Dear Valued Supporters,

I am fighting against injustice, systemic documented corruption and cover ups where the truth is hidden from my family by numerous Australia Post officials from June 2006. Then the cover ups continued by numerous others, outside of Australia Post, that got involved in allegedly protecting Australia Post and allegedly covering up the truth. Many high-ranking officials are involved in unacceptable conduct over number of years.

It is a matter where Australia Post accepted a fraudulently obtained Indonesian passport on my name as a photo ID and allowed redirection of my entire family’s mail to a fraudulently opened PO Box on my name by the criminals. After some initial honesty shown in reporting this to me and my family members, the cover ups started from 15-16 June 2006 and have never ended. This is an unprecedented fight for justice where I have decided not to give up despite numerous people have allegedly joined hands to keep the truth covered up.

This update is a continuation of my letter dated 18 September 2010 to Mr Ahmed Fahour-former MD & Group CEO of Australia Post. My previous three updates covered my questions from 1-61 to Mr Fahour. He failed to even acknowledge my letter and it was filed without a response. My letter dated 18 September 2010 to Mr. Fahour was in response to the Review conducted on this matter by Australia Post, four years after it remained unresolved. It is still unresolved.

The cancer of cover ups has spread everywhere. Please read my petition to Ms Christine Holgate who took over from Mr Fahour. She also failed to resolve the matter for the three years she was the MD & Group CEO of Australia Post. My many updates that followed speak volumes. Ms Holgate resigned with immediate effect.

My petition to Ms Christine Holgate is easily accessed just by typing in Google “Petition Holgate Vasant”. The title is “Australia Post must never cover up IDENTITY THEFTS”.

Please read my letter with my comments on the Review conducted by Australia Post on my unresolved ID theft matters. The person allegedly responsible either partly or wholly for this Review has passed away. The cause of the death is suicide. Mr Fahour and his team hide this death from my family despite this person was my contact person. No new contact person was ever appointed and the cover ups have continued.

Now please read the next part of my letter to Mr. Ahmed Fahour dated 18 September 2010.

The ASSESSMENT Continues as follows:

The offence associated with a fraudulent redirection is that of dishonesty obtaining delivery of articles that are not directed to the person who submitted the redirection (i.e. a person dishonestly/fraudulently attempting to obtain another person’s mail by purporting to be one and the same the person at the address from which the mail is to be redirected). That was not the situation in this case. No one has attempted to obtain Vasant Wagh’s mail from xx Randolph Street.

My Comment:

This redirection was done using INDONESIAN passport on my name. There is only ONE Vasant Wagh not only in Randolph Street but as per my view in the entire Sydney City and in whole of Australia. The conduct of the officials of CSG NSW, CSG Headquarters is of great concern to me who are attempting to make this serious crime/fraud involving my stolen identity as the matter that has nothing to do with me. Any CSG officials involved in this type of assessment in my view need to be investigated for their conduct in relation to this matter.

The ASSESSMENT continues as follows:

While the subject redirection purported to redirect mail from a non-existent address, In whatever name, to a PO Box in which the applicant for the PO Box also used that non-existent address in their application, was capable of giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that the redirection and the PO Box was being used for fraudulent purposes, the CSG of Australia Post neither had a power nor the jurisdiction to investigate that suspected fraudulent purpose, for which the submission of the redirection and box application merely constituted acts in furtherance of that purpose and not offences within themselves.

My Comment:

The PO Box Application and the Application to redirect Mail were accepted by Australia Post and the PO Box was successfully opened by using Indonesian Passport on my name by the criminal as Photo ID. With the limited jurisdiction and power of CSG of Australia Post in this matter the matter was outside their powers and jurisdiction to investigate. In these circumstances, please let me know the following.

62

Which law enforcement authorities were provided with all the documents involved in the crime including the AFP and NSW Police Force and when were these and other authorities informed?

63

When was the Indonesian government informed about the Passport on my name?

