"Public Guardian's Office Looting Estates--with a Little Help from the Judge"

The Public Guardian's office in Riverside has been caught red- handed embezzling funds, it appears. And it is apparently going to get away with it.

The Public Guardian's office is pledged with the task of acting as conservator over estates belonging to the elderly and/or disabled and also acts as Trustee in other estate matters. In a recent routine accounting in Riverside Superior Probate Court concerning the Amalie Phelan Trust, a notation appeared in the attorney's time records, indicating she had leached off funds without court approval and had apparently falsified the accountings to cover this up.

Attorney Toni Eggebraaten has declined to answer questions about this notation in her time records, which points the finger towards embezzlement of funds and falsification of court records. She has stated that the Public Guardian's office has pooled a number of estates, an act specifically prohibited by probate code 16009 and cites this pooling as a reason not to open up the records to examination.

Another probate code exonerates the Public Guardian's office from the necessity of keeping funds separate, however. The pooling of funds essentially occludes what would otherwise be a straightforward matter of reconciling checks with bank statements. Eggebraaten further raised alarm when she supplied minimal discovery in the form of some checks and then redacted (blacked out) a number of names of payees as well as bank cancellation information and the signature of the endorser on these checks, in more attempts to hide the transactions taking place in this accounting.

But it was business as usual in Riverside Probate Court last week. Eggebraaten's alleged embezzlement was reported to the sitting Probate Judge, Thomas Cahraman, who ignored the fact that there are active subpoenas, yet to be satisfied, for Union Bank records which could resolve the issue of alleged embezzlement.

In a rush to judgement, Cahraman took the matter under consideration and then quickly issued a ruling which does not even touch on the matter of the implied embezzlement, and approved the accountings filed in this matter, which involves the decedent's estate of Dr. Amalie Phelan, a former conservatee. "The Public Guardian's office handles money for a lot of disabled and elderly people," states Janet Phelan, who discovered the notation and filed objections with the court. "These people may not have anyone to even check the accountings for them and are entirely dependent on the integrity of the Public Guardian's office." "The court has stolen around $800,000 from me," alleges Janet Phelan, who is a beneficiary of this Trust and caught the attorney's notation after examining the accountings prior to their being approved by the court.

"They have nearly cleaned me out." Phelan is pro per and states she does not have enough money to hire an attorney. Phelan refuses to speculate as to why Judge Cahraman approved obviously fraudulent accountings. "This judge has already showed us what he was all about back in 2009," she states, "when as Presiding Judge he refused to investigate compelling indications that the Riverside judges were laundering bribes and pay offs through their property loans."

Phelan, who is an investigative reporter, broke the story of the loan scam in the San Bernardino County Sentinel in September of 2009. "A little digging and we came to the realization that Cahraman's loans are also questionable," she states. "The judge is on the take, the PG´s office is looting the estates of Riverside County's most vulnerable citizens and Barack Obama is bailing out Wall Street," she said. "Let's get clear on what is going on here. The little guy is being raped and no one in power will lift a finger to stop this.

""My Imprisoned Wife" - Queensland OPG Imprisons Wife of 28 Years and Loots Family Estate"

I, a man going by the name Chris, a free man, over the age of twenty-one years, competent to witness, do affirm and say that I have first hand knowledge of the facts stated herein:

I am husband to the woman known as My Imprisoned Wife.  I have been married to My Imprisoned Wife for 28 years.  My Imprisoned Wife began to show signs of her disability four years ago.  I believe this disability is still to be properly diagnosed and qualified.  I believe this to be a condition called post traumatic stress syndrome.  I alone have been caring for My Imprisoned Wife while she has this condition.  On 2nd March 2011 My Imprisoned Wife had an episode where she presented her anger and had to be restrained.  I believe her anger was the result of withdrawal symptoms after ceasing her medication.  This medication was ??????????. 

On the evening of 2nd March 2011 I made an attempt to contact by phone four different support groups but each call went to a message-bank.  In a state of exhaustion I contacted Nambour Hospital on 3rd March 2011 for overnight help so I could obtain a nights rest to recover from the previous night’s lack of sleep.  This error of judgement began a nightmare for My Imprisoned Wife and I as she has been a PRISONER OF THE STATE ever since ...

