NSW Ombudsman has fundamentally ignored our complaint against Service NSW’s corrupt conduct

April 10, 2025

Editor’s Foreword:

From the outset, we emphasise about this complaint matter, that Nature Trail and its Tour Director Steve Ridd have nothing to financially gain from this article and our broader campaign.

This article is one in a series published herein under our campaign topic category we entitle:

‘Government Indian Givers‘

So this article and others included in our public campaign serve as pure citizen whistle-blowing about government greed, doing wrong, ignoring legitimate complaints, and perpetuating that wrong.

This campaign is just about what we perceive to be criminal extortion activity by certain departments within the NSW Government targeting many small genuine and honest small family businesses across NSW.

Our research shows that it suggests a more underhand and sinister association to serious multi-million dollar corrupt conduct and to bureaucratic cover-up, that has been unchecked and so remains current, ongoing, unacceptable and must end and be brought to justice and media scrutiny ASAP.

What has been going on is a CROCK!

Introduction:

It seems that the bureaucratic jungle drums across the NSW Government have been busy of late. Disgruntled rumblings from the Blue Mountains seem to have stirred certain ‘big smoke’ bureaucrats afar in their Sydney bubble.

Nature Trail received a token apologetic email (28th March 2025) from Service NSW for what we term its criminal Grant Clawback Extortion Racket imposed upon Nature Trail.

Then within days (31st March 2025) we then ‘coincidentally’ received a second closure email from then the NSW Ombudsman to our quite separate complaint against Service NSW for its ongoing extortion racket against many other small businesses who have reached out to Nature Trail.

In sequence, we herein provide a copy of both letters as follows: [Note: anyone can download, print these and use these (no copyright terms), since this matter is not personal nor about us, but about governmental attack on the rights of citizens of New South Wales):

Taking too long?

Reload document

Open in new tab

Download [113.56 KB]

Taking too long?

Reload document

Open in new tab

Download [680.70 KB]

Our complaints against Service NSW’s corrupt conduct (its Grant Clawback Extortion Racket) were made along with anyone and everyone we could think of having some authority.

This including Nature Trail’s Tour Director Mr Steve Ridd‘s complaint to the NSW Ombudsman (4^th September 2024) (their Case Reference Number C/2024/17563). We note that it’s final response represents a shameful 208-day turnaround to our submitted complaint.

Worse is that the NSW Ombudsman dealt with an imagined complaint, NOT the specific complaint that Mr Ridd had submitted to the NSW Ombudsman.

Tht complaint was NOT about Nature Trail’s dealings with Service NSW per se, since this dispute had been closed by Service NSW five months previously, following Nature Trail’s year-long campaign battle against Service NSW’s criminal Grant Clawback Extortion Racket.

Rather, Mr Ridd’s complaint to the NSW Ombudsman was specifically about Service NSW ‘s ongoing extortion racket toward many OTHER small businesses that had contacted us during our very public campaign. Nature Trail’s complaint about Service NSW to the NSW Ombudsman was part of that followup campaign to support the other business copping the same corrupt conduct from Service NSW as we had endured.

Readers, when you read this reply letter from NSW Ombudsman’s Investigation & Resolutions Officer Hannah Versicano, bear in mind that it totally ignores our raised complaint focus about Service NSW’s extortionate mistreatment of OTHER businesses.

Our complaint was never about Nature Trail’s beef with Service NSW. We had beat the bastards on our own terms five months prior by 30th April 2024. We then followup with Steve’s analysis for the benefit of the truth of this case, and to allow to realise that the NSW Ombudsman is not up to its statutory task.

Our critique of the NSW Ombudsman’s mishandling of our momplaint:

Our Analysis Method:

We note that the NSW Ombudsman seems to prefer an abbreviation “OMBO”, using it in its default email address: PAT@OMBO.nsw.gov.au.