64

When the Indian government was informed about this Indonesian passport on my name? (Note: I disclosed to the Investigator Don Kane that I was Indian citizen living permanently in Australia during our conversation on my home telephone number (02) xxxxxxxx on 16 June 2006. This matter before Australia Post was identified by the State Manager CSG, NSW as the criminal matter to Mr. Andy Caprackas, National FOI Officer/ Legal Officer, Australia Post Headquarters. Please let me know if this State Manager CSG NSW was Mr. Alan Barwick JP at the time? I have serious concerns about the assessment that the submission of redirection and box application merely constituted acts in furtherance of that (fraudulent) purpose and not offences within themselves).

65

Why the State Manager CSG NSW considered this as a criminal matter?

The ASSESSMENT continues as follows:

Such a matter can only be properly investigated by the relevant Commonwealth or State law enforcement authority. The role of CSG in such a matter is confined to cancellation of the subject redirection and PO Box, on the basis of a breach of the relevant terms and conditions applicable to the service, or referral of the matter to the relevant State or Commonwealth law enforcement authority for their information and action they deem necessary with the assistance to be provided by CSG, on request by the relevant law enforcement agency, in relation to the provision of information or documents.

My Comment:

When there was a fraudulent use of Indonesian Passport on my name the Australia Post CSG had no options due to its limited authority, jurisdiction, power and role in these criminal activities other than reporting it to the relevant law enforcement authorities immediately. The whole review has played down the seriousness of these criminal activities despite the applicants of the Mail Redirection are required to sign the declaration that they understand that it is a criminal offence to redirect mail of other people without their authority. All those living at the household at the old address were included in the application where my name appears as the applicant. As I am possibly the only person with Vasant Wagh name in the entire country any excuse by the CSG officials of Australia Post that the name does not matter as the address was 38 Randolph Street and not xx, which is my house number, on the PO Box and Redirection of Mail applications is of very serious concern to me and my family.

66

If the name does not matter then why was I contacted by Australia Post?

There was an envelope addressed to 38 Randolph Street with my name on it which the postman could not deliver as 38 number does not exist in Randolph Street in Rosebery, NSW 2018. I believe the word “or” in two places in the above paragraph of the assessment needs to be replaced by the word “and” in this particular matter. I was informed by my local police that the Indonesian Passport on my name falls under the jurisdiction of AFP and all the other matters such as opening of a PO Box, redirection of mail, opening of the garage door of my house remotely by someone, harassing hang up telephone calls, suspiciously parked black Mercedes with tinted glasses and people sitting inside this car for hours, suspicious people visiting my property without identifying who they are etc. falls within the jurisdiction of NSW Police. The NSW CSG and CSG Headquarters in my view had a responsibility to provide information and documents to both AFP and NSW Police immediately after Mr. Steve Gabell handed over all the documents, after reportedly doing overtime to collate all the information and documents to the official of CSG NSW on 16 June 2006 before proceeding on a extended leave. This official is expected to be Investigator Mr. Don Kane of NSW CSG.

The documents referred to in this review are not the documents involved in the Redirection of mail and PO Box application form that was discussed with me and my sons by Mr. Steve Gabell and Ms. Roslyn of Alexandria DF, NSW.  The reason being the application for a PO Box and Redirection of Mail have a Haymarket date stamp indicating that the applications were lodged at Haymarket, NSW. Mr. Steve Gabell informed us that the Mail redirection and PO Box applications were not lodged at Haymarket Post office when we had face-to-face meeting with him on 16 June 2006. Ms Roslyn was present at this meeting.

The ASSESSMENT continues as follows:

It should be noted here, that in the event of the investigation being conducted by the relevant law enforcement agency, then unless and until the investigation did establish a connection between the subject redirection and the complainant, other than just the same name, any investigation would proceed without reference to the complainant.

My Comment:

I have brought to the attention of Australia Post several times that the subject mail redirection as referred by CSG is not the one that was discussed with me and my sons by Mr. Steve Gabell and Ms. Roslyn of Australia Post Alexandria DF located at Ralph Street, Alexandria, NSW.