"Man's death in aged care home referred to Coroner"

POLICE will refer the death of a 92-year-old man at the Grafton Aged Care Home in South Grafton on Wednesday night to the Coroner for further investigation.

Media outlets said staff at the facility called police when the man was found dead in his bed about 10.30pm with minor facial injuries which would not be explained.

Inspector Murray Gillett from Grafton police confirmed that no one had been charged over the death and the matter was being referred to the Coroner.

The Daily Examiner left a message for the manager of the Grafton Aged Care Home but the call was not returned.

Prime7 said on Thursday night that staff at the facility were devastated by the circumstances of the death. (Source : http://www.dailyexaminer.com.au/news/mans-death-in-aged-care-home-referred-to-coroner/1581205/)

"Woman's death shines spotlight on aged care"

A New South Wales family is demanding increased staffing levels for aged care in regional Australia after a coronial inquest into the death of a 91-year-old woman.

Martha McKee died of asphyxiation at the Mid Richmond Aged Care facility at Coraki, near Lismore, on July 28, 2010.

She died on a night when there were only two staff members caring for 45 residents.

Ms McKee was treasured by her family, and her 91st birthday was another milestone in a long and contented life.

"It was happy times. She just loved that birthday party. I will never forget that," her daughter Judy Keepance said.

"We were just smiling and taking photos."

Ms McKee was known by her nickname Bub. She lived all her life in northern New South Wales and was happiest when surrounded by her family.

"I actually got to say a few times that I loved her very, very much and that she meant the world to me," Ms Keepance remembered.

But Ms McKee's 91st birthday was the last time her family would see her alive.

Ms McKee was a high-care resident at the Mid Richmond Aged Care facility.

She had very little mobility and sought comfort from little things, as her dementia deepened.

"You are trusting, you are putting your loved one in a place. You are trusting they get the best of care," Ms Keepance said.

It was the earlier hours of the morning and there were two staff on duty on Ms McKee's final night: Judith Robson, a carer, whose registration as an enrolled nurse had lapsed; and Patricia Sawtell, a 20-year-old carer, who was on her very first night shift.

The Coroner, Magistrate Robyn Denes, found "Ms Robson was effectively on her own caring for 45 residents".

Ms Robson and Ms Sawtell checked on Ms McKee at 2:50am.

She had bed poles on her bed to help pull herself up.

Ms Robson later told police she spoke with Ms McKee before leaving the room.

"It's a long time before the morning. You need to get some more sleep. I'll see you in the morning," Ms Robson told police she said.

Martha McKee's death

But some time in the early hours of the morning on July 28, 2010, Ms McKee fell out of bed.

The two carers opened the door at 5am to find Ms McKee lying on the floor.

She had fallen out of bed, taking her mattress with her. Her neck was trapped by the bed pole.

"I saw Martha and saw she was wax-work white. I turned the light on and it was absolutely horrific. I could tell that she was dead," Ms Robson said in her police statement.

But Judith Robson did not check for any signs of life. She and Patricia Sawtell closed the door and telephoned their supervisor.

Ms Keepance says her mum might have been alive.

It's very important that people know she's not a number. She was our mother, my mother. And we miss her. We miss her very much.

Judy Keepance

"Mum might have been alive. And they could not go in there and check for basic signs of life and take the bed stick off her neck. I am shocked. I am furious," she said.

Ms Robson was the president of the local Surf Lifesaving Club and was trained in first aid.

But Ms McKee was left lying on the floor for another hour, before a nurse checked if she was dead.

"So, I will always wonder. If something could be done. If she was alive, something could be done to save her life," Ms Keepance said.

The Coroner found it was unclear exactly what time Ms McKee died or how long she may have suffered.

"What I can say is that, had she still been alive, she may have been able to have been resuscitated," Magistrate Denes said.

Police were called to the nursing home and the room was sealed off.

Ms Keepance was allowed in. She said goodbye to her mother and promised to find out what happened.

"I just told her that I loved her. And sort it out, I will," she said.

