I Was Fined For Attending an Appointment

Ames (Echo Australia)
Suite 1008 1a City Square
Knox ozone
Wantirna South vic 3152
18 January 2016

        I consider the mutual obligations of New Start are inappropriate for people experiencing homelessness, and medical conditions both physical and mental. I request the mail and phone contact, from Echo, cease immediately.

        First appointment I attended the company called Echo.I asked staff member to provide their name. Her first name was provided, Li. I was told by staff member I had to sign a contract with her that was provided. I asked if I had a choice. Answer: no, you have to sign today. I said I won’t be signing today. I asked if there was a copy for me and was informed by the staff member that a copy would be available after signing, but not before. I mentioned I was informed, of 48 hours grace, to decide, if I wished to sign an agreement. That was disputed by staff member. I was told I have to sign, and only after I have signed their agreement, do I then have a choice to choose another provider, within ten working days.

        I asked staff member  “is a 55 year old with no bathroom cooking facilities, or home, with medical and conditions and depression, experiencing survival difficulties, who is flagged, and forced to arrive at a work place, likely to be negatively affected, by association, with their company arrangement, and whether or not there is a difference between this person, or a 55 year old living in an inherited house”.

        Staff member said, “if you don’t sign the agreement today, you will have to sign eventually”. That signing is inevitable. I asked staff member, if signing would aggravate my existing medical condition. Upon checking my record, she informed me that signing would make life harder for me. She said that she would not force me to sign, and that I should not be here. The manager entered the room. I asked her if my payment would be suspended, in relation to staff member’s recommendation, not to sign. Manger informed me that it would not be suspended.

         I was informed by staff member that, she would be noting, that she did not attend this appointment. I asked why she was not here. She said because an agreement has not been entered into. I asked if this means that I am not here. She said the form does not provide inclusion for this information, about my attendance, unless I have entered into an agreement. Manager said I could leave, and I did leave.

       Consequently I have been contacted many times by Echo. To inform me of my non-attendance of an appointment. I denied the repeated accusation. I was asked whom did I speak to. I made it clear to staff members during phone conversations, that I did not ask for names. Staff members inform me that I must record all names, otherwise my account of what had occurred, can’t be verified. Staff inform me that they did not have to provide names.

         The credibility of my account, of what I observed, and experienced, was viewed as compromised and floored, by not providing names. I experienced the accusation that I did not attend, with an increasing level of menace. I felt I was being black mailed as they threatened to cancel my benefit. I was told, over and over, on numerous calls, that I did not attend the appointment. These phone conversations, generally would end, in acceptance of my situation, but not of my attendance, and ended with, “I will get back to you.”
          Fair Trading Act 1999 Act No. 16/1999
(d) whether any undue influence or pressure was exerted on, or any unfair tactics were used against the purchaser or a person acting on behalf of the purchaser by the supplier or a person acting on behalf of the supplier in relation to the supply or possible supply of the goods or services;
          A second compulsory appointment was made, after exemption was provided by DSS, that I did not request, nor gave DSS authority to pass my information to a private entity, to enable it to enforce compliance, to enable it to profit from the information provided by DSS. To expose me to menace to sign an agreement. Without any request made by or on behalf of me, while assigned to a disability support agency. In my agreement with DSS, I believed I granted permission to share information, in a specified manner, to assist and improve my situation.
To receive information, to enable me to make informed choices.

          Disclosing your personal information to other parties

We will not disclose your personal information to anyone, including to other government agencies, organisations or third parties unless:
 you have consented; or
 the disclosure is required or authorised by or under law; or
 the disclosure is otherwise permitted by the APPs; or
 those records determined to be part of the archival resources of the Commonwealth.

         I called to inform a staff member of my inability to attend a second appointment. I was told by staff member that I could not cancel, because I had not attended the previous appointment. I denied non attendance of the previous and first appointment. I was informed that my benefit would be cancelled for non attendance of the second appointment. I said, I wish to comply, but was experiencing difficulty. I said that I did attend the first appointment. I asked, do you understand the level of aggravation caused to me by the phone calls, and attempts to enforce compliance, with the companies agreement. She said, “I will get back to you.” Subsequent phone contact, of this appointment by text, was to inform me, the date of appointment had been moved forward. The forced compliance situation has caused aggravation of existing medical conditions, against my doctors instructions, financial stress, increased anxiety, has not assisted with my depression, has worsened my existing depression.