Australia Post officials in response to the questions by Mr. Andy Caprackas in relation to the Indonesian passport have never mentioned involvement of two separate Indonesian passport numbers anytime. The subject mail redirection involves lodgement of the applications for redirection and PO Box opening at Haymarket PostShop. The mail redirection discussed with us did not involve these applications lodged at Haymarket PostShop. The conduct of all the CSG officials involved in this matter is the subject of great concerns to me and my family members. It is very important for the Managing Director of Australia Post and all the board members including the Chairman Mr. David Mortimer to take this matter very seriously. As these events have taken place Australia Post is expected to show absolute transparency, honesty, integrity, moral and ethical values and also see that the true information and authentic documents involved in these criminal activities are provided to me.

The constant reference to the documents which I have consistently considered as fabricated documents are referred to again and again as the documents involved in the crime/fraud by CSG officials in my view are making matters worse. Nobody has ever dared to categorically deny the existence of the real documents in these criminal activities. This is my view. I believe sufficient opportunities have already been given to Australia Post to tell me the truth and nothing but the truth no matter who was involved in the crimes. The efforts made by the CSG official/s to somehow impress and satisfy me by providing coloured photocopies of some of the documents which were certified by Mr. Alan Barwick in the capacity of the Justice of the Peace as the true copies of the original sighted by him has not satisfied or impressed me at all.

I did not ask for any such certification by a JP. This action to certify copies by a JP by the State Manager CSG NSW has raised more doubts about their authenticity. When asked by the National FOI officer Mr. Andy Caprackas the following question, look at what was the answer by the State Manager CSG NSW. 

Table 48, & Concern 48

In his application for internal review, Mr Wagh states,” Please be aware that in my opinion, the field receipt that has been supplied (Attachment 9) is a fabricated document. I believe that it has been deliberately created to give credibility to Mail Redirection Application Form (Attachment 6 and Attachment 7) and the PO Box Application Form (Attachment 8). The reason why the Field receipt (Attachment 9) that has been supplied is a fabricated document will be disclosed, if necessary, at the right time and place.

Response to National FOI  Officer

State Manager, Corporate Security Group NSW advises that the Field Receipt is the true copy of the original (copy enclosed).

67

Why the State Manager CSG NSW has not responded to my concern that the Field Receipt supplied by him to the National FOI Officer was a FABRICATED DOCUMENT?

68

Why Mr. Andy Caprackas did not insist on a proper response to my view that this Field Receipt was a fabricated document from State Manager CSG NSW?

(Note: This Field Receipt was certified by Mr. Alan Barwick as the true copy of the original sighted by him in the capacity of the Justice of the Peace without disclosing if he was the State Manager CSG NSW at the time).

69

Was Mr. Alan Barwick himself was the State Manager CSG NSW who supplied this Field Receipt to National FOI officer Mr. Andy Caprackas?

This Field Receipt (Property) with Field Receipt No. 01317 has been dated 16/6/06 and the only two documents recorded on this Field Receipt are also in my opinion fabricated documents. This field receipt has been signed by Mr. Don Kane and Mr. Steve Gabell on behalf of CSG NSW and Alexandria Delivery facility (ADF) respectively.

My concerns about all these three and many more documents were forwarded to you in my earlier correspondence. The date stamps on these documents, redirection commencement date of 29 May 2006 and first contact in the form of answering machine message left by    Mr. Steve Gabell on my home telephone number on 14 June 2006, K 861 PO Box, The transaction receipt with a different CRN number, No expiry date recorded of the Indonesian passport by accepting officer of Australia Post, INDO abbreviation for Indonesian, two different mobile numbers of the same customer with a different sixth digit, two different handwritings of the same customer on these forms, confirmation by accepting officer that he/she checked the name, address and signature on the Indonesian Passport on my name were same as the one on the Mail redirection and PO B ox application form are the things that DO NOT ADD UP AT ALL.

How could Australia Post fail so dismally in allowing this mail redirection to be successful is the matter of great concern. In my view this whole thing is a complete fabrication in every way. I am not surprised that the Redirection Action Sheet of this particular Redirection cannot be located by Australia Post. Possibly it was too late to fabricate Redirection Action Sheet in relation to the fabricated Redirection of Mail application and fabricated PO Box application. The systems put in place by Australia Post may have prevented or made it difficult to create this Redirection Action Sheet at a later date. The other two forms can be obtained from any Australia Post Outlets that could be easily fabricated. I have concerns about the use of date stamp of Haymarket Australia Post on these documents. Identifying the accepting officers who have signed these forms is inevitable to find the truth unless they have been already identified and the truth is already known to Australia Post officials.

