Hazzard & Dominello's quarantine fee debt collection methods ignore legal requirement that demand is limited "to the person's means"- breach of law likely to involve Minsiter For Finance Damien Tudehope

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 


On 21 February 2021 the SMH quoting  NSW Minister For Finance and Small Business Damien Tudehope reported: 

The NSW government has called in debt collectors to chase $16.4 million owed by more than 7000 returning Australians for their stay in mandatory hotel quarantine in Sydney.

NSW Finance Minister Damien Tudehope said hotel quarantine was a key safeguard in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic and Australians returning from overseas or interstate needed to contribute to the cost.

"When it comes to paying your invoice for hotel quarantine, the message is a simple one - payment of your fee is not optional," Mr Tudehope said.

"Don't ignore it. If you are facing hardship or difficulty paying, contact us about making payment, entering into a payment plan, an extension to pay or other hardship measures."

Mr Tudehope said the bill was not just for the accommodation and food but also a contribution towards security, testing, cleaning, police, health personnel and other expenses.

As reported earlier on this blog, it was after a long delay that Minister for Revenue NSW, the Minister For Digital Victor Dominello's Revenue NSW has finally provided this explanation for Minister for Health Brad Hazzard's quarantine fee: 

Liability for the quarantine fees is provided for under section 70 of the Health Services Act 1997.  The fees were gazetted on 17 July 2020.  Revenue NSW is managing payment and recovery of the quarantine fees under the State Debt Recovery Act 2018.

Section 70 (1) provides that any person who receives any health service (other than a non-chargeable hospital service) from a public health organisation is liable to contribute towards the funds of the organisation, according to the person's means, such sum in respect of the health service (see story below).







Dominello, Hazzard and Tudehope have ignored repeated requests from this writer (who was quarantined for 14 days after arriving in Sydney by air) for an itemised invoice so it is impossible to say what Tudehope, Dominello and Hazzard are attempting to pass off as a "health service".


They had instead chosen to refer queries to their "internal debt collectors" who have threatened to issue statements of claim against anyone who seeks to question Dominello and Hazzard's demand. 

The demand, from their debt collectors, prefaced with threats of legal action are obviously in breach of the requirement in Section 70 (1) that any contribution to health services provided be according to the person's means.

TO BE READ WITH 








Dominello's Revenue says Hazzard relied on NSW Health Services Act to demand payment of quarantine fees- Act says Hazzard can only demand what a person can afford, Hazzard will still not say what "health services" he provided









October 22, 2021

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 




                                                      Brad Hazzard

                                                   
                                                    Victor Dominello


Minister for Revenue NSW, the Minister For Digital Victor Dominello's Revenue NSW has finally provided this explanation for Minister for Health Brad Hazzard's quarantine fee: 

Liability for the quarantine fees is provided for under section 70 of the Health Services Act 1997.  The fees were gazetted on 17 July 2020.  Revenue NSW is managing payment and recovery of the quarantine fees  under the State Debt Recovery Act 2018.

 


Section 70 states:



Liability of persons for health service fees

70 Liability of persons for health service fees

(cf PH Act s 30(1)-(5))

(1) Any person who receives any health service (other than a non-chargeable hospital service) from a public health organisation is liable to contribute towards the funds of the organisation, according to the person's means, such sum in respect of the health service as is calculated in accordance with the scale of fees fixed under section 69.


Hazzard and his NSW Health have refused to say what health services were provided to those sent into quarantine (without any notice of quarantine).

Note also that even if "health services" were provided, the liability is according to the person's means.

Readers will be aware that Dominello and Hazzard have hired private entities to collect their fees. 



TO BE READ WITH 



An invoice for a fee that is a penalty: Dominello's Revenue NSW will issue a statement of claim against anyone who seeks to challenge Hazzard's Quarantine Fee invoice





by Ganesh Sahathevan 

This writer has been informed in writing by  Minister for Digital Victor Dominello's Revenue NSW officers that anyone wishing to challenge Health Minister Brad Hazzard's  Quarantine Fee Invoice will be issued a statement of claim by Revenue NSW.

That turns what has been described as a fee for services provided anyone who is required to be quarantined into a penalty. The invoice issued by Ministers Hazzard and Dominello for quarantine fees has therefore become much like a penalty or fine for speeding or some other traffic infringement.

How NSW Health accounts for the above in its own books remains a mystery. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Not new or worthy of consideration" : WA Corruption & Crime Commissioner confirms but dismisses Anne Azza Aly 's referring queries about PAVE, her work to Malaysia

Image
by Ganesh Sahathevan       John McKechnie The issues raised on my related RealpoltikAsia blog in the posting:  ALP's Anne Aly's Phoenix Consulting of Dubai provides covert intel training-Who does she report to in Dubai, and then there is the matter of Malaysia....... were brought to the attention of The Hon John McKechnie QC,the current Commissioner, WA Corruption and Crime ,given the security implications that arise from the connections between PAVE and one David (Dave) Allen, currently Assistant Director Intelligence,WA CCC. McKechnie's response is as follows: Thank you for the email. I am the Corruption and Crime Commissioner. I will decide if and when Mr Allens security clearance should be reconsidered but nothing in this email is either new or worthy of consideration. The Hon John McKechnie QC Readers have now confirmation from no  less a personage than the WA CCC Commissioner himself, a former judge and QC,of the fact of Aly's Dubai connection, and her ref...
Read more

If Damien Tudehope's COVID hotel quarantine fee statements are correct, SLHD revenue reported in financial statements signed by former CEO Teresa Anderson is overstated, and false

Image
 by Ganesh Sahathevan                     Tough talking Damien Tudehope may not have the power to impose th.  bulk of his quarantine fee, if any Readers will recall that former NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller (now a PwC partner) said in his notice that Revenue NSW " will be charging a mandatory quarantine fee". Readers will also recall that the rormer NSW Minister For Financial Services, Damien Tudehope insisted that the quarantine fees charged by Sydney Local Health District, pursuant to the NSW Health Services Act include charges for police security. However, there is nothing  in the SLHD's financial statements for the relevant periods (see links below) to reflect any payment from the COVID quarantine fee revenue being made over to NSW Police. SLHD's revenue must then have been overstated, by the CEO concerned Teresa Anderson.  SLHD Financial Statements https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/annualreport/Publicat...
Read more

Strata managers' aversion to contact with tenants can leave strata managers exposed to personal liability

Image
 by Ganesh Sahathevan      Advice for living in, or buying into, a strata community Strata managers are employed to manage strata schemes which are often home to renters as well as owners. However, in evasion of that which they are paid to do there are instances where strata managers have attempted  to evade their duties by refusing to  deal with tenants.   Even this writer can recall an instance where the strata manager warned that it was against the law for tenants to contact him directly.  The instances where strata managers have refused to deal with tenants occur when the issues raised concern fairly pedestrian maintenance issues, for example blocked plumbing and the like. Having said that, tenants do actually have a legal right to a great many things, including being informed (and presumably make representations) when strata schemes consider re-development. Strata managers who seek to stand in place of strata committees  are even more e...
Read more