Q files on 27 July 2010, that he "spoke with JCA due to assess TB and briefed her on the scenario". He does not record that he completed his task, regarding the collecting of my medical information/evidence, by giving it to the JCA as part of my DSP application, as per the EEP dated on 15 March 2010. She was there that day, working out of the On-Q HR office, her company's registered address in Tweed Heads. Or did he phone her before she came down? If they met in person, he had no reason not to give it to her. He only mentions speaking to her about there being no evidence.
However, at my JCA interview the following day, the JCA officer claimed that she did know AB. She had never met him, nor spoken to him, she claimed. She later claimed that she had no knowledge of a report from an Osteopath. When I got a copy from the Osteopath, she claimed that she had since met AB and he had told her that I did not want the report submitted. Yet I had been on the phone to my Osteopath, trying to get a copy, since AB claimed his report contradicted everything he had ever said to me, and to be able to get same report to her.
You also do not address the issue of AB phoning me and advising me of the result of my DSP application, before I attended a JCA interview. It was not his decision, nor his role to advise of same. Why did he breach procedure in that way? Why was in he such a hurry to tie things up regarding Newstart and work exemptions? Even the JCA officer tried to deny that I could have had that conversation with AB, as no one could have known the outcome, as she had only began her role of assessment, earlier on that same day.
The copy of that document which appears later in my appeals process, is still not the one that I gave to the JCA assessor. I deliberately scanned it onto my computer, with the Osteopath’s name, qualifications, and contact details onto the second page in the form of his business card. AB and I were the only people who had one on plain paper. Which means that the one that showed up later is the one I submitted for my ARO appeal, and was the one I had submitted to Centrelink.
So where did a copy of the one I sent to the JCA officer go to? If AB lost the information from the Osteopath, and that is why he did not give her a copy on On-Q HR letterhead, then that would constitute another breach of the one off loss of documents rule.
The Osteopath was mentioned in my DSP application forms, and his contact details given there, as a second medical opinion. No one contacted him, yet in the On-Q HR files, the email sent to him from AB states that his ‘educated’ opinion will ‘determine the outcome of her imminent JCA’ (see AB’s emails to Osteopath).
AB records in the On-Q file that when he suggested contacting my Osteopath for information, I informed him that I had a second TDR, from the DSP pack, and would be asking him to complete it. However, I stated that he was to make a report to my GP, and I would first endeavor to get that document, to save myself having to pay for a consultation to have the TDR filled out. I later did have to pay full price for it - $75, only to have Centrelink try to loose it and refuse to give it to my next JCA assessment officer or scan it to their own records.
Eventually, the Osteopath told me that he had not made the report to the GP, but had been contacted by AB from On-Q HR and was waiting for him to return his call. He stated that he would give information to him about my case, for my DSP application. I left it up to that process, that On-Q HR would create a report regarding the Osteopath's diagnosis and opinion, as opposed to getting a TDR from him. On-Q HR's set of questions to the Osteopath later seemed to have held no weight in my application, due to not proving enough evidence of my illness and treatments, for them to have been considered to be proven.
Thirdly, you state that On-Q HR still claim that the Appointment Outcomes forms are correct as they are. I claim otherwise. You side with them. You ignore that I have previously stated that I worked on one of those days, and was moving into a new rental property on another. I have looked for the relevant payslip, and have not yet found it. Don't forget that I was homeless for 7 months, due to the corrupt actions of AB, with my possessions scattered amongst three different places, and many of which had to be left behind and/or were lost. Least of all my 16 year old daughter. I could obtain copies of same though, and witnesses to moving day events.
On-Q HR could have claimed that they recorded those fortnightly appointments because, even though I was voluntary, I had agreed to fortnightly phone interviews. They could have claimed that they were entitled to some payment for doing the things they were to assist me with. Yet, I had to do all of the agreements on the EPP without any assistance from them. In fact, when the EPP was updated when SD handed me over to AB, the update was that the onus was taken off On-Q HR to do all those things and placed onto myself. Also added was that AB would ‘provide comprehensive assessment and resourcing to address non-vocational barriers to employment’, but could only suggest counseling. An incorrect decision since he later states that there is no evidence of any mental illness in me, and all of my issues were related to accommodation and physical issues. Where is that assessment, where are all the resources he organised for me?