70

If these two accepting officers have not been identified and if one of them or both of them do not exist or never existed or worked for Australia Post then please let me know who at Australia Post has created fictitious identities and false signatures to create fabricated forms in relation to this mail redirection and PO Box application. Are these accepting officers real people?

71

Is the handwriting on all these certified copies is that of Mr. Alan Barwick JP?

72

Was Mr. Alan Barwick State Manager CSG NSW when he signed this document on 8 December 2006 indicating his JP number as 175733?

This last paragraph of this Review ASSESSMENT indicates that if the law enforcement authorities decide to conduct the investigation it would proceed without reference to me unless and until the investigation did establish a connection between the subject redirection and me. This statement in my view is irresponsible, unwarranted, suspicious and I consider it as a gross misconduct of the author especially when the CSG is not the law enforcement authority and with their documented limited role, no powers, no jurisdiction, limited extent of their capability it is objectionable that the CSG official can make assessment about what the law enforcement authorities would do.

The Subject redirection in this review is not the mail redirection that was discussed with me and my sons. It appears that the CSG officials could be breaching the limits of their authority in dealing with this well-planned premeditated crime and fraud and could be fully involved in covering up these crimes. In my view each and every CSG Official who was involved in these matters has lost the credibility and should never be allowed to have any further involvement in this matter. I request both the Managing Director and the Chairman of Australia Post to take personal interest in this matter to resolve it very quickly. CSG officials in my view have dismally failed and probably taken matters into their own hands without the proper authority. I believe it was their immediate responsibility to report these matters to the law enforcement authorities and inform me accordingly. The actions and inactions of CSG officials has probably contributed to this matter remaining unresolved for over four years. I hope you have a very transparent and strong mechanism in place to investigate the investigators for possible corrupt conduct which in my view is consistently displayed in this review by Australia Post dated 22 June 2010.

If the law enforcement authorities consider that their investigations will proceed without any reference to me then they should write to me accordingly with the full explanation of the reasons and if I am not satisfied with their explanation then I can raise it with the people who have powers to ask questions to the law enforcement authorities. For Australia Post CSG official/s to make such an assessment is absolutely unacceptable. This further raises doubts about their involvement in possible cover up of these criminal activities especially when they are keeping on referring to the documents referred in this review which are not the ones involved in the criminal activities that were discussed with me by Mr. Steve Gabell and Ms. Roslyn of ADF.

This review further details CSG NSW Action:

CSG NSW did not refer this matter to a relevant law enforcement agency. They maintain that they did advice the complainant that if he was concerned he should report the matter to the NSW police and that should the police require further assistance with their inquiries the CSG would oblige accordingly.

My Comment:

When the fraudulent use of INDONESIAN passport on my name was involved as a Photo ID to redirect mail coming on my name and opening of a PO Box on my name at Australia Post Haymarket PostShop, CSG NSW, as per their own documented admission, had no jurisdiction, powers or authority to investigate this premeditated crime/fraud. Not to report this to law enforcement authorities immediately will be considered by me as a serious breach by CSG NSW officials of their prime responsibility to alert AFP and NSW Police Force when the matter was handed over to Mr. Don Kane of CSG NSW by Mr. Steve Gabell of ADF.

The claim that I was advised by CSG NSW to report the matter to NSW police if I was concerned, in my view, is F A L S E  and is COMPLETE FABRICATION OF UNACCEPTABLE  PROPORTIONS.

73

Can you please provide documents and details of when, how and in what way I was advised by CSG NSW to report the matter to NSW police? Please provide dates, time, name of the CSG official/s who gave me such an advise.

CSG NSW Action continues as follows:

It seems quite clear from the nature of content of the complainant’s correspondence to Australia Post that CSG NSW failed to adequately communicate Australia Post’s limited role in this matter to the complainant or indeed his legal representative, such as to give rise to an expectation by the complainant that CSG NSW would be investigating the matter and that the complainant would be kept appraised of the progress of any investigation being conducted by CSG NSW.

