Second Case against Westpac:

On 20^th March 2007 I was ordered to pay $ 10,000 to Westpac. Next morning, I filed a new case against Westpac in the same court. This is because I went for the first case itself due to the way the bank staff caused misunderstanding regarding the way they charge interest.

On 10^th May 2007, Mr A.Vassie heard the second case, to decide on the section 75 application from Westpac. He dismissed my case. He ordered me to pay costs to Westpac.

But in his own words on 29^th March 2007 in V564/2007 Hariharan Iyer Vs National Australia Bank, declared that a section 75 application can be heard and determined ONLY by a judicial member, which he was/is NOT.

This situation was reaffirmed by Justice Bowman on 18^th June 2007 in C564/2007 Hariharan Iyer Vs National Australia Bank, in opening speech, Judge disclosed he has shares and has a trustee position for superannuation wing of the bank. He asked me if I had any objection for him hearing the section 75 application filed by NAB. He wanted me to note, if I had objection to him hearing, there are only 2 Judges in VCAT that could hear such application, one being himself and the other Justice Harbison.

Obviously, Mr Vassie, on 18^th June 2007 was NOT entitled to hear and determine section 75 application, but he did on 10^th May 2007!!!

Mr Vassie on 29 March 2007 in C564/2007 Hariharan Iyer Vs National Australia Bank ( a similar case to one against Westpac), in 'directions hearing' provided 2 weeks for NAB to file affidavit relating to their intention to file section 75 application and allowed 2 weeks after the date of their filing section 75 application, for me to file affidavit of my defense.

In my case against Westpac C1937/2007 Hariharan Iyer Vs Westpac Banking Corporation, filed on 21 March 2007, registered by VCAT on 30 March 2007, 'directions hearing' was scheduled for 10 May 2007.

On 4 May 2007 Westpac filed section 75 application with VCAT. I received notification from VCAT on 8 May 2007 (though the notification bears the date 4th, as 4 May was a Friday) advising that section 75 hearing is included for 10 May 2007 'directions hearing'.

This was heard and dismissed by Mr Vassie.

Firstly in his own words he is NOT eligible to preside over this kind of application. Secondly, he had a sensible approach on 29 March 2007 to give 2 weeks for either side to file affidavits, but on 10 May 2007 he had been brain jacked by the presence of Mr Strong that he did not think that I needed time to prepare my defence.

So next time when I go to VCAT should first ask the question to the presiding officer whether he/she is rightfully there are they are sitting there?