Regional standards

This case reveals a series of concerns about the standards of aged care, particularly in regional areas.

The Coroner expressed concerns about the staffing levels, even though they were legal.

"One carer to the 45 residents at Mid Richmond, as it was in July 2010, is unsatisfactory even if it meets the legislative requirements," he said.

At the time of Ms McKee's death, Mid Richmond was classified as a low-care facility, and its managers were not required to have a registered nurse on duty.

But the Coroner found that about 20 of the 45 residents were in fact high-care.

Unlike child care, there are no minimum staffing ratios for aged care.

Brett Holmes from the New South Wales Nurses Association says low staffing levels can place residents at risk.

"The size of the facilities in rural areas often means that they have fairly minimal staffing. And, as in this case, have a period of time elapse before you're able to get back around the rest of the facility to check on everyone," he said.

Aged care activists, like Linda Sparrow from Aged Care Crisis, say elderly Australians deserve better.

"In fact they are just as vulnerable as very young children, who have been not so long born," she said.

"And yet we don't seem to provide the care and attention at the end of life as we do at the very start of life, and I find that very troubling.

"People in aged care homes have the right to care, protection, to have their say, all the things that the rest of us take for granted."

'Appropriate staffing'

The owner of the facility, Baptist Community Services (BCS) declined to be interviewed, but released a statement.

"Based on our extensive experience operating aged care facilities, we maintain that our staffing at Coraki on the night in question was appropriate," it read.

"We also support our staff members who were involved during the events surrounding Mrs McKee's tragic death."

The association representing aged care providers declined to discuss staffing levels in the industry. It also released a statement.

"Aged and Community Services Australia wishes to offer its sincere condolences to the family of Martha McKee," it read.

"ACSA has nothing further to add to the Coroner's report of 26 August 2011."

The Coroner also questioned why bed poles had been fitted to Ms McKee's bed.

7.30 has obtained a Department of Health and Ageing advisory, issued six weeks before Ms McKee's death, warning about their dangers.

"She couldn't do anything physically and they shouldn't have been on her bed," Ms Keepance said.

"BCS were found to have been in breach of their responsibilities under the Aged Care Act."

But Baptist Community Services defended its use of the bed pole.

"A risk assessment was conducted on Ms McKee's use of the KA524 bed pole. It was determined that this was an appropriate aid for her to continue to utilise," it said in a statement.

BCS has since removed bed poles from its facilities, and retrained its staff in first aid. 

Audio: Listen to the story (PM)   (Source : http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-08/elderly-womans-death-shines-spotlight-on-aged-care/4186002)

"Why are family members being banned from visiting their relatives in nursing homes?"

Huguette Hebert was banned for a day from seeing her husband at a continuing care facility after she asked to stay in the room while he was changed to see if he had bedsores. (CBC)  Listen

Families of seniors in some care homes in Alberta have been banned from seeing their loved ones and say - short of going to court - which some are now doing, there is no way to appeal decisions made by staff at those homes.

Huguette Hebert visited her husband in an Alberta nursing home and asked to watch while his diaper was changed. She was concerned about bedsores. Not only was she told she couldn't watch -- she was made to leave. Here's how she describes that day:

"New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal - Appeal Panel"

The Guardianship Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal[i] is where people who have had guardianship orders placed upon them can apply to have them revoked or changed.  This is only supposed to  happen when there is either nobody to care for the person.  Unfortunately, locking people up in Aged Care and or Residential facilities is extremely lucrative for all those involved - from the NGO who gets paid to "care" for the client, the solicitors appointed by the government who are supposed to act on behalf of the government and both the Guardianship Tribunals and the Public Guardians also. 

In studying various cases, there seems to be an extraordinary amount of human rights violations, whereby the Guardianship Tribunal, the Trustee and the Administrative Tribunal appear to be in collusion with each other in order to keep a person and their property under their absolute control.

No right to choose your own legal representation.

As a general rule, NCAT refuses to allow persons to have legal representation stating “the general rule in the Guardianship Division is that a party has the carriage of his or her own case and is not entitled to be represented by any other person”. [ii]

However “a party may be represented by another person only if the Tribunal grants leave for the person to represent the party”. [iii]

This means that you do not have any entitlement to legal representation to appeal any Guardianship Tribunal decision, unless the Guardianship Tribunal says you can.  And even then, it will only be if the Tribunal allows that particular legal representative to represent you.