My Comment:

I wanted to report the matter to the local police station located at Botany Road, Mascot in NSW. When I visited Mascot police station (Botany Bay Local Area Command) I was asked to bring even one document from Australia Post so that the matter could be entered in the police computer. I went to ADF and met Mr. Steve Gabell to inform him about the police requirement. I was told by Mr. Steve Gabell that I will be kept updated all the time by the “security” (CSG NSW) and someone will be in touch with me immediately and I will be kept informed about all the developments. He said as the matter is with the “security” (CSG NSW) he cannot give me any documents as the investigations are not over and by asking for the documents “I was putting the cart before the horse”.  My both sons were present when this happened on 16 June 2006 at Alexandria DF in Ralph Street, Alexandria in NSW. Ms Roslyn was also present at this meeting. She said she does not know if the matter is criminal but it is definitely fraudulent. I was advised to cancel all my credit cards and immediately contact my banks. Mr. Steve Gabell told us that someone could use my existing accounts to open new accounts using the Indonesian Passport on my name. As I did not want to get tossed between the police and the post, I appointed Mr. Vincent Pelosi of Pelosi and Associates (Solicitor) to get to the bottom of this matter quickly. He wrote to Investigator Mr. Don Kane on 21 June 2006 asking for the documents. No one from CSG NSW has cared to respond to this letter for over past FOUR YEARS. CSG NSW, in my view, has no credibility left to deal with this matter anymore.

74

Please let me know if Mr. Alan Barwick JP was the boss of Mr. Don Kane Investigator at the time holding the position of State Manager CSG NSW/ACT?

CSG NSW Action continues as follows:

CSG NSW did however cancel the subject redirection based on the fact that it was purporting to redirect mail from a non-existent address and conducted some preliminary inquiries in relation to the passport details provided on both the redirection and PO Box application. There are no records in CSG NSW to indicate whether results were obtained from these inquires or whether the inquiries were followed through to finality but in any event, the complainant would not have been entitled to privy to specific details of those results.

My Comment:  VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE

The subject redirection as referred to in this review is not the redirection that was discussed with me and my sons by Mr. Steve Gabell and Ms. Roslyn on 16 June 2006. The redirection that was discussed was the one that was NOT LODGED AT HAYMARKET PostShop of Australia Post. In my view I have been provided with the FABRICATED documents created by someone to cover up the crime/fraud and CSG NSW are keeping on referring to these FABRICATED documents all the time. This has been going on since these documents were released to me under FOI act. The story of CSG NSW therefore DOES NOT ADD UP and in my view WILL NEVER EVER ADD UP. I hope under your new leadership as Managing Director and CEO of Australia Post the truth will be revealed to me immediately about this matter.

CSG NSW DID NOT CANCEL THE REDIRECTION THAT WAS NOT LODGED AT HAYMARKET POSTSHOP. IT WAS MR. STEVE GABELL OF ADF WHO INFORMED MY SON AFTER THE CONTACT WITH THE PERSON WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN MADE ON A MOBILE NUMBER THAT WAS CONNECTED. THIS MOBILE TELEPHONE NUMBER WAS ON THE REDIRECTION APPLICATION FORM THAT WAS IN FRONT OF MR. STEVE GABELL ON 15 JUNE 2006 WHEN HE CALLED MY HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER (02) xxxxxxxx. HE TOLD MY SON NILESH THAT THE REDIRECTION IS CANCELLED AND HE WILL BE HANDING OVER THE MATTER TO THE SECURITY (CSG, NSW). THE INFORMATION THAT I WILL BE INFORMED AND WILL BE CONTACTED ON AN ONGOING BASIS BY THE SECURITY (NSW, CSG) OFFICIAL TILL THE MATTER IS RESOLVED CAME FROM MR. STEVE GABELL.

