updated 16 September 2008 13 30.30hrs 

Westpac Banking Corporation's FRAUD

Mr Strong, as counsel for Westpac, bluffed inside the court room, saying my understanding of compound interest is unique. Perhaps he has not learnt compound interest in his schooling! Mr Tim Goss has given in writing and with ombudsman (in response to my complaint, not enquiry) against my claim that they charge compound interest. These guys repeatedly confirmed, and successfully hush up the case from entering in (a) legal database (b) from their own financial reports for the relevant periods, they filed with various authorities!!!

It will be interesting to check if National Australia Bank and Commonwealth Bank of Australia have shown the 2 court cases (judgement reserved on 18th June 2007 and 20 June 2007 respectively, myself and Praveen having a claim of $1billion in exemplary damages, the judgement came on 23 January 2008), in their financial reports falling between the dates!!!

Financial Reports Hush up:

As per the accounting standards, the bank prepared half yearly financial statement, (lodged and published their report), they have to disclose existence of court cases against them (because no one knows?? how the decision would go!), the auditors have to certify these. Particularly when I sought exemplary damages, the cases details must be disclosed in Financial Reports.

You can check in www.westpac.com.au in the annual reports published my case details does not exist and auditors Pricewaterhousecoopers have either not been informed or they joined these bluffers or did not want to get into it!!

My first case C111/2007 Hariharan iyer Vs Westpac banking corporation was sent to VCAT on 19th Dec 2006, but due to foul play by Westpac or whatever reasons, the case was only registered on 9th Jan 2007 (otherwise if it was registered on 19th Dec 2006 the case details must go in financial reports for that period if there was one prepared) heard on 19th March 2007 where I claimed $1 billion in exemplary damages (so it is a significant case to be included in financial reports).

My second case was filed on 21st March 2007 C1937/2007 Hariharan Iyer Vs Westpac Banking Corporation for the national resolution manager of Westpac deliberately providing false misleading and deceptive statement that my loan account was not charged compound interest, I claimed the same $ 1 billion in exemplary damages. This case was registered on 30th March 2007.

This was heard on 10th May 2007 so definitely this case should have gone in their financial reports because as of 31st March 2007 the bank is only in the risk of losing the case and paying $1 billion, but was decided only on 10th May 2007, but this case also has not gone in financial reports but audited and certified!!!.

These two cases have not gone in the legal database (but now, I have placed it in 'view documents' page of this website the court transcription. (Each of them cost me money to be paid to the transcribing agents appointed by VCAT, and I selected one of the 6 agents).

Sequence of Events:

In fact, I did not have any case at all, if my initial query sent on line has been resolved appropriately. I requested for recalculating the interest on my home loan, (that I had with them for a very short period as I transferred to NAB later) and refund the difference (it came up to $1001.89, when I calculated myself, for that period I stayed with them).

At Westpac website, I lodged a complaint. Ms Robyn Clarke of Westpac rang to (she was pretty rude) tell me ‘you signed the contract, you are bound by it, now you cannot complain’ (her written reply attached). In fact, Ms Robyn Clarke of Westpac (see view documents) has been very tough on phone asking me to go to ombudsman, which I did.

So I lodged a complaint with Ombudsman. So Mr Tim Goss, on 16 November 2006, spoke to me for one hour (see view documents for minutes of conversation) and did not answer my question, 5 times every 10 minutes on that call, of simple interest/interest only on money lent or compound interest/ interest on interest, finally he wanted me to guess it myself and in his 4 pages letter (in view documents) he has reassured in at least 3 places that on my home loan I have been charged ONLY SIMPLE INTEREST!

This is a misleading statement in writing when I was disputing this point. It is definitely false (see view document CBA letter confirming the industry charging compound interest). It is a deceptive conduct as it has been done for gaining financial advantage over me, as per section 52 of Trade Practices Act 1974 or Section 9 of Fair Trading Act of Victoria. The Act covers even a 'likely' to mislead behaviour. But what I have produced in the court is (not about likely to mislead), definite mislead in writing in the process of resolving my complaint with ombudsman!!

Since no solicitor was prepared to take a case against the banks, I decided to go without legal representation. With my legal knowledge of teaching for 2 years, various Australian Law (including Trade Practices Act and Court Room Procedures), I filed my first case against Westpac Banking Corporation in Dec 2006 to recover my money.

Filed a case on 19th December 2006 with VCAT, but a caller from VCAT required me to withdraw my application under civil claims list and put it under credit list, advising me I am wrong. Later I demanded that my application be filed ONLY under civil claims list. I sent this fax on 23 dec 06. Normally a case is listed in a week and a number given to applicant and respondent, but for my application.

The casse was registered only on 9th Jan 07 with a schedule directions hearing for 22nd Feb 07.

On 19^th Feb 2007, I received a fax from Westpac’s solicitors wanting to speak to me before the hearing on 22^nd Feb. I sent the copy of the fax to VCAT for them to respond (as the bank has been already served notice of my case). As I was very sure that I didn’t want any outside court dealings with thieves, I did not contact them at all.

On 22^nd Feb 2007, Deputy President Ms B Steele of VCAT presided over the directions hearing (means, a pre hearing to plan of time and witness to be produced etc). She encouraged me to go for compulsory conference, in a confidential environment with the bank representative. She argued most part of our 1 hour against my case (as if she is representing Westpac. Westpac lawyers hardly spoke few words). On 22 Feb 2007 only 2 lawyers came on behalf of Westpac.

When I demanded interlocutory injunction (for Westpac Not to continue lending in Victoria until my cases is decided and determined, for the bank’s failure to comply with legislative requirements on Mandatory Comparison Rate effective 1^st July 2003). She asked me if she or VCAT has such powers. I affirmed. So she rang from her desk to her senior.

Immediately after speaking to her senior she suspended the court for a few minutes went down to meet someone and came back to advise me that VCAT has such powers and that she can schedule such hearing in 2 days or a hearing of the actual case on 19^th March 2007. Due to intervention and suggestion by Mr Praveen Rao (when I was seriously arguing with Ms B Steele), I took the option of 19^th March full hearing than injunction hearing in 2days after 22 Feb 2007.

She scheduled the full day hearing of the case (as I rejected the offer of confidential compulsory conference with the bank) for 19^th March 2007 from 10.a.m... She ordered if the case is not concluded on that day, I can apply for injunction against the bank’s lending practices in Victoria.

On 8^th March 2007, one page fax from VCAT advised ‘due to member’s availability the hearing will commence from 2.p.m on 19^th March 07, in stead of 10.a.m. (is it due to any intervention by any resource person?). I had no choice but to agree. But I put the condition that regardless of starting time, I need about 4 hours to present my case. For this I sent a fax to VCAT that they make sure I get about 4 hours to present all details of my case (please note I am the one who paid the fee and dragged the bank to court).

On 9^th March 2007, I received a letter from Westpac lawyers as their submission in defence. This was a hopeless defence and I knew I will ‘walk over’ such defences on 19^th March. I discussed in detail about this with 2 of my “friends” on 11^th March 07.

It was a long weekend till 12^th March. On 13^th March evening, I received a courier from the Westpac lawyers as their defence. This sounded like a threat to me, as the letter named Judge Harbison would hear the case on 19^th March and the defence the lawyers would adopt, but not about Mr Strong, a special counsel would represent!

On 19^th March 2007, in the court room, a sudden appearance by Mr Strong as counsel for Westpac, along with his other 2 lawyers who came on 22 Feb 2007. (3:1 talks about the strength of my case though I am not a lawyer).

The judge to preside over was Vice President Justice Harbison (she heads the ‘anti discrimination wing’ of VCAT, while Vice President Justice John Bowman heads the ‘Civil list’ wing of VCAT):

Justice Harbison, in spite of my objections that Mr Strong’s appearance was never notified to me (I told her that was my first appearance in a court situation), allowed him to represent. She asked Mr Strong as to how he wanted the proceedings to go (whether I present first or be put in witness box). He opted for putting me straight into witness box. I have been questioned for about 1 hour (I was wondering whether I was the offender or the bank). Anyway, I answered as I have nothing to hide or worry. Case was adjourned to the following day.

It is interesting to note here, that Mr Strong vehemently argued before Justice Harbison at VCAT, that Westpac is NOT charging Compound interest and that Mr Iyer’s understanding of compound interest is unique!!!

Before entering the court room, the court Clarke, Mr Bill Swayne, came out to tell me that the proceeding will not last for long that day (I never asked him or prompted him to talk anything to me). I told him, but I want to cross examine Mr Strong, yesterday he had his go, but today my go, I prepared the whole of last night without sleep. He replied, if you didn’t sleep I can give you a ‘coffee’, but allowing you to cross examine is left to the Judge (I was wondering then what this fellow was trying to do by talking to me rubbish).

Inside the court, Mr Strong had the first go; he advised the Judge that he read the cases wrong on 19^th March 2007. He took permission to requote some of the historical cases (as he said he quoted them wrong on 19^th March 07). He quoted a few and stopped. Judge Harbison, declared that my case was dismissed.

Immediately Mr Strong said, Westpac files a case for $50,000 to be paid by Mr Iyer as costs. Justice Harbison, sought permission from Mr Strong to ‘fix’ the costs. She fixed it to $ 10,000 payable by 30^th April 2007.

For, detailed chronological sequence of events on this case please visit Page 3 (down) on ‘what I did’ link of this site.

My Second Case against Westpac:

On 20^th March 2007 I was ordered to pay $ 10,000 to Westpac. Next morning, I filed a new case against Westpac in the same court for the way the bank staff caused misunderstanding regarding the way they charge interest.

Similar ‘hush up' and 'highjack' in my case hearing on 10^th May 2007, (Vcat Ref No C1937/2007 Hariharan Iyer Vs Westpac Banking Corporation). This time (Westpac filed a Section 75 application 4 days prior to hearing) Senior Member Alan Vassie, presided over Section 75 application of Westpac and dismissed my case and awarded full cost damages (I ended paying $ 12734).

Whereas Mr Vassie in his own words, on 29^th March 2007, in my case (Vcat Ref No C564/2007 Iyer Vs National Australia Bank Limited) said that a Section 75 (summary dismissal) application (filed by NAB) can only be heard and determined by a judicial member (which he is not). But on 10th May 2007 he presided over the same section 75 application filed by Westpac on 2nd May 2007 and included in the listing without giving time for me to prepare defence.

Mr Vassie not eligible to hear Section 75 application was again reaffirmed by Justice John Bowman on 18th June 2007, in his introduction to hearing my case, advised that he is a trustee for NAB superannuation division and has some shares in. He asked me if I had any objection for him hearing the case and cautioned me that if I had an objection for him hearing, there are only 2 Judges in VCAT who are entitled to hear and determine Section 75 application and they are, one himself and the second person Judge Harbison.

Obviously, Mr Vassie, even on 18th June 2007 was NOT entitled to hear S75 application but on 10th May 2007 presided over determined, dismissed and made me to bear the full cost for Westpac Banking Corporation. 

So next time when I go to VCAT should first ask the question to the presiding officer whether he/she is rightfully there are they are sitting there as a "sham" arrangement!.