Former intensive care doctor warns government against merging public guardian and trustee

Professor Tom Faunce: "You never want to get into a situation where life and death decisions are hanging because of financial considerations."

ANU law professor and former intensive care doctor Tom Faunce has urged the government not to merge the offices of public guardian and public trustee, warning it could confuse crucial medical decisions.

"Public Guardians WorldWide Kidnapping and Trafficking People for Money"

naziflowersIt seems to be another one of those worldwide issues with governments trafficking in people yet again.  People all over the world are complaining about the money and their families being stolen by the Public Guardian, or Courts of the Protector etc.  They claim that documents are falsified, that judges are colluding with tribunals and that embezzlement is the norm.

How can our governments and our international tribunals continue to allow this when just the idea of people being trafficked makes us sick.  The thought that our own governments are doing it to the most vulnerable - elderly and disabled persons - and all for the seizure and use / sell of that persons assets is dispicable.

"30 August 2012 - Office of the Public Guardian re EMILY BROWN"

Dear Ms MacDonald

I am replying to your email of 13 August 2012 regarding Ms Emily Brown.

This office currently manages Ms Brown's financial matters. As far as I'm aware there are no current proceedings in relation to Ms Brown. Under Privacy legislation I cannot answer your questions relating to Ms Brown's finances without her authority to do so. Ms Brown has not authorised the release of information to you.

Most of the information you have requested regarding Ms Brown's current address can only be answered by Ms Brown's guardian. The Public Guardian has been appointed as Ms Brown's guardian and you will need to refer your questions regarding her curent address and access to Ms Brown to the Public Guardian. The address for the Public Guardian is Locked Bag 5116 Parramatta 2124 or alternatively you can email them at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

"31 August 2012 - Office of the Public Guardian re EMILY BROWN"


To Whom It May Concern,

Please find below-listed a revised set of questions that I seek the answer to regarding my friend Emily Brown, who is being kept in an undisclosed location, with, as far as I know, the only people knowing her whereabouts are the government and or its agents.

The questions listed here-below do not have any privacy requirements, as I am not asking for personal information - and they are a matter that would apply to each and every person who is being held by the public guardian, however (for now) I seek the answers only for Miss Brown. Please provide the answers to these questions and I would like to think that as a representative of people who are under the “care” of the government, that you be freely disclosing this information in the interest of transparency and accountability, and not to appear that you are hindering our investigation.

3254 -Legislative Assembly Questions and Answers - Tuesday 15 July 2008 - Guardianship Hearing for Emily Brown - Ms Katrina Hodgkinson asked the Minister for Community Services

(1) How many DoCS staff attended the Guardianship Tribunal hearing regarding the custody of Emily Brown?
(2) What is the employment position description of each of the DoCS staff attending this hearing?
(3) (a) Did any barristers and solicitors, retained by DoCS, attend this hearing?  (b) If so how many?
(4) What was the total cost to DoCS, including legal fees, for attending this hearing?


(1) Three.
(2) The Manager Casework was the applicant, the Manager Client Services attended as supervising officer and the Director Intensive Support Services was present due to the very complex nature of this case and at the specific request of the Guardianship Tribunal.
(3) DoCS was legally represented by a DoCS lawyer.
(4) No legal fees were incurred and the attendance of DoCS officers was seen as a normal part of their duties in relation to ongoing casework. No special costs were incurred in relation to this hearing.