In relation to the two EPP's dated 24 March and 15 April 2010:
1. I found myself permanent accommodation, and after AB's suggestion of temporary crisis accommodation. I had a six month lease which I was forced to break due to AB's later 'arrangement' with the JCA officer.
2. I downloaded forms for social housing and tried to lodge them. I was told I would have to wait 2 months due to restructuring. I went back then to lodge them again, and was told they now had a new form, and I had to complete that instead. I did so and lodged same. I would have too request Department of Housing records to obtain reference numbers for same, and the dates that they were lodged. In the first instance, I did lodge the forms for Housing Commission, as that was a requirement for applying for social housing.
3. I could not collect information for my DSP application, because AB had stalled the process for the period of three months, while he withheld the application forms and failed to contact the Osteopath to obtain a report for and behalf of On-Q HR. I did not set the ball rolling with the GP to start tests, until I had the DSP forms and Osteopath's report back.
4. I did find myself part-time work. AB did find me one potential job, cleaning, which contradicts the other update to the EPP, that it not exacerbate my injuries. He does not record in the files though calling me about that job, and I refused it anyway. I applied for a job doing the same type of work, the next day, because it was obvious once again On-Q HR were not able to be of any help again on that issue.
5. On-Q HR recorded in the file that they did do various things on my behalf in relation to social housing, but none of those records are true.
6. I did not bother to attend counseling. This is because I was busy trying to fix the issues I was facing. I was still looking for an easy job I could do, via the internet. I was attending viewings of rental properties and honestly explaining my predicament to them. I was applying for social housing. I had no mental illness to be treated or diagnosed. I was stressed by my issues, and firstly lack of advice regarding any safety nets, and later when they were revealed, reluctance by On-Q HR staff to honestly try to rush or even assist me into same.
Why are there no On-Q HR records relating to my last job, at the XXXX Court Motel? On other instances they recorded a start date on the same day that I started work. Three weeks went by without them advising DEEWR that I had recommenced working. AB even falsely states during this period that he advises me against doing that work. But it was the only thing which got me out of crisis accommodation and into something permanent.
I no longer acknowledge the EPP document as having been signed by myself. The signature is on a separate page to the written agreement. The date written under my signature on one of them was not written by myself. I have never been able to make sense of, or understand why I would have signed, the wordings on the first page of that document.
In December of 2009, On-Q HR staff forged my details and signature onto consent forms, to keep me on their program, without my knowledge. I had lodged a letter of resignation the month before, so they knew I might not be wanting to sign up again. When I was released again from their program by a JCA report dated March 2010, they finally told me about the DSP and social housing. They advised me to apply for both. Once I had agreed to stay with them, based on them assisting me with those issues foremost, they deliberately failed to provide me with an honest or proper standard of service.
With all of the above in mind, and proven by the accompanying documentation, I wish to advise you that I no longer care what you decide. You have already limited my complaint to the least investigation possible, and found in favour of the guilty, on all counts. In fact, every department has denied me any kind of favourable decision, and I believe that is so I have nothing to show in court, to bring a case against On-Q HR.
However, since I prefer not to have to launch my own case against them in a civil court, I will now simply apply for compensation from Centrelink/DEEWR for failing to monitor this agency that they had contracted me to. Also, for the inconvenience and hardships suffered while Centrelink sought to harass me, rather than rectify the issues in my favour, again to protect On-Q HR from my threatened legal action.
This could have been settled eight months ago, had I been allowed access to their file. It clearly demonstrates that AB lied to the JCA officer on 27 July 2010, as most of the records within the file indicate that I was ill for most of the 12 months that I was on their program. It also later turned out that I had been on the wrong medication, which I had been using sparingly prior to the months leading up to these events, but then was taking almost daily to keep myself working at the XXXX XXXX Motel, which contributed to my volatile reaction at the time. What excuse does On-Q HR have for their actions? So far, all they have offered is more lies and deceit to explain their initial lies and deceits.
I had every right to get angry at AB and shout at him. Mostly because he dared to ring me and smirk at my situation, and expect me to continue to stay on their program, when it had become glaringly apparent that they did not have my best interests in mind. Only their own profits and ambitions. I wanted them to finally get the message. That they were incompetent leeches who, instead of supporting me, were actually getting in my way of achieving any change in my circumstance. Yet they applied for an AVO based on that two months afterwards? And you also wish to ignore that?
