, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I’ve written quite a bit about knowmore over the past 24 hours, and all of it will be forwarded to the Attorney-General for his consideration and deliberation, and my best guess is that heads will soon roll, and so they damn well should.

But the well is far from dry, and there is plenty more to come.

Stuff like this.


This is where the rort kicks in, and if what knowmore are doing isn’t criminal then it’s surely the next best thing.

As you can see above, the $5 million outfit has ‘established two panels of lawyers’.

The inverted commas that I have used are not because I am quoting from the glossy brochure that is produced by consultants who have never actually tendered for the job (so how do they get it? Mmm, good question) but because I am taking the p*ss, just like knowmore are when they farm the gold-plated compensation cases of sexual abuse victims out to their hand selected mates.

Mates you say? C’mon Archie, you’ve gotta be kidding.

No sportsfans, I am not.

There is no tender process for inclusion on the knowmore panel. Nil, zip, nada. None.

There is no advertisement for expressions of interest to become a member of the panel. Nil, zip, nada again. None.

There are no offers put out in the manner of a closed tender process to preferred suppliers. Yeah I know, you guessed, nil, zip, nada. None.

I confirmed all this yesterday in a terse discussion with knowmore’s Principal Lawyer Prue Gregory, who didn’t really want to tell me, but hey, I’m a child sexual abuse victim and I’m a taxpayer and I have a right to know. So I kept asking the hard questions until they were answered, the and the answers were disturbing to say the least.

The panel members apparently put themselves forward to knowmore, rather than the usual practice of it being the other way around. They become aware that a panel spot is on offer by ‘word of mouth’ Ms Gregory tells me, which is a most unusual way of appointing businesses as preferred suppliers to public service clients, particularly vulnerable clients who are highly susceptible to the recommendations of the legal service they believe they can trust because it is funded by the government to help them.

Or so they think. The suckers.

This is how the rort works.

The victim rings knowmore.

A s0licitor from knowmore tells them that they need a lawyer, and recommends one, from their panel, even going as far as to glick them to a particular individual within the recommended firm, rather than the firm itself per se.

The victim is put in touch with the recommended lawyer, the lawyer strikes a costs agreement that is in no way favorable to the abused, confused sucker, and then it’s onward and upwards and at $500 an hour upwards it’s salad days for all.

For all in the legal profession that is. Or more correctly, for the lucky word of mouth panel winners favoured for referrals by the publicly funded knowmore.

It’s an absolute scandal, that’s what it is, as rotten as a ripe banana left out for seven days in the sun.

I have a lot more to say on the matter, a whole lot more, but I’ll wait until tomorrow to tell you. If you’re bored in the meantime however perhaps you might like to fill your time by Googling the names of the partners of some of the knowmore lawyers, or perhaps searching for the political affiliations of the lawyers themselves.

Then have a quick peek at the political donation disclosures on the State and Federal Electoral Commission websites, and pay particular attention to which law firms donate large wads of cash to whom.

Then suddenly, like Sydney Nolan’s brilliant painting Snake, all the panels may just start to come together, and if you look real close you might even begin to see the whole picture.

And then like me you will be saying ‘Oh dear, but this is taxpayers money, they can’t do this!’.

And too right you’ll be.