We herein breakdown the statements made to us in the NSW Ombudsman‘s response letter above. For clarify, for each statement (shown in bold italics) made in the letter by NSW Ombudsman’s Investigation & Resolutions Officer Hannah Versicano, we prefix it with ‘OMBO STATEMENT #:’, then follow with ‘OUR ANALYSIS:’ with our detailed crituque.

In this way, we rip apart the letter’s mishandling/non-handling of our case, shred by shred.

The statements made by the NSW Ombudsman above and our respective analysis:

OMBO STATEMENT #1:

‘Complaint about Service NSW

I acknowledge your complaint about Service NSW received on 4 September 2024. You complained that you were subject to a debt for the COVID-19 Micro-Business Grant (MBG) by Service NSW, even though you alleged that you met the eligibility criteria.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

No, the NSW Ombudsman’s Investigation & Resolutions Officer Hannah Versicano, has dealt with the wrong problem. The problem was NOT about Nature Trail’s own dispute with Service NSW.
Steve Ridd made it quite clear to Hannah Versicano “she/her”? in his detailed phone conversation on Friday 1st November 2024, that his complaint about Service NSW with NSW Ombudsman was specifically concerning the ongoing Grant Clawback Extortion Racket impacting other small businesses, of which Nature Trail had been one but had won its fight against Service NSW.
Steve Ridd made it quite clear to Hannah Versicano, that rather than he email his copious blog articles on the issue to her, that Ms Versicano read his blog from her computer at work and then notify which articles she felt were best suited to the case. At the time, Mr Ridd explained over the phone to Ms Versicano how to locate the relevant blog material. Ms Versicano acknowledge that access in her reply email same day (copy below). However Ms Versicano refused to follow Steven’s directions. At the time Steven was very busy with the campaign against Service NSW on behalf of dozens of other small business grant recipients.

OMBO Statement #1 omits Mr Ridd’s accusations of extortion by Service NSW outsourced contracted debt collectors.
OMBO Statement #1 also omits Mr Ridd’s criticism (verified by mainstream media) that the grant clawback by the NSW Government (Service NSW) was illegitimate also because the funding came 100% from the Federal Government for this grant, yet the clawback was not refunding the grant funds back to the Federal Government, but instead stashing it and using extortion tactics.
Ms Versicano has completely failed to deal with the specific complaint submitted by Mr Ridd. Instead she has gone off on an irrelevant tangent to deal with a different matter that had belong been resolved by Mr Ridd himself. She has totally wasted time and effort and in the process failed to maintain correspondence with Mr Ridd over 208 days the matter was delegate to her.

OMBO STATEMENT #2:

‘Whilst the debt was eventually waived by Service NSW,’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Service NSW so-called ‘compliance review‘ of Nature Trail’s grant approval was withdrawn by Service NSW on 30th April 2024.
As mentioned above, Steve Ridd’s complaint to the NSW Ombudsman was NOT about Nature Trail’s dealings with Service NSW per se. Nature Trail had had its battle against Service NSW’s $15,214 Micro Business grant clawback extortion threats receiving a brief ‘case closure’ email of sorts directly from Service NSW dated 30th April 2024 (received 3 May 2024) had advised Mr Ridd thus:

“Upon the resumption of the compliance audit, Service NSW has completed a review of the further documentation you have supplied and has identified that you have not currently provided sufficient evidence to support eligibility of your application. However, after careful consideration of your application and subsequent communications, Service NSW can confirm your application has been withdrawn from any pending compliance review and note no further action is required by you or your business.

Kind regards

Tina Dougherty

Director,

SNSW Business Bureau, Business Customer Service”

We note that Ms Dougherty’s excuse above is mealy-mouthed, feeble and blatantly wrong for the following reasons:

(1) Service NSW Grant Clawback Extortion outsourced debt collectors did not do anything but debt collect on a commission reward basis;

(2) What Service NSW did (continue to do) is no ‘audit’;

(3) Nature Trail has extensive correspondence with Service NSW records proving that it provided all the requested evidence to support eligibility for the grant application. This was submitted to Service NSW (a) at the time of the initial application 1st August 2021, (b) prior in a previous bushfire grant application, and (c) multiple times in response to Service NSW Grant Clawback extortion Racket;

(4) The problem was that Service NSW did not keep records and the debt collection contractors failed to share evidence provided to each. They had no central database.