Please see attached information supporting all of the complaints/allegations I have made about these events with On-Q HR. These, plus other documents already submitted to yourself, will form the evidence of my complaint in a higher arena than your office. Your opinion on what laws they did break in relation to same events, no longer matters to me. We both know that they are guilty of breach of contract, by way of unconscionable acts, which is a compensatory offence in any terms.
Yours sincerely
Tracey
Please find two attachments:
Falsities contained within the On-Q HR File
Appointment Outcomes Report
Please advise if there are any documents, which are referred to, but which you do not have a copy.
It had taken 7-8 months of making applications and having to fight the rejections to be allowed to view the file. My FOI rights were denied all through. Once I did have the evidence I created the above mentioned reports about their inaccuracies. Proof of these allegations had previously been sent to this Office, and others.
I had originally complained to the Privacy Commissioner in October 2010. The result of their investigation into these matters, and more, has been to exhonerate the employment agency completely.
I have been advised that it is now up to me to challenge that finding in the Federal Court, if I want to have any of these charges found instead to be proven.
This email addresses the reasons he quoted to me when he advised he was about to close the file on my complaint, unless I submitted more evidence, and find them innocent. I have been advised today that they are still choosing to appear to be blind.
Dear Mr JXXXXX
I acknowledge your last letter and its contents. I wish to advise, however, that I am finished with this game of pass the buck and denial of any responsibility for the acts of misconduct committed by On-Q Human Resources and Centrelink staff, against myself.
We both know that these organisations broke many laws, and you are aware of what they are. I do not need to read your brochures and play another game of me having to describe their actions within your own terms. Especially when one considers all relevant agencies are so reluctant to conduct any fair investigation, or follow through with any action.
You claim that On-Q HR is allowed to loose one form. But you fail to address the matter of AB withholding the forms from me for so long in the first place. With the aid of the On-Q records, I am able to demonstrate the date he asked me to drop the forms to him, phone requests to retrieve same, and finally his note that he had just left them at reception for me to collect.
He did in fact loose two forms. The DSP application package consists of three booklets. The TDR, Personal Details and Income and Assets. AB only returned the TDR. Three minus two equals the loss of two documents. You also fail to address any foul play within this process, as handled by him.
You state that I did give him permission to contact my Osteopath. You quote a consent form which I had already pointed out was a forgery. I have always admitted that I gave him permission to collect verbal information from my Osteopath, for me to hand in with a DSP application, at his suggestion that I should “take a letter from us (On-Q) to the chiro (Osteo) to gain specific info” (On-Q file record dated 6/5/10).
However, at no time did I give him permission to take three months to do this. I also did not give him permission to keep my DSP forms for three months, and had in fact requested that he return them promptly for lodgement by myself.
What is most obvious though is that I would not have given him permission to fail to share that information with me in an unfactual manner, once he did obtain it. I did not give him permission to withhold a printed copy of it from me and/or the JCA officer. I did not give him permission to misquote it, and then try to hide it.
AB admits in the On-Q records that he has the information, which had been faxed to him the day prior by my Osteopath, and emailed the Osteopath to thank him on 26 July. This was at 3pm. That gave AB 2 hours of that day to phone me and tell me that he had the report, in time for the JCA the following day. He had that same two hours, plus until 12 noon the next day, to do the same. He had those same 5 hours to have printed out the report onto On-Q HR letterhead, as I had indicated in a response to his query as to what to do with it, once he received the report.
Why did he not have that report waiting at reception for me the following day, ready for my JCA interview? Why did he approach the JCA assessor, hours before my appointment with her, and advise her that I had no evidence of my illness when he had that report in his possession? Why did he not give her a copy of the report for her records, to back up her reasons for a rejection of my DSP application?
He states in the On-Q files on 27 July 2010, that he "spoke with JCA due to assess TB and briefed her on the scenario". He does not record that he completed his task, regarding the collecting of my medical information/evidence, by giving it to the JCA as part of my DSP application, as per the EEP dated on 15 March 2010. She was there that day, working out of the On-Q HR office, her company's registered address in Tweed Heads. Or did he phone her before she came down? If they met in person, he had no reason not to give it to her. He only mentions speaking to her about there being no evidence.