As indicated in this paragraph CSG NSW conducted some preliminary enquires in relation to the passport details provided on both the redirection and PO Box application. As per CSG NSW emails released to me under FOI act two different passport numbers have been mentioned in their correspondence. This was never the case in relation to the mail redirection and PO Box application that was not lodged at Haymarket PostShop. I was never told by Mr. Steve Gabell, Ms. Roslyn or Investigator Mr. DON KANE that two separate passport numbers are involved at any time. In my view this further confirms that the subject documents as referred to in this review are not the ones involved in the matter that was before Mr. Steve Gabell on 14,15 and 16 June 2006.

CSG NSW on one hand has indicated that they have limited powers, no jurisdiction and such matters can only be properly investigated by the relevant Commonwealth or State law enforcement authorities and on the other hand they are having enough powers to conduct the enquiries in relation to the passport details on the redirection and PO Box application forms. Their explanation in my view is not adding up.

CSG NSW has no records to indicate whether the results were obtained from these inquiries in relation to the passports and whether the inquiries were followed through to finality. Why there are no records with CSG NSW in relation to the passport on my name? The only reason that I can think of is the documents released to me under FOI act are not the documents involved in the crime of mail redirection and opening of a PO Box on my name using an INDONESIAN PASSPORT as photo ID to commit these crimes. In my view as CSG NSW very quickly identified the crime, they did not require any assistance from me and my family, the victims of crime, to solve it. In my view they also could have reported it very quickly to the law enforcement authorities, as they had no powers, jurisdiction, authority as the fraudulent use of Indonesian Passport on my name falls under AFP jurisdiction and all the other matters under NSW Police Force jurisdiction. It is my belief that the responsibility of informing me that this matter is handed over to the law enforcement authorities was that of CSG NSW and/or CSG Headquarters. This did not happen.

75

When was the matter, that related to mail redirection and opening of PO Box that was NOT lodged at Haymarket PostShop was reported to law enforcement authorities by Australia Post CSG NSW/Headquarters?

CSG NSW Action continues as follows:

CSG NSW also terminated PO BOX K861 on 8/5/08, primarily it would seem as a result of an unrelated fraudulent redirection investigation conducted by CSG NSW. No reason has been disclosed as to why this PO Box was not closed at the same time as the subject redirection was cancelled but nothing turns on this fact.

My Comment:

PO Box K861 story DOES NOT ADD UP. Why would Australia Post lose revenue for almost TWO YEARS by not renting this PO Box in the middle of the city of Sydney where it is expected to have probably waiting list for the renting the PO Boxes. If this was unrelated fraudulent mail redirection investigation conducted by CSG NSW, why I have been given a document that relates to the PO Box K861 on my name that was fraudulently opened using INDONESIAN PASSPORT as a Photo ID on my name. This Indonesian passport was accepted by Australia Post’s Accepting Officer as the one on Vasant Wagh’s name and Two keys of this PO Box K861 were handed over to the applicant as per this document. The fact that this PO Box was not closed immediately raises serious questions if this PO Box was involved in the real crime/fraud in the first place. I have raised the concerns in the past that in my view the PO Box application lodged at Haymarket PostShop is a fabricated document. No one from the CSG NSW has responded to my concern that this is a fabricated document to National FOI Officer despite Mr. Andy Caprackas asking to comment on my concerns. Certified coloured copies were supplied by State Manager CSG NSW of this PO Box application form with K861 as the PO Box allocated to the applicant. Mr. Alan Barwick JP certified this document as the true copy of the original sighted by him that was received by the National FOI officer Mr. Andy Caprackas.

If Mr. Alan Barwick was the State Manager CSG NSW at the time of supplying this document to National FOI officer then it was his responsibility to disclose his conflict of interest or perceived conflict of interest in certifying this document in the capacity of Justice of the Peace as the true copies of the original sighted by him on that copy. Any violation by Mr. Alan Barwick of his responsibility in signing documents in the capacity of the Justice of the Peace may fall outside your authority to investigate but to inform me if was the State Manager CSG NSW at the time of signing this and other documents signed by him, in my view, will fall well within your responsibility as the Managing Director and CEO of Australia Post. His connection with Australia Post at any time in the past, present or after his leaving Australia Post could very well be considered as conflict of interest or perceived conflict of interest if the Australia Post documents involved in the crime/fraud are certified by him in the capacity of the Justice of the Peace without the proper disclosure of his connection with Australia Post.