          Being in receipt of my personal information, seems to be construed as license to pursue relentlessly, ignoring democratic principles and fair trading laws. Is any company able to behave in the same manner too? Is this company an exemplary of the forced compliance model? If it is law that deems the job active procedure as best practice, has this law, if there is one, been created to provide a closed market to a select few companies, or encouraging a restricted market, or assist in the erosion of the current laws and best practice, or being implemented in a manner,

contrary to law?

          Left wondering, if this is law, what hope is there for me and others like me, if the Job Active Commonwealth Legislation, has to be implemented in such a manner, to instil a culture of belief, in which the proper means is deemed to be the provision and implementation of unsolicited service,
by menace, intimidation in the suggestion that I have no option but to sign. Though I did not wish to have their services provided, Applying business strategy as to restrict competition, while remaining unaccountable anonymous, with immunity, outside of business law and fair trade.
          93AC  Commission’s objection notice
                    2 (a)  the provision has or would have the purpose, or has or is likely to have or would have or be likely to have the effect, of substantially lessening competition (within the meaning of section 45); and
Subdivision B—Activity test

         DSS informed me that the two year agreement, to act as an agent of the Commonwealth had not been re-signed, and that it has been operating without a signed consent agreement for many months”

           Have been advised  to contact the manager in writing. I wish to be treated kindly and fairly,

and humanely, even if the law states, I am no longer required to be. I wish to get well again and work again as soon as possible. However, Echo’s tactics have caused a set back in my recovery. Consequently, in fear, of engaging Echo staff, of being left with no income, and of making complaint.

         To respond with words requires effort that I don’t have, but somehow must. The last mail contact was on 23rd. December, 2015. A  request for my attendance of an appointment on the 7th. March, during which  they may review and update my job plan, and to discuss the activities or services that will help me to find work. The last phone contact with echo on the 13TH of January 2016, I requested my file, and times of contact etc. I was  transferred to the person able to assist. I was informed, “There is no file as such”. I was informed that I was currently registered with a disability support agency.

          One job active business took 77 million dollars in its first year, described by its owner as the cash cow of the century. May it be in some cases, that housing may be beneficial to some, and to the community, compared to removing welfare income, to pay for the programme itself.  Money may, in some cases,  provide time to heal and be housed and find work. I don’t agree that over riding the peoples rights legislated for, over many decades, so a select few can be given hundreds of millions for dollars, thousands of dollars per person signed, of average working australians tax dollars, is beneficial to all. The media demonises me as a bludger. I am a soft target, for a private consortium, and I take great offence to the persistent harassment. It is worsening my condition. I suffer depression and anxiety caused through previous work place bullying, and it is my opinion, that I am experiencing the same again with echo.

         I don’t experience enquiry from Echo, as to my situation, nor care, support, nor interest, nor informed on procedure, or how I can be benefitted by the Echo experience. I have been clearly informed on three occasions, one in person, that I would not benefit by signing. I believe I am not unworthy of welfare. I believe that I am treated as unworthy. I believe that welfare provided to me is necessary, not a luxury. I wish the harassment by Echo to stop.

         My efforts are focused on survival each day. Do you care once in many calls to ask how I am. To ask what is it like for you. You are trained in forced compliance as it may be the best practise for your employer to maximise income. And it is legal and you are immune. I  understand that the law is not about ethics and morals . As it is not written by the people for the people but by, and for, the protection and advantage of a few.

         The 1958 crimes act states, it is a crime to commit blackmail, unless the person is of the belief that black mail is appropriate means. How can this be appropriate means when there are in my opinion clear breaches of the job active programme legislation guidelines,  Of which, I am assuming, would have been included for their best practice value. I make it clear that I  will not be fobbed off, and that the problem will not go away unless it is properly resolved. I have made all reasonable efforts to do so. I request the mail and phone contact from Echo to cease immediately.

Kind regards,