30 something someone with some thoughts about some things.
a dear dear friend of mine, and some funny funny times xx
Sharing drunken war wounds with Darbiel, the Sunshine Angel, I was reminded of that one time that I scared a man out of my apartment.
It was during Melbourne Whore Week, a week spent with a fellow wordpress blogger who shall remain anonymous unless she chooses to reveal herself, where we were stoned, drunk and/or having sex, the entire time.
It was seriously, the most fun week of my life.
I wish I could say that it was the most debauched, but to be honest, the events of this week are quite tame in comparison to the everyday life I lived when I first lived alone in that beautiful, cold city.
Nevertheless, on this particular occasion, my cohort and I met two men outside a popular eating establishment. We struck up a conversation, and, because I was guilt-ridden and hated myself for drinking, and was terribly, completely lonely, the only…
View original post 423 more words
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF A CORRUPT 2004 BANKING CODE
Information sourced from bankinfoline.com
In 2010, a very detailed and thorough document was submitted to and accepted by the Australian Senate on Banking Reform. It’s known as “The Australian Bankers Problematic Code” paper.
This letter attempts to highlight the most important sections of it, to give a high-level overview of the document, so it can be exposed to the public and not kept hidden under layers of banking misconduct and media blackouts.
The Problematic Code paper follows the 18 year evolution of banks being forced (by threat of government regulation after Senate reports in 1991) to document rules, which governed their behaviour towards customers. This document is known as the “Banking Code of Practise” and the banks have been contractually bound to them since 1996. In a publication on 1 November 1993, senior bankers, Commonwealth Bank’s David Murray and NAB’s Don Argus, were said to have agreed to be contractually bound by the code if government allowed banks to manage it.
This code is monitored by 3 people, the “Code Compliance Monitoring Committee” (CCMC), and their job is to investigate and make a determination on “Any and All complaints” made by the public against the code subscribing banks behaviour. (cl. 35.7)
In 2003, unsatisfied with the original practices, ANZ’s John McFarlane and St George Bank (now Westpac’s) Gail Kelly, and senior Australian Bankers Association officers redrafted the code introducing loopholes in the previously high-principled process. With the introduction of loopholes 16 banks agreed with the changed practices and became code signatories.
A year later, in 2004, banks agreed it wasn’t enough and sought to benefit themselves even further.
A new layer was secretly added so that the CCMC was no longer at liberty to investigate “Any and All complaints..”. This is because the 16 signatories formed a new group known as “The Code Compliance Monitoring Committee’s Association” (CCMCA) and they wrote their own rules as to what banks had to investigate. They set these new rules out in a document they called “the Constitution”. The Constitutions terms were so restrictive towards the job of the CCMC, that to date the independent Code Compliance Monitoring Committee have only investigated 250 complaints alleging the banks have breached the code.
The “Constitution” was never published, its restrictions were never made public and the CCMCA members never announced as a public group. The directors of the 16 banks and their CEO’s wrote a new set of rules setting out what this supposedly independent body they appointed called the Code Compliance Monitors were allowed to investigate.
Since 2004, the directors of major banks have told their customers and customer’s lawyers, and the public, that if a customer or small business signs a bank’s contract they will be protected as the code is contractually binding. However the Problematic Code paper sets out how a new set of banking ethics have evolved and the paper names banks, the bank directors and other people who sat benignly allowing banks to introduce corrupt practices that cripple customers.
You might ask how could this happen, was it uncaring legislators or sleepy regulators? It’s probably both.
In 2008, the previous Code Compliance Monitors, acting as whistleblowers, exposed the scam prior to resigning. The Compliance Monitors were appointed by and paid for by the signatories banks to investigate any allegation, by any person a bank breached the code. The Constitution, however, meant banks didn’t have to do that. By not requiring banks to investigate complaints, customers were forced to take banks to court if they breached a contract.
And that, as everyone knows, is costly, lengthy and a futile battle.
Examples as to how this can affect individuals, are evident in the Priestly case. Had the bank provided a fair and independent complaints procedure, they probably would not have spent the last six years battling it out with their bank in courtrooms across the state, and ultimately, losing their house and farm in January, this year.
The Priestley complaints
On 26 January 2013, the Priestley’s, having read “The Australian Bankers Problematic Code” paper set out their experiences and concerns in complaints sent to Mr Michael Chaney AO and NAB Directors. The bank breached its contract by failing to investigate the complaints which are serious.
In 2013, a principled banker would investigate the following complaints and respond, if the NAB had nothing to hide. However, to date there has been no official response so, instead, we will follow the NAB investigation as it unfolds, keeping in mind the Compliance Monitors had a contractual duty to name and shame bankers breaching the code.
Following years of failed attempts to have their bank complaints investigated, on 26 January 2013, the Priestley’s referred the following complaints to the NAB Directors, alleging:
1 In 2012, National Australia Bank directors intentionally or recklessly allowed its CEO, Mr Cameron Clyne, to breach the bank-customer contract when the NAB failed to investigate all the Priestley complaints, copies of which were sent directly to him.
2 Since 20 February 2004, the NAB changed terms of its contract, which meant Farmer-NAB contracts and small business-NAB contacts were potentially non-contracts and not binding.
3 The NAB, and other signatory bank officers, instructed their managers and lawyers to keep the “Constitution” and thus changed bank-customer contracts from the courts for a decade as the courts might not hear their cases.
4 The NAB, and other signatory bank officers, and bank representatives, asked customers to sign contracts when they knew or should have known the contractual rights were changed causing customers financial disadvantage.
5 The NAB’s and other signatory bank CEO’s were members of the Code Compliance Monitoring Committee’s Association that created and relied on the constitution to conceal a countless number of contract breaches.
6 According to Mr Andrew Wilkie’s 2012 press release, there have been 2.5 million bank complaints since 2004, yet only 250 investigations, which was when the changed terms in the started to truly strip away bank customers rights.
7 For a decade, Code Compliance Monitors were dishonest and their actions corrupt allowing people to believe they could investigate and make a determination on any allegation a bank breached the code when they had no such powers.
8 Since 2004, NAB and ABA’s conduct was dishonest and their actions corrupt when they published untruthful statements intended the make the Australian public believe code signatory banks would comply with the code and investigate all code breaches and complaints.
9 In 2012, the NAB instructed lawyers to attend court and keep from His Hon. Justice Peter Garling the truth about the Problematic Code and by their silence they allowed the court to still believe the code was contractually binding.
NAB’s internal dispute resolution process
Mr Michael Chaney AO and Directors of NAB told all their customers that the bank has an internal process for handling disputes (Cl. 35.1).
● It will be free of charge (Cl. 35.1(b));
● We will adhere with timeframes specified in the contract (Cl. 35.1(c);
● We will notify the name and contact number of the NAB person investigating your dispute (Cl. 35.2); and
● Within 21 days of becoming aware of the dispute we will inform you of the outcome (Cl. 35.3).
What Mr Michael Chaney AO and NAB Directors also said. The bank:
● Has a dispute resolution process available for all complaints unless resolved to your satisfaction (Cl. 35.7);
● Will provide customers with the above information in writing (Cl. 35.8);
● Will provide information to customers in plain language (Cl. 2.1(d)); and
● Will act fairly and reasonably towards customers in consistent and ethical manner (Cl. 2.2).
The last four dot-points relate to all complaints, which signatories to the Code of Banking Practice and NAB contractually agreed to provide customers since 2004. NAB might believe that customers can agitate complaints in the courts and have their say, however only the bank has the benefit of having unlimited funds to fight in the courts.
Nobody could believe customers could lodge 2.5 million complaints since the “Constitution” was introduced and therefore, depending on NAB findings and with new information to hand, individual and small business customers who have lodged complaints since 2004 can ask them to be re-heard. Especially if the banks had been hiding behind these secret documents, and which may have influenced the judgement in the first place.
This time by a truly independent, non-bank appointed /funded committee giving customers who suffered adverse court judgements since 2004, a chance to finally have their day out of court and be heard in full.
A fair go. It’s not much to ask for really.
During yesterday’s eviction of The Priestly’s, Chris Priestly bravely read out this letter to the NAB representative they sent, Mr Peter Mair.
You may have heard of Peter Mair, or you may have not. But a recent article shows he believes pensioners are hoarding $100 notes under their beds in order to rort the pension. Obviously a kind, and generous guy – who also used to be a Reserve Bank Official..
So why is an ex-RBA official, attending the eviction of just 2 normal farmers, 9 hours North-West of Sydney? hmm Interesting indeed. And not a question I actually have an answer to.
( Edit: After some diligent research, turns out there are two creepy bankers called Peter Mair. The one that attended the eviction, is not the same as the one who thinks Pensioners are rorting, but to be honest, the eviction Peter Mair looks even more sinister..)
A video of Chris reading this out will be available as soon as those wonderful citizen journalists and occupy activists return from supporting the Priestly’s. But in the meantime, have a read of it for yourself.
It’s a doozy 😀 I can’t wait to see the video xx
So, they’ve been busy, while we’ve been busy.
They’re changing the terms, getting on TV and Radio and in the papers to show you how *ethical, and transparent the Banks really are.
Of course. The Banks really are good people right. Or not people. Corporations..
Hell, even the head of the Australian Bankers Association, Mr Münchenberg said in his press release:
“Banks are committed to acting fairly, responsibly and transparently – the revised Code reinforces these industry values.”
“For example, banks are committed to working with customers who may be experiencing financial hardship. There are times when any one of us can suffer a setback that means we can no longer meet our financial obligations, like paying the mortgage or credit card bill. This can happen because our working hours have been reduced or we’ve even lost our job, because of unexpected illness, because a relationship breaks down, or for a host of other reasons. It’s at times like these that banks can help people get through their financial difficulties and back on their feet.”
Yep. That’s why you helped the Priestly’s when their father lay dying in hospital, right?
Yep. That’s why you helped them to sow a new crop after the floods had subsided, right?
Yep. That’s why you responded in writing, and officially investigated every one of the 9 complaints she submitted to the Banks, and then the Ombudsman, and then the CCMC, right?
Oh.. what? You didn’t do any of those things? You didn’t investigate their complaints? Even though, their first complaint was made before ANY of the preceedings against them took place.?
hmm. I find that a bit.. misleading. I find that a bit.. fraudulent.
I wonder what the Priestly’s have got to say about that? Well.. no, they can’t get the internet at the moment, because you evicted them yesterday. I’ve tried to call them a few times today, but the phone kept dropping out. The house is boarded up. The locks have been changed. You’ve even entombed Chris’ thongs in there – you wouldn’t let him go in and get them. Because, you know.. The thongs are yours now. Hope they fit..
Good thing I’ve got copies of the most recent letters they sent the Chairman of the NAB, this week. And hey, get a load of that – they were also personally copied to you, Mr Münchenberg.
Seeing as I can’t get in touch with them to find out what’s going on, perhaps it’s time for you to come forth with an explanation, Mr Münchenberg.
Speak soon?? Once you’ve finished getting your hair and make-up fixed for the Business Show, that is.
(Official Press Release from the Australian Banking Association.
Direct contact details for the ABA
f you could also tweet these out, the bottom of the ABA Press Release has these details. You know.. just fyi.
P&L Corporate Communications (?)
Phone: 02 9231 5411
Mobile: 0488 390 151
The battle is over, but the war has just begun.
12 months ago, I knew nothing of the Priestly’s, their farm, their family and their lives.
Yet today, I receive the most heartbreaking text from them.
” it’s over. very sad day. 2 Sheriffs, 2 Security Guards and locksmiths”
but then, the fight in her remains.
“lots of footage of me going off. I nearly decked the wimpy NAB guy. Little creep”
And that’s where the hope lies. In the hearts of those who have followed this story. In the strength of their love for their home. In the fingers of those who type away bringing this message to you.
Oh, and by the way NAB. We’re breaking up with you. Because you are no different from every other greedy motherf***ing corporation who see’s no further than your bottom line. Well, keep an eye on your bottom, because I promise you – you are about to have your ass kicked.
Subcomandante Marcos essay – Them and Us : “Part II – The Machine in almost two pages”
The salesman speaks:
It’s amazing, very “cool”, you understand. It’s called “neoliberal globalization version 6.6.6,” but we prefer to call it “the savage” or “the beast.” Yes, an aggressive nickname, one with initiative, very grrr. Yes, I learned that in a self-help course called “How to sell a nightmare”… but let’s get back to the machine. Its operation is very simple. It is self-sufficient (or “sustainable,” as is sometimes said). It produces, yes, exorbitant profits… What? Invest part of those profits to alleviate hunger, unemployment, lack of education? But those shortages are exactly what makes this baby run! What do you think of that? A machine that produces the fuel it needs to run: misery and unemployment.
Of course, it also produces goods, but not just that. Look: let’s say that something completely useless is produced, something that no one needs, something without a market. Well, this gem doesn’t just produce useless stuff, it also creates a market where that useless stuff is turned into a basic necessity.
The crises? Of course. Just press this button right here… no, not that one, that’s the “eject” button… the other one… yes. OK, push that button and ta-da! There you have the crisis you need, everything is right there, with your millions of unemployed, your water cannons, your financial speculation, your droughts, your famine, your deforestation, your wars, your religious apocalypses, your supreme saviors, your jails and cemeteries (for those who don’t follow the supreme saviors), your tax havens, your aid projects with theme songs and choreography included… of course, a little bit of charity always looks good.
But that’s not all, let me show you this demo. When you put it in “destruction/depopulation-reconstruction/restructuring” mode it performs miracles. Look at this example: do you see those forests? No, don’t worry about those indigenous people… yes, they’re Mapuches, but they could be Yaquis, Mayos, Nahuas, Purépechas, Mayans, Guaranís, Aymarás, Quechúas. OK, press the “play” button and watch how the forests disappear (and the indigenous people, but no one cares about them), now watch how everything becomes a wasteland, wait… here come the machinery and voila! There you have your golf course that you’ve always dreamed of, with its exclusive parking and the works. Ah, it’s wonderful, don’t you think?
It also comes with the latest software. You can click here where it says “filter” and your TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube will only show psalms and praise for you and yours. Yes, it eliminates any sort of commentary, writing, image, noise, all the bad vibes that every now and then those anonymous, dirty, ugly, bad, rude proles try to slip in.
It has a lever on the floor (even though you can put it on autopilot with just one click); a heliport; no plane ticket, because sometimes there’s no place to run to, but it does include a spot on the next departing space shuttle; it also has a super-hyper-mega exclusive mall; a golf course; a minibar; a yacht club; a framed diploma from Harvard; a summer house; an iceskating rink… yes, I know, what would we do without the modern Left and its quick wit? Ah, and with this gem you can be in “real time” simultaneously in any part of the world, it’s as if you had your own exclusive global ATM.
Hmm… yes, it includes a papal bull to ensure you a V.I.P. spot in heaven. Yes, I know, but we’re already working on immortally. Meanwhile, we can install an accessory (at an additional cost, of course, but I’m sure this isn’t a problem for someone like you): a panic room! Yes, you’ve seen how those vandals think they have the right to demand what’s theirs with that “the land belongs to those who work it.” Oh, but you have nothing to worry about. That’s why we have rulers, political parties, new religions, reality shows. But of course, that’s an assumption*, because if they fail at some point? Of course, when it comes to security, no expense should be spared. Of course, let me write that down: “Include Panic Room.”
It also includes a study for TV, one for radio, and an editor’s desk. No, don’t get me wrong. They’re not for watching TV or listening to the radio or reading newspapers and magazines, that’s for jerks. They’re for producing information and entertainment for the people who run the machine. Isn’t that neat?
What? Oh… OK… yes… I’m afraid that problem hasn’t been solved by our specialists. Yes, if the raw material, I mean, if the plebeian masses revolt nothing can be done. Yes, the “panic room” could be useless in that situation. But we shouldn’t be pessimistic, just keep in mind that that day… or night… is very far off. Yes, I also learned all that “new age” optimism from a self-help course. Huh? What? I’m fired?
(to be continued…)
From any corner of any world.
Actually, there’s no fun in watching
Another you love
My time came
Yet your watch was running a few minutes slow.
I decided to wait
Slowed down the minutes
Hope to synchronise down the path.
Instead, you found another whose time had come
To match yours in the here and now.
Now the minutes tick past even slower
Knowing I put time on hold
For someone. Else.
Did I tell you I loved you?
Did I need to?
Would it make a difference anyway.
This patient tried patience
For you, I strived.
For you, I dived.
you me, I’ll survive.