To show my openness I would like to inform you that all the copies signed by Mr. Alan Barwick JP that were provided to you have also been provided to the Attorney General of NSW Hon. John Hatzistergos and I have received communication from his department on his behalf. I have raised my concerns with the Attorney General of NSW as the concerns about the conduct of Justice of the Peace falls under his portfolio responsibilities.

If you have already established and confirmed that the signature of Mr. Alan Barwick is his genuine signature on all the documents that were provided to you then I do not expect you to hide that fact from me even for a single day. On the other hand, if you have positively confirmed with the documentary evidence that the signature of Mr. Alan Barwick JP is a forgery then you are requested to provide me with all the information that will substantiate that the signature is a forgery. In any event the matter before you that I expect you to resolve will be considered by me as of extremely serious nature.

CSG NSW Action continues as follows:

Not withstanding CSG’s limited role in, and powers to investigate this matter, CSG NSW conducted fresh enquiries in relation to the passport numbers and mobile phone numbers provided on both the subject redirection and PO Box application as a result of the complainant’s representation to Australia Post. These inquiries disclosed that one of the passport numbers used is the number of an active Indonesian passport but in the name other than that of Vasant Wagh. The mobile phone numbers are currently active although in the names different to that on the passport and other than that of Vasant Wagh.

My Comment:

Once again, the subject redirection is not the redirection that has anything to do with the fraudulent/criminal mail redirection that was brought to my attention by officials of ADF      Mr. Steve Gabell and Ms. Roslyn. This Review has now confirmed that as per CSG official/s  the documents supplied to me under the FOI act have Two separate Passport numbers and as per these two documents viz. Redirection of Mail application and PO Box application the passports were on my name as the accepting officers have indicated that they were on the name of Vasant Wagh, each passport has 38 Randolph Street, Rosebery, NSW 2018 as the  address of the applicant written somewhere on the passports and the signature on these two passports is the same as the one on the application forms sighted by the accepting officers.  I cannot believe that the accepting officer of Australia Post at Haymarket PostShop has even considered the application to be accepted when the only document available for the accepting officer for verifying the identity of the applicant was this Indonesian passport as a Photo ID and one of the passports as per CSG NSW is not even on the name of Vasant Wagh. Who is telling the truth? In my view neither the CSG NSW officials nor the Accepting Officer of Haymarket PostShop are telling the truth.

76

If one of the Indonesian passport numbers on the application is an active Indonesian passport but, on the name, other than that of Vasant Wagh then how could the accepting officer of Haymarket PostShop accept it as the passport on the name of Vasant Wagh? The STORY DOES NOT ADD UP AT ALL.

77

What is the story of the other passport number? CSG NSW did not mention anything about this second passport number in the review. Where is the integrity and honesty?

78

Who is displaying corrupt conduct? CSG NSW officials or the Accepting officer? Or both CSG NSW official/s and the Accepting officer/s?

79

Where does Mr. Alan Barwick JP stand in all of this?

The credibility of the CSG officials who are with this matter for the past four years has been totally lost. This is my view. The accepting officer’s conduct is of great concern as well.

80

Why would someone write INDO for Indonesia? The short form INDO is normally used for INDIA internationally.

81

Why did the Accepting officer left the place blank where there is a requirement to fill the expiry date of the passport?

82

Why did the ADF official/s allow the mail redirection and the opening of a PO Box to go through successfully without contacting me in any shape or form despite my name being the only one in Sydney White Pages along with my address?

83

How can Australia Post even consider an application for a redirection of a mail form from a non-existent address in the suburb of Sydney in the City of Botany Bay which is named ROSEBERY in the year believed to be 1884 with my name clearly written on both the application to Redirect Mail and PO Box application form?

84

How can a redirection action sheet of this Mail Redirection cannot be located?

85

 How can there be two mobile numbers of the same person with a different sixth digit that was missed by the ADF officials?

86

How can the same person who is the applicant of Mail redirection and PO Box opening have two different styles of handwriting and not picked up by the Australia Post officials?

87

 The applicant had a passport of INDONESIA. In this day and age what is the competence of Australia Post Accepting Officers to accept a document and act on it blindly without first contacting me to check the authenticity of this mail redirection?