Source : http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/la/lapaper.nsf/0/84AB3CC8C055E870CA257486001FC9CC/$file/081-QA-S.pdf

Guardianship Act 1987 - Sect 4 - General Principles

It is the duty of everyone exercising functions under this Act with respect to persons who have disabilities to observe the following principles:

(a) the welfare and interests of such persons should be given paramount consideration,
(b) the freedom of decision and freedom of action of such persons should be restricted as little as possible,
(c) such persons should be encouraged, as far as possible, to live a normal life in the community,
(d) the views of such persons in relation to the exercise of those functions should be taken into consideration,
(e) the importance of preserving the family relationships and the cultural and linguistic environments of such persons should be recognised,
(f) such persons should be encouraged, as far as possible, to be self-reliant in matters relating to their personal, domestic and financial affairs,
(g) such persons should be protected from neglect, abuse and exploitation,
(h) the community should be encouraged to apply and promote these principles.
Source : http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ga1987136/s4.html


  • Australian public guardian corruption

    Image result for guardianship corruptionThe following comments relate specifically to the Queensland entities QCAT (the kangaroo court) and the Queensland Public Trustee / Adult Guardian, however similar entities in other states and territories operate on essentially the same (lack of principles), consequently the exact same potentially applies to every Australian citizen who doesn't have a professionally prepared succession plan (ie at the very least an Enduring Power of Attorney and a Last Will and Testament).

    Be wary of 'I found it on the internet' forms as there are many instances where those have been successfully challenged by either avaricious family members, the kangaroo court or even 'proper' courts. On the other hand, a good lawyer (no I don't like that breed either but there is actually the rare decent one) can patch most of the loopholes that can be exploited by bottom-feeding grubs like that greedy brother-in-law or even worse, the kangaroo court. 

    I wish to warn everyone, including those carers who think looking after a stroke victim is too much trouble, or those who have the mistaken belief that there is any semblance of decency at the Public Trustee, or for that matter the Adult Guardian. I elect to use the term 'kangaroo court' because that utterly evil entity totally ignores legislation intended to regulate its operation. Its really nothing more than a source of victims for the extortion racket trading as the Public Trustee.

    Published decisions of the kangaroo court invariably put victims in the clutches of the Public Trustee where their assets are systematically plundered. Anyone who lives in their own home is likely to cop a shonky ACAT test since owner occupied homes are protected from the typically exorbitant and unregulated Public Trustee fees whereas an unoccupied home (ie when the owner has been consigned to a nursing establishment) are not protected. Clearly owner-occupied homes are unprofitable business so the Public Trustee plays any number of dirty tricks to rectify that situation. Neither the kangaroo court, the Adult Guardian or the Public Trustee have proper complaints management systems despite such being a legal requirement in Queensland. Whilst there are sham facilities, responses to complaints amount to 'cut and paste' of official publicity.

    There are reasons to believe Public Trustee complaints are routed directly to its legal department which then uses its victim's financial resources to protect the interests of the Public Trustee. There is no point complaining to the Queensland Ombudsman, the Crime and Corruption Commission, the Queensland Attorney General, the Federal Attorney General, the Legal Services Commission, the Discrimination Commission, the Information Commission or the Human Rights Commission because the standard response is 'the Public Trustee is immune'.

    Victim's funds held 'in trust'; are regarded as the property of the Public Trustee which levies horrendous fees that typically consume a million dollar estate within a few years. Unlike every other financial organization, no auditing is performed since some moronic politician in times past 'deemed' the Public Trustee competent. Media reporters who attempt to expose the activities of the unholy triune beast are warned by management that exposure of these entities is strictly verboten. In the past, stringent secrecy provisions were imposed, ostensibly in place 'to protect the vulnerable' but which were undoubtedly intended to hinder communication and collaboration between carers and victims.

    Over the past year a number of individuals have discovered ways to circumvent the maze and now there is a significant group committed to bringing these bureaucrazies (MIS-spelling intended) to account. Its not a straightforward task as the Public Trustee has infiltrated a lot of 'apparently' legitimate support organizations. For example, Carers Queensland openly admits to receiving financial support from the Public Trustee and the relationship between the Uniting Church and the Public Trustee is subject to some suspicion.Many senior citizen clubs are receiving Public Trustee money albeit after having been 'washed' through third parties like Caxton Street Legal Centre.

    A significant number of people have been sucked in by Public Trustee promotions claiming to provide a 'free' will making service. Yes well, it is true that the document is made without charge, but on condition that the Public Trustee is nominated as executor. When the principal carks it, the Public Trustee fees are usually sufficient to soak up every single cent.

