Document

Gerard Crewdson's Letter to Steven Davison CEO HealthQuest

STEVEN DAVISON
CEO HEALTHQUEST

10 May 2007

Dear Mr Davison,

I have learnt from [name withheld from public view at this time 2008] that you wish to contact and speak to me about the injustices I have suffered as a result of being subjected to an involuntary psychiatric 'examination' at HealthQuest and that you have or will be organising an independent investigation of our cases. I have also been told that you wish to know how the wrongs that have occurred might be corrected. I am very surprised that after almost 10 years of hostile treatment from HealthQuest that someone now heading the organisation should be making this approach. My trust in NSW Government officials has been severely damaged by my experiences but I am willing to believe that your intentions are genuine and represent a welcome change for the better.

Firstly however my overwhelming concern is for the situation of Mrs Val Kerrison who has suffered longer than myself as the result of HealthQuest malfeasance. As you may know she won a ground breaking case in the Industrial Relations Commission to have her purported retirement declared null and void only to have it overturned on appeal by a Full Bench comprising Justices Walton, Staunton and Staff. As a result of that decision Mrs Kerrison not only has lost over 12 years of wages and her entitlements she now faces massive court costs arising from a hearing on this coming Thurs. The judges of the Commission overturned a decision in her favour on submissions from the TAFE Commission that the Managing Director of TAFE or delegate was absolutely bound by HealthQuest's advice to summarily terminate Mrs Kerrisons employment without affording her procedural fairness. On 23/3/07 you issued a notice about new HealthQuest processes and stated in bold: "It is important to remember that decisions relating to the retirement of public sector employees are the sole responsibility of the Department Head. While the HealthQuest Assessment must be considered when decideing to medically retire a public sector employee, Departmental Heads must also take into account other relevant information in making their decision."

As you would know this was also the case in June 1995 when TAFE Commission took action to try and terminate Mrs Kerrison's employment. It was also the case in 1997/1998 when DOCS officers took various actions to suspend me. Again it was the case when officers of the NSW Dept of Public Works and Services removed Ms Pascale Bourot from her employment. And yet in all three cases the Crown Solicitor has argued in the Industrial Relations Commission that HealthQuest opinions were binding on our Departments. The Commission have been issuing judgments against us on the basis of false arguments made by the Crown Solicitor about the role of HealthQuest. As the decisions have ben obtained by fraud they cannot stand. ("Fraud unravels everything") Mrs Kerrison is about to suffer further irreparable harm as a result of this dishonesty perpetrated by the NSW Crown Solicitor and Barristers Elaine Brus and Paul Menzies. Mrs Kerrison has won many supporters and friends amazed at her courage particularly as she is also now having to deal with the effects of cancer. We are deeply concerned at the unnecessary stress being placed upon her by what is happening. I urge you to as a priority take all action you can to remedy the damage caused to her by HealthQuest and to communicate clearly to the Crown Solicitor the true role of HealthQuest. They must correct their misleading statements to court.

In my own case I will be serving tomorrow on HealthQuest submissions for my application for judicial review in the Supreme Court. I am requiring the Court of Appeal to quash decisions of the Commission in my case but the legal issues apply equally to Mrs Kerrison's case.

You may know that Justice Boland of the IRC upheld the validity of a Deed I signed with DOCS and HealthQuest on 6/10/98 and held that it barred my application for declaratory relief. Putting aside whether his decision was correct and bona fide there emerged evidence in the case which he overlooked in his judgment that revealed that HealthQuest/CSAHS did not pay a single cent of compensation to me under that Deed
See letter Mike Wallace CSAHSA to Dr Gapper 29/9/98
Dr Gapper was given permission to sign that Deed on the basis that
"The release does not involve either the Area Health Service or HealthQuest in any expense or cost."

HealthQuest malfeasance has cost me 10 years of employment, damage to reputation etc and the Deed even it were valid with regard to my Department is not valid with regard to HealthQuest because there was no consideration given to me for releasing HealthQuest from past current or future legal claims and liability.

I don't believe that HealthQuest should ultimately be held liable for all my losses since 29/10/97.

My Department set the process in motion by their own unlawful conduct.

I am fighting in the Supreme Court to have my employer made fully liable for its manifestly unlawful conduct in referring me to HealthQuest in the first place and lying to HealthQuest about an alleged but non-existent mental illness.

It is therefore in the interests of HealthQuest that my application to the Supreme Court suceeds.

Meanwhile I welcome any action on your behalf to genuinely repair the damage done and emphasise that such action needs to be taken urgently.