88

Where is the photocopy of the passport page where the photograph of the person appears on the passport who made these applications?

If an ordinary layman like me can pick up all these things, I believe, there was no chance that the experienced Australia Post ADF officials could miss all these things so easily. On top of this the person with the name of Alan Barwick JP signs these documents as TRUE COPIES OF THE ORIGINALS SIGHTED BY HIM in the capacity of the Justice of the Peace. Please let me know if the following description of the person with the name Alan Barwick was the one who was State Manager CSG NSW/ACT at any time. This description of Alan Barwick was on the Internet some time ago.

“Alan served for twenty years in the NSW Police Force. He performed duties in General Duties, Traffic, Criminal Investigations and Tactical Response Group. Alan was the Director of the Criminal Intelligence Analyst Training Course at the NSW Police Academy. Was attached to the Organised Crime Squad, Bureau of Criminal Intelligence and was instrumental in the establishment of State Intelligence Group. Presently, Alan is the State Manager NSW/ACT, Corporate Security Group-Australia Post.”

As the Managing Director and CEO of Australia Post I would like you to confirm that the documents signed by Mr. Alan Barwick JP (Six copies provided to you with my earlier letter) are the ones that are signed by the same Alan Barwick who was the State Manager CSG NSW at any time. I believe, it will be very easy for the following persons to confirm this as well.

1.    Mr. Andy Caprackas,

2.    Mr. Steve Brotherson,

3.    Mr. Bob Croxford.

4.    Mr. Don Kane,

5.    Mr. Chris Lenton.

There was also mention of Mr. Alan Barwick’s name in one of the International Magazines for Close Circuit Television in relation to Australia Post turning to high-tech digital CCTV. He has been mentioned as the State Manager of Australia Post NSW Corporate Security Group many years ago.

If all the description and information above about Mr. Alan Barwick is true and if he is the same Alan Barwick who has certified the documents then it will be hard for anyone to believe that the person of this much experience and expertise was unable to identify, which in my view, are the fabricated documents supplied to me under FOI Act.

In my application to obtain documents involved in the criminal activities and many other documents I did not request Australia Post for any of the documents certified by the Justice of the Peace. This type of unnecessary, unwarranted certification has raised serious concerns about the authenticity of the Original documents sighted by Mr. Alan Barwick JP.

The Review does not mention about the other passport number if it is active and on my name or was active and was on my name. If the CSG officials could find about one passport that is active and not on my name, why cannot they disclose what is the result of their enquiries about the other passport. In my view there is no credibility left at all in CSG officials involved in this matter.

The review mentions that the mobile numbers on the subject redirection and PO Box application are active mobile numbers although in names different to those on the passports and other than that of Vasant Wagh. If this is the case:

89

Why these applications were approved in the first place by Australia Post? This in my view further confirms that the subject Redirection and PO Box application are FABRICATED documents.

The final part of my above mentioned letter will be shared next time.

Dear Supporters,

Now you will know why it is important to fight for the truth and against the corruption and cover ups. Both Mr. Fahour and Ms Holgate resigned and no one investigated why they resigned.

Ms Holgate was provided the copy of this letter to Mr Fahour and many other documents but she failed to respond. Both gave baseless reasons for their resignations and the media protected them instead of exposing them is my view.

If no one is above the law then why not start from Australia Post officials to see how many laws were breached by them over the past SIXTEEN years?

Please keep reading, commenting and supporting. I thank all my 41,456 strong supporters for their continued support.

I am prepared to answer any questions that my supporters may have that are to the point and in relation to my petition and updates.

There are numerous people in Australia Post aware of my fight for justice.

The letter received by my solicitor with the name of the author as Paul Gardner has a signature that is highly likely a forgery. No one in Australia Post has any courage to tell me the truth about this alleged forged signature. The letter to my solicitor was baseless with a false date and no reference number.

Mr Gardner has left Australia Post job and this is also the case with Mr Burke and many others.

Please help because identity thefts are public interest matters. Close to a million people in our country alone are affected each and every year.

Please help my family to get justice because “justice delayed is justice denied”.

Thanks again