    Typical fees are approximately five times what a private lawyer would charge to do the same work, and surely no sentient being believes private lawyers run a benevolent society. A report that was briefly published in the Queensland Sunday Mail concerned a disgruntled Public Trustee whistleblower who related details of an internal memo requiring all staff to drag on estate matters until the maximum possible fees has been levied. One particular case in which the beneficiary 'should' have inherited $1.3 million resulted in said beneficiary discovering the anticipated amount had been completely dissipated in fees. There are numerous other horror stories that need to be told but this probably isn't the correct forum. Bottom line is that everyone, regardless of how healthy they may be, is flirting with disaster if they don't have a professionally prepared succession plan in place.  Those who wish to explore Public Trustee  and kangaroo court misdeeds more fully can google 'Workers Bush Telegraph',  'Queensland Public Trustee Exposed'  and 'nswtgexposed'

    The Committee to expose the Public Trustee held the first of a series of pickets at Parliament House on Tuesday 16th January and will be continuing these at QCAT and the Public Trustee in due course. We've also contacted every politician in Queensland, the Queensland Law Society and the Queensland Bar Association.

    Next on the list are every senior citizens group, media reporter, magistrate, judge and politician in Australia. We are also preparing a group submission to the Crime and Corruption Commission and the United Nations Human Rights Council. The volume will be turned up until or unless the systematic abuse and misappropriation of victim's resources is stopped permanently, those whose estates have been plundered are compensated,.and the perpetuators exposed and penalized.

    Call me anytime 24 x 7.   We have a good team with substantial experience in battling the official crime gang. Despite what a lot of lawyers would have you believe, it is possible to beat the crooks. Only 5% of kangaroo tribunal matters are published, consequently only insiders know what is really going on.  My partner's victory is one that will never be published because it demonstrates just how corrupt are the kangaroo tribunal, Adult Guardian and Public Trustee.  There was also a very damning report on the guardianship racket in the Gold Coast Bulletin, Sydney Morning Herald and Melbourne Age last weekend.   I don't want or need to make anything out of my advocacy efforts, simply seeing people whacking the criminals is all the reward I need. 

    Oops, I neglected to include contact details. Actually I have left details elsewhere in this forum but you may not have read all my posts. Mobile 0488531824 is best. I'll answer it 24 x 7 providing I'm not asleep or out of mobile range.  Don't worry about the time because I'm often communicating with others around the world at all sorts of times.  Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. is also fine but ignore anything else I've published … I need to change email addresses regularly as the evil ones at the bottom of Queen Street keep giving my address to spammers.

    I receive a number of calls from this site regarding victims of the guardianship racket. Only a few leave messages here, the majority phone or text 0488531824. Quite often I or an associate in another state can assist with advice on procedures or referral to known trustworthy medical and / or legal professionals, but it needs to be recognized that the official perpetuators are both exceptionally well organized and well protected. Whilst only a handful of victims have secured victory, the main reason why so many lose is their refusal to do what it takes.

    There is a very steep learning curve involved, and that entails coming to grips with the realization that no politician, no watchdog, no media company and no community legal service will provide meaningful support. In 'some' cases the UN Human Rights Council, International Criminal Court, or international human rights organization will get onboard, however their criteria are such that only precious few will satisfy them.  In effect, unless you have a pathological obsession with winning, and the will to do whatever it takes, do yourself a favour and give up now. Personally I'd dearly love to see every victim of the guardianship racket get their life back, but after years in this game, I now realize that only one in a thousand will run the race. If perchance you are one in a thousand, call me ASAP.The Office of the Public Trustee is conducting what can only be described as officially-sanctioned organized crime. 

    This insidious and predatory organization has been endowed with total immunity and protection and it is consequently accountable to nobody. No media entity, no public sector or private sector watchdog, no church, and no politician is prepared to lift a finger against the PTQ. Typically, 'victim protection' is quoted as justification for non-disclosure of material which could potentially identify a victim, although it is blatantly obvious that restricting collaboration between victims and hiding deliberate fraud and embezzlement are the REAL reasons for non-disclosure directives. Mind you the contribution which the PTQ provides to consolidated revenue is such that no morally and financially bankrupt government could afford to lose the income stream. Legislation joins the PTQ to the non-constitutional QCAT kangaroo tribunal in every guardianship matter.

