Dear Sir / Madam,
I wish to make the following submission regarding the
contemptible treatment by the Guardianship Board the
trickery involved in securing ‘clients’ and
the mismanagement and depletion of our funds for the
past three years by the Protective Commissioner.
In summary, with regard to your Terms of
Reference I wish to advise the following
as the matters refer to our case:
(a) The OPC have managed to deplete our finances by
around $250,000 in a matter of 3 years through
negligence, and sheer singlemindedness in their
refusal to listen to any sensible suggestions put
forth by myself, my husband’s Attorney. They
have in fact cost us around $55,000 in interest with
the Bank of Queensland.
(b) The OPC has totally ignored needs and interests
of the person under their control and his relatives.
Not once in 3 years have they inquired as to my
husband’s wellbeing. Since they have no
jurisdiction over my husband they have no interest in
anything else except our money.
Though it would have been my husband’s wish to
have debts cleared immediately considering the
situation, they have ignored my pleas to do this for
three years and are now threatening to take away our
home under the guise of needing funds for future
maintenance of my husband.
They don’t take into account our needs, what was
normal practice for my husband. they don’t
‘consult’. They tell you what will happen whether
you like it or not. My opinion counts for nothing
whether it be on my own or my husband’s behalf.
Thirty years with my husband counts for nothing!
(c) Accountability and transparency are not words or
actions that refer to these offices. Questions of
missing funds, requests for assistance in recovering
embezzled funds, requests to have account charges
queried all meet with resistance and denial. They
cause problems for which they need legal advice- who
pays for this? The client!
(d) There are no effective complaint mechanisms in
place within either Office. I have requested reviews,
I have requested appeals, I have requested an
appointment with the Protective Commissioner, Ken
Gabb and for 3 years have been ignored. Complaints
fall on deaf ears. They ‘pass the buck’ ,
advise it "would not serve any purpose" or
plead inability to interfere.
(e) In this case the Public Guardian is not an issue
but the Body who appoints the Public Guardian and
Protective Commissioner are a law unto themselves.
They accept unsubstantiated ‘evidence’ at
tribunals, they accept opinions and concocted
evidence from unqualified unsworn strangers .
(f) I have no knowledge of this document therefore am
unable to make comment.
(g) Other related issues are following in this
submission.