Twenty-One Failed Arbitrations
AbsentJustice.com is a work in progress, last edited January 2023.
A click on my ABSENT JUSTICE book below, and you will see nine different publishers who have published my book from all different parts of the globe. ABSENT JUSTICE is free, but if you would like to donate, please send it directly to Transparency International Australia.
Copies of the original documents support all events quoted on this website: Corruption in Arbitration 1 - Corruption in Arbitration 2 - Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman -Chapter 1 - The collusion continues - Unprecedented Deception and Chapter 7- Vietnam-Vietcong. Clicking on these links automatically opens a PDF of the exhibit. You can verify our story using this method and following the file numbers.
We could not have successfully composed this website absentjustice.com without these exhibits to prove our story
Until the late 1990s, the Australian government wholly owned Australia’s telephone network and the communications carrier, Telecom (today privatised and called Telstra). Telecom held the monopoly on communications and let the network deteriorate into disrepair. When four small business owners had severe communication problems, they went into arbitration with Telstra. The arbitrations were a sham: the appointed arbitrator not only allowed Telstra to minimise the Casualties of Telstra (COT) members’ claims and losses, but the arbitrator also bowed down to Telstra and let the carrier run the arbitrations. Telstra committed serious crimes during the arbitrations, yet the Australian government and the Australian Federal Police have been unable to hold Telstra, or the other entities involved in this deceit, accountable (see Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1)
The following government records (see AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings), at points 2 to 212 show the government communications regulator had already validated my arbitration claim on 4 March 1994, six weeks before I signed my 21 April 1994 arbitration agreement. Why did the government validate my claims and then withhold the documents I needed to support my claim?
The concealment of this irrefutable evidence AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings) was an abuse of process. For the government to have allowed me to commence an arbitration against Telstra without the necessary documents I needed to support my claim was gross misconduct of the worst possible kind. To have allowed me to enter an arbitration process that lasted for thirteen months, costing me more than $300.000.00 in arbitration fees trying to prove something that the government had already proved against Telstra not only breached their statutory obligation towards me as a citizen of the commonwealth, they discriminated against me by protecting Telstra's interests above mine.
Sue Hodgkinson, the financial adviser to Warwick Smith (the then administrator of my arbitration), wrote Warwick Smith on 30 March 1995, six weeks before the conclusion of my arbitration and stated under the heading EXTRACTS OF TELECOM'S DEFENCE - Principal Submission (A) Opening Submission (File 103 - AS-CAV Exhibit 92 to 127) that
- Most of the allegations are unsubstantiated and many are not verified by statutory declaration. Smith has relied upon records kept in his diaries as his primary record of complaints
- Smith has relied upon records kept in his diaries as his primary record of complaints;
- The magnitude of fault complaints reported is unsubstantiated and appears overstated
- Of the few faults which occurred, most were trivial or short lived due to prompt rectification by Telecom.
- Those faults that did occur, many were due to misuse of telephone and associated equipment by the claimant or customers of CBHC [Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp].
- Of the 58 customers (66 by August 1993) conneted
- to the Cape Bridgewater telephone exchange, only Smith has had a significant level of fault complains. It is vertually impossible that faults
- at this exchange can effect the claimant only.
These eight dot point examples made by Sue Hodkinson's (when addressing Telstra's arbitration defence of my claims) do not coincide with AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings at points 2 to 212.
File 103 - AS-CAV Exhibit 92 to 127 is conclusive proof that had the government not concealed [withheld] their factual findings concerning my ongoing telephone problems, Telstra's arbitration defence would never have been able to advise the arbitration process of something they knew the government knew to be incorrect. In other words, someone within AUSTEL disclosed to Telstra that the government was on their side and would conceal AS-CAV Exhibit 92 to 127 from the arbitration process.
When will the Australian Government [The Commonwealth] finally bring foreclosure to this twenty-eight-year David and Goliath battle
Please click on the video following link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl-TxwIoRxU or click on the Holiday Camp photo.
Alan Smith (LinkedIn Profile) https://www.absentjustice.com/
Who are we?
Absent Justice was set up to publish an accurate account of how the arbitrator ignored corruption and misleading and deceptive conduct by Telstra during their defence of the author's claim. The same arbitrator secretly sanctioned alterations to the arbitration agreement after the claimant's lawyers had accepted the unchanged version. These secretly altered clauses 24, 25 and 26 severely affected the claimant's chances of appealing the arbitrator's findings.
This is the story of a group of ordinary small-business people fighting one of the largest companies in the country. For years, Telstra failed to address the many phone problems affecting the capacity of the COT Four to run their businesses, telling them ‘No fault found,’ when documents on this website show they were found to have existed even as the arbitrator were bringing down his findings without ever disclosing these facts. This meant Telstra did not have to investigate any ongoing complaints because the arbitrator, in his award, had recorded no ongoing faults
Editorial, Social Networking, and Training.
2 年Thanks so much for your continued support. It is valuable to me in so many ways. Thank you - Alan