    The Office of the Adult Guardian which funded by, and is therefore effectively a branch of the PTQ, is also joined. This creates an unholy cabal which procures shonky medical and allied health reports certifying the victim suffers alzheimers dementia. Dementia is a valuable tool to the crime gang as it implies the victim is a danger to themself and others, and must be institutionalized forthwith. It just so happens that owner-occupied homes are non-profitable business as the PTQ cannot impose (MIS)management fees on owner-occupied homes. Separating owner and home is therefore imperative and there is no depth to which the PTQ will not stoop to achieve this objective.

    A major component of PTQ income is derived by its in-house legal department. Given the state government's demonstrated obsession with unaccountability, it is not surprising that the Legal Services Commission will not investigate public complaints regarding public sector lawyers. Furthermore, it is alleged that many if not most PTQ 'lawyers' do not possess the practicing certificate needed to practice law, although yet another legislative shenanigan provides that a practicing certificate is not necessary for 'lawyers' working for public sector entities.

    Compliance of senior citizen organizations and community legaal centres is assured by way of bribes which are believed to be bankrolled by the Gambling Benefit Fund. Not surprisingly, the PTQ gets to use this slush fund to induce what would otherwise be honorable entities to support the predatory antics of the PTQ. 

    Carers Queensland openly admits to accepting dirty money to produce a series of YouTube videos extolling the virtues of the OPG, PTQ and QCAT kangaroo tribunal, and Caxton Street Legal Service is also funded by the PTQ. An even more 'interesting' interesting example of PTQ skullduggery is its retention of spotters (typically social workers) in the hospital system. It is understood that these spotters are paid by cash deposits into offshore bank accounts to refer potential merchandise (PTQ internal term for victims with assets) to the QCAT kangaroo tribunal. Needless to say, the kangaroo tribunal invariably decides that the victims lack capacity to manage their own affairs and that there is family conflict and undue influence (both created by the kangaroo tribunal) which supports the decision made prior to any hearing to deliver the merchandise to the PTQ for asset plundering.

    The reader is invited to form his or her own opinion regarding the possibility / probability of further inducements by the PTQ for supply of the merchandise, although those who have personally witnessed interactions between PTQ operatives and kangaroo tribunal quasi-judges are in no doubt that there are 'interesting' features which lead to considerable apprehension about the relationships between the parties.  Despite almost complete media cover-up and protection of the PTQ and its incestuous cohorts, the odd snippet is mentioned. Several years ago, a Courier Mail reporter revealed a PTQ internal memo requiring all staff dealing with a deceased estate to delay settlement until the maximum possible fees had been imposed, and more recently another report exposed a matter in which the 'client' had been deceased for weeks before the NSWTG became aware of his plight. A comparable event occurred in the Brisbane northside suburb of Banyo in 2018, although there was no media coverage on that occasion. 

    In addition to the extortionate fees and charges mentioned in the previous post, there are also massive legal fees and charges which are never disclosed unless a victim dies or escapes the clutches of the guardianship racket.  There are only three known instances in Queensland of a victim regaining capacity to manage their own affairs, Bucknall QSC09-128, Maher QCA11-225 and Marmin G29078 in 2017. In all cases, the full extent of PTQ embezzlement was only discovered months after the victory.  In a current matter, the PTQ is believed to have helped itself to some four million dollars of the victim's fifteen million dollar estate, however numerous requests for provision of complete financial statements have all been totally ignored. Something worth mentioning is that the PTQ legal department is permitted and even encouraged by the kangaroo tribunal to use the victim's money to fight the victims attempts to escape the PTQ / guardianship racket web, however despite legislation providing that a person with impaired capacity has automatic right to legal representation, the PTQ consistently refuses the victim access to their own funds to fight the PTQ / guardianship racket.

    Source : https://enableme.org.au/Community/Forums/View-topic?id=7cae0b95-e248-4401-aef8-a6490e701e77

    Article Count:
  • UK public guardian corruption
    Article Count:
  • US public guardian corruption
    Article Count: