First case against Westpac:

VCAT received my application on 19^th Dec 2006. A call came  from VCAT advising me to withdraw my application and file it under ‘Credit List’ and not under ‘Civil List’. I accepted this on phone, but the same day I faxed and demanded my application be heard under ‘Civil list’. Vcat reluctantly accepted my application under civil list on 9^th Jan 2007 for a ‘directions hearing’ on 22^nd Feb 2007. Copy of my case.

That was my debut appearance in court. Straightaway I was put in witness box, and was tried for about 1.5hrs. Not allowed to present my case and not allowed me to examine Westpac.

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 requested them to respond (as the bank has been already served notice of my case).

On 22^nd Feb 2007, Deputy President Ms B Steele of VCAT, presided over the directions hearing. She spoke most part of our 1 hour session (to plan the time required and witness to be produced. She encouraged me to go for compulsory conference etc), arguing against my case (Westpac lawyers hardly spoke few words).

Then 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., and she ruled that, if the case is not concluded on 19th March 2007, I can apply for injunction against the bank’s lending practices in Victoria (as I demanded immediate injunction on 22^nd Feb 2007, for the bank’s failure to comply with legislative requirements on Mandatory Comparison Rate effective 1^st July 2003).

On 8^th March 2007, a fax from VCAT advised me ‘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 politician?). 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.

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. It said the Judge's name who will hear the case on 19^th March and what defence the lawyers would adopt, but not the name of the lawyer/counsel who will appear on behalf of Westpac!.

On 19^th March 2007, in the court, a sudden appearance by Mr Strong as counsel for Westpac (please note that Vice President Judge Strong, of VCAT is NOT this Mr Strong, may be they are twins or related but not one and the same).

If Mr Strong is related/twin brother with Judge Strong (I deduced this going through internet and then physically attending one court session presided by Judge Strong), then ‘conflict of interest’ prevailed in VCAT in my case. Judge Strong was then a Vice President of VCAT in as much as Judge Harbison was then.

Justice Stuart Morris was the president of VCAT (a Judge of Supreme Court of Victoria) then. Since my application claimed exemplary damages of $1 billion, my case would perhaps been heard by the President, as he headed ‘Civil List’ then.

Possibly, due to some ‘play up’ on 8^th March by someone, the hearing time was changed from 10.00a.m to 2.15 p.m. and possibly the same ‘conspiracy’ worked to change the presiding judge too!!!

It is important to note that Justice Stuart Morris abruptly resigned from VCAT and Supreme Court on 21^st March 2007 night. My case was dismissed by Justice Harbison on 20^th March 2007.

21^st March 2007 morning I filed the second case C 1937/2007 against Westpac in the same court. I also requested for transcript of 19^th and 20^th March hearings.

May be there is a procedure that the President hears the audio of the proceedings before it goes to the transcription agents, to ensure no tampering at any point!!!

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 for Mr Strong’s appearance (on the basis that it was never notified to me), (and that I told her that was my first appearance in a court situation), allowed him to represent.

Mr Strong’s identity was not confirmed by the Judge nor did he produce any document entitling him to represent on behalf of Westpac. Mr Strong was sitting on the bar bench, throughout the proceeding. I thought it may be the system in Australia to do so.

But on 18^th June 2007, Justice Bowman, advised us to ‘stand’ and present the case, which both Mr Chris Archibald and myself did. So obviously, Mr Strong was stronger than Justice Harbison that she did not mind him sitting and presenting.

She asked Mr Strong as to how he wanted the proceedings to go through (as to 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 1.5 hours (it made me wonder whether I was the offender or the bank was). Still I answered as I have nothing to hide or worry. Case was adjourned to the following day.

Mr Strong vehemently argued before Justice Harbison at VCAT, that Westpac is NOT charging Compound interest and that my (Mr Iyer’s) understanding of compound interest is unique!!!

On 20th March 2007, before entering the court room, the court clerk, 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 I should have 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 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.

All these made me to wonder who is this Mr Strong. I searched on internet. To my surprise I found Judge Strong’s name in VCAT as Vice President. Andrew, a friend, brought out the photo from internet and he too identified him to be the one who appeared for Westpac. Not to leave any loose ends, I went and sat in public gallery when Judge Strong was to ‘sentence’ a person and provide ‘judgement’ in another case on 4th April 2007. I looked at him and heard him (to confirm if the voice is same). Based on these, I mentioned above that he could be twins/related to Mr Strong.