However, at my JCA interview the following day, the JCA officer claimed that she did know AB. She had never met him, nor spoken to him, she claimed. She later claimed that she had no knowledge of a report from an Osteopath. When I got a copy from the Osteopath, she claimed that she had since met AB and he had told her that I did not want the report submitted. Yet I had been on the phone to my Osteopath, trying to get a copy, since AB claimed his report contradicted everything he had ever said to me, and to be able to get same report to her.
You also do not address the issue of AB phoning me and advising me of the result of my DSP application, before I attended a JCA interview. It was not his decision, nor his role to advise of same. Why did he breach procedure in that way? Why was in he such a hurry to tie things up regarding Newstart and work exemptions? Even the JCA officer tried to deny that I could have had that conversation with AB, as no one could have known the outcome, as she had only began her role of assessment, earlier on that same day.
The copy of that document which appears later in my appeals process, is still not the one that I gave to the JCA assessor. I deliberately scanned it onto my computer, with the Osteopath’s name, qualifications, and contact details onto the second page in the form of his business card. AB and I were the only people who had one on plain paper. Which means that the one that showed up later is the one I submitted for my ARO appeal, and was the one I had submitted to Centrelink.
So where did a copy of the one I sent to the JCA officer go to? If AB lost the information from the Osteopath, and that is why he did not give her a copy on On-Q HR letterhead, then that would constitute another breach of the one off loss of documents rule.
The Osteopath was mentioned in my DSP application forms, and his contact details given there, as a second medical opinion. No one contacted him, yet in the On-Q HR files, the email sent to him from AB states that his ‘educated’ opinion will ‘determine the outcome of her imminent JCA’ (see AB’s emails to Osteopath).
AB records in the On-Q file that when he suggested contacting my Osteopath for information, I informed him that I had a second TDR, from the DSP pack, and would be asking him to complete it. However, I stated that he was to make a report to my GP, and I would first endeavor to get that document, to save myself having to pay for a consultation to have the TDR filled out. I later did have to pay full price for it - $75, only to have Centrelink try to loose it and refuse to give it to my next JCA assessment officer or scan it to their own records.
Eventually, the Osteopath told me that he had not made the report to the GP, but had been contacted by AB from On-Q HR and was waiting for him to return his call. He stated that he would give information to him about my case, for my DSP application. I left it up to that process, that On-Q HR would create a report regarding the Osteopath's diagnosis and opinion, as opposed to getting a TDR from him. On-Q HR's set of questions to the Osteopath later seemed to have held no weight in my application, due to not proving enough evidence of my illness and treatments, for them to have been considered to be proven.
Thirdly, you state that On-Q HR still claim that the Appointment Outcomes forms are correct as they are. I claim otherwise. You side with them. You ignore that I have previously stated that I worked on one of those days, and was moving into a new rental property on another. I have looked for the relevant payslip, and have not yet found it. Don't forget that I was homeless for 7 months, due to the corrupt actions of AB, with my possessions scattered amongst three different places, and many of which had to be left behind and/or were lost. Least of all my 16 year old daughter. I could obtain copies of same though, and witnesses to moving day events.
On-Q HR could have claimed that they recorded those fortnightly appointments because, even though I was voluntary, I had agreed to fortnightly phone interviews. They could have claimed that they were entitled to some payment for doing the things they were to assist me with. Yet, I had to do all of the agreements on the EPP without any assistance from them. In fact, when the EPP was updated when SD handed me over to AB, the update was that the onus was taken off On-Q HR to do all those things and placed onto myself. Also added was that AB would ‘provide comprehensive assessment and resourcing to address non-vocational barriers to employment’, but could only suggest counseling. An incorrect decision since he later states that there is no evidence of any mental illness in me, and all of my issues were related to accommodation and physical issues. Where is that assessment, where are all the resources he organised for me?
In relation to the two EPP's dated 24 March and 15 April 2010:
1. I found myself permanent accommodation, and after AB's suggestion of temporary crisis accommodation. I had a six month lease which I was forced to break due to AB's later 'arrangement' with the JCA officer.
2. I downloaded forms for social housing and tried to lodge them. I was told I would have to wait 2 months due to restructuring. I went back then to lodge them again, and was told they now had a new form, and I had to complete that instead. I did so and lodged same. I would have too request Department of Housing records to obtain reference numbers for same, and the dates that they were lodged. In the first instance, I did lodge the forms for Housing Commission, as that was a requirement for applying for social housing.