Solomon Vs Solomon & Co Ltd

Yet we have examples of Solomon Vs Solomon & Co Ltd established as per British law in 18th Century where Mr Solomon used the constitution of Company law to defraud his suppliers. The supplier took him to courts and the courts did identify his intention to defraud suppliers, so did not want to acknowledge the existence of the Company Ltd as an entity, as they wanted to deliver true justice to society. Solomon took it to 'Privy Council' of the Parliament to see if those parliamentarians honour their own law, which they did and Solomon got free of debt, effectively cheating his suppliers.

But we have our courts here, the Judges understood the impact caused by the lenders on the society, understood the trouble I took to reach up to them, but dealt with me as you can notice from the preceding pages and in 'view documents' page.

Our politicians, I have approached both in Canberra and in Victoria, regardless of the political party they belong to, so that like 'Privy council' in Australian System, they can make sure the law they made is adhered by these lenders, but we find the lenders are the ones running the country, perhaps through their representation in some way. The law makers themselves do not support the implementation of the legislation by influencing re roaster of the judge to hear my case and to hush up the case!!!.

When i taught Criminal Codes Act in Victoria, I appraised the students that the criminal law is very weak to the extent that a defence lawyer does not have to prove that his client has NOT committed the crime, it is sufficient if the defence lawyer 'creates a doubt' in the minds of at least one of the 12 'juries' that there exists a possibility that the accused 'may not  necessarily have committed' the crime. This is because of the religious philosophical background of the country that they do not mind a 1000 criminals escaping punishment but will ensure that NO INNOCENT is PUNISHED. This is the situation for the criminals themselves in countries like Australia.

But what happened in my case? i am not the one fraudulently charged interest and ripped of Australians, but took the industry to the court proving the point. What Justice ? Harbison did, she gave the judgement that she did not want to go through whether the interest is compounded or not (this is the essence of my case itself, but she did not want to decide on that, please read the transcript from View documents). Contrarily, dismissed my case and penalised me to pay $ 10,000 to the offender, Criminal, Westpac Banking corporation!!!

What Mr Vassie did? Went a step above in presiding over a case that on his own words he was not entitled to preside over and gave permission for 'Special counsel' Mr Strong to represent for Westpac Banking corporation against myself, a self represented applicant. Mr Vassie awarded 'full indemnity' of costs to Westpac that made me to pay about $13,000.

What more is, that these cases have not been registered/ made available to public from the legal database of Australia, successfully hushed up.

I cant blame them, it is the teacher who taught these people the method of deriving judgement, who need to be blamed. It is wonderful that such people can eat, sleep and live comfortably after penalising an innocent self represented litigant. They would also be fully aware that i was not pleading the case for my sake alone, they knew it will set a precedent and will ensure all Australians are provided appropriate justice through my case.

Please read special characters from 'view documents' page of this site for more information.

Menu (Link):  XL Downloadspage  What I Did    What Westpac Bank did    What you can do    Solution

READY RECKONER  [Compound Interest Rate to Simple Interest Rate]

RATE INCREASE              When     LOAN WILL NEVER BE PAID OFF !!!

VIEW Documents    VIEW Jan 2008 COURT DECISION Confirming the Compounding Monthly

Breif features of this case:

1.             The question before Justice Bowman on 18^th June 2007 & 20 June 2007 was to decide if there is a case at all on our side, to schedule further arguments.

2.             The Judge heard NAB's counsel for 25 minutes. Then heard me for 50 minutes on 18th June. On 20^th June allowed me to speak for 40 minutes against CBA, on behalf of my (more at 'B 4' in 'view documents' page) "friend" Mr Praveen Rao, who claimed not knowing much in law, but immediately after 20^th June, he told me that Justice Bowman would ‘club both cases’ and give his judgment. But it is a miracle/magic/Praveen's skills that Justice Bowman exactly did the same in 'black and white'!!!.   Praveen's skills

3.             On both days after my submissions, the Judge ‘reserved the judgment’. No further contacts or communication until 23^rd January 2008. He decided not to schedule further hearings, on the only grounds, that loan contract shows 'total amount repayable over the term of loan’. Please read 'view document'........