3. I could not collect information for my DSP application, because AB had stalled the process for the period of three months, while he withheld the application forms and failed to contact the Osteopath to obtain a report for and behalf of On-Q HR. I did not set the ball rolling with the GP to start tests, until I had the DSP forms and Osteopath's report back.
4. I did find myself part-time work. AB did find me one potential job, cleaning, which contradicts the other update to the EPP, that it not exacerbate my injuries. He does not record in the files though calling me about that job, and I refused it anyway. I applied for a job doing the same type of work, the next day, because it was obvious once again On-Q HR were not able to be of any help again on that issue.
5. On-Q HR recorded in the file that they did do various things on my behalf in relation to social housing, but none of those records are true.
6. I did not bother to attend counseling. This is because I was busy trying to fix the issues I was facing. I was still looking for an easy job I could do, via the internet. I was attending viewings of rental properties and honestly explaining my predicament to them. I was applying for social housing. I had no mental illness to be treated or diagnosed. I was stressed by my issues, and firstly lack of advice regarding any safety nets, and later when they were revealed, reluctance by On-Q HR staff to honestly try to rush or even assist me into same.
Why are there no On-Q HR records relating to my last job, at the XXXX Court Motel? On other instances they recorded a start date on the same day that I started work. Three weeks went by without them advising DEEWR that I had recommenced working. AB even falsely states during this period that he advises me against doing that work. But it was the only thing which got me out of crisis accommodation and into something permanent.
I no longer acknowledge the EPP document as having been signed by myself. The signature is on a separate page to the written agreement. The date written under my signature on one of them was not written by myself. I have never been able to make sense of, or understand why I would have signed, the wordings on the first page of that document.
In December of 2009, On-Q HR staff forged my details and signature onto consent forms, to keep me on their program, without my knowledge. I had lodged a letter of resignation the month before, so they knew I might not be wanting to sign up again. When I was released again from their program by a JCA report dated March 2010, they finally told me about the DSP and social housing. They advised me to apply for both. Once I had agreed to stay with them, based on them assisting me with those issues foremost, they deliberately failed to provide me with an honest or proper standard of service.
With all of the above in mind, and proven by the accompanying documentation, I wish to advise you that I no longer care what you decide. You have already limited my complaint to the least investigation possible, and found in favour of the guilty, on all counts. In fact, every department has denied me any kind of favourable decision, and I believe that is so I have nothing to show in court, to bring a case against On-Q HR.
However, since I prefer not to have to launch my own case against them in a civil court, I will now simply apply for compensation from Centrelink/DEEWR for failing to monitor this agency that they had contracted me to. Also, for the inconvenience and hardships suffered while Centrelink sought to harass me, rather than rectify the issues in my favour, again to protect On-Q HR from my threatened legal action.
This could have been settled eight months ago, had I been allowed access to their file. It clearly demonstrates that AB lied to the JCA officer on 27 July 2010, as most of the records within the file indicate that I was ill for most of the 12 months that I was on their program. It also later turned out that I had been on the wrong medication, which I had been using sparingly prior to the months leading up to these events, but then was taking almost daily to keep myself working at the XXXX XXXX Motel, which contributed to my volatile reaction at the time. What excuse does On-Q HR have for their actions? So far, all they have offered is more lies and deceit to explain their initial lies and deceits.
I had every right to get angry at AB and shout at him. Mostly because he dared to ring me and smirk at my situation, and expect me to continue to stay on their program, when it had become glaringly apparent that they did not have my best interests in mind. Only their own profits and ambitions. I wanted them to finally get the message. That they were incompetent leeches who, instead of supporting me, were actually getting in my way of achieving any change in my circumstance. Yet they applied for an AVO based on that two months afterwards? And you also wish to ignore that?
Please see attached information supporting all of the complaints/allegations I have made about these events with On-Q HR. These, plus other documents already submitted to yourself, will form the evidence of my complaint in a higher arena than your office. Your opinion on what laws they did break in relation to same events, no longer matters to me. We both know that they are guilty of breach of contract, by way of unconscionable acts, which is a compensatory offence in any terms.
Yours sincerely
Tracey
Please find two attachments:
Falsities contained within the On-Q HR File
Appointment Outcomes Report
Please advise if there are any documents, which are referred to, but which you do not have a copy.