This eventual closure of the extortion racket by Service NSW targeting approved grant recipient Nature Trail (amongst many others) was due to Nature Trail’s successfully waged battle against Service NSW on this issue and Mr Ridd ‘s very public counter campaign against Service NSW for over year.
It is questionable then why almost exactly a year later, on 28th March 2025, Service NSW decides to email a brief apology for the affair to Mr Ridd. Copy below.
Statement #5 contradicts Statement #2 about the Grant Clawback Extortion Racket ever being an ‘audit’. NSW Ombudsman’s Investigation & Resolutions Officer Hannah Versicano is inconsistent in her letter in many ways.

Taking too long?

Reload document

Open in new tab

Download [113.56 KB]

So why Service NSW year delay between notifying closure (30th April 2024) and apologising (28th March 2025) ?
What has transpired between NSW Ombudsman and Service NSW? What political machinations have been going on behind closed doors?
Why has the Godfather of the Grant Clawback Extortion Racket CEO Greg Wells not been investigated for corrupt conduct by NSW Ombudsman?
Just like how ICAC failed to investigate this extortion, so has the NSW Ombudsman – both organisations have failed Nature Trail Mr Ridd and the many similarly extorted small business recipients of the NSW Government’s COVID-19 Micro Business Grant with payouts totalling $781.1 million. One is led to believe that the NSW Ombudsman is supposed to be independent of the NSW Government and its departments. Clearly not.

OMBO STATEMENT #3:

‘…you reported the following issues relating to your experience with Service NSW:

The unprofessionalism of Service NSW throughout the investigation.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Yes, but far worse than that…
Try also, by phone and email – making threatening unfounded claims of Mr Ridd being a fraudster by default retrospectively (this started 11 April 2023, being more than 1 year and 8 months after Service NSW manual approval of the grant for Nature Trail.
Also, the intimidating threat to refer the (fabricated debt) to Revenue NSW for debt collection, thereon the escalated threat and power to seize Nature Trail’s assets if the (fabricated debt) is not repaid in full, etc. This applied equally to Nature Trail as it did to may other grant recipients.

20241105 Grant Recipient Complainant #33

An extract of Revenue NSW invoicing – adopted as part of Service NSW ‘Grant Clawback Extortion Racket’ (2023 – current).

This is all unconscionable behaviour by Service NSW contractors going by anonymous first names only. It is the despicable behaviour of scammers.
Steve Ridd’s complaint to the NSW Ombudsman was also NOT to have Nature Trail’s grant application reassessed, rather it was a complaint against Service NSW corrupt extortion racket along with its unconscionable threatening and intimidating behaviour.
The NSW Ombudsman has completely avoided the problems raised by Mr Ridd. We question whether this was more than incompetence, but indeed more sinister – that the NSW Ombudsman was not independent in its dealings with Mr Ridd’s concerns, but was in cahoots with the Minns Ministry and condoned this extortion racket.

OMBO STATEMENT #4:

‘The use of unqualified staff, as the staff who handled your case did not have sufficient knowledge of tax, tax law or accounting.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Yes
But nothing changed despite Mr Ridd’s two detailed formal complaints to Service NSW CEO Greg Wells (#1) 16th April 2023 of 11 pages, and (#2) 7th February 2024 (5 pages)
Service NSW continued business-as-usual with its use of unqualified staff (no knowledge of tax, tax law or accounting). The anonymous callers and emailers using Service NSW Letterhead were ring-in debt collector on commission, working from home.
Service NSW Grant Clawback Racket has taken the approach of scammers

OMBO STATEMENT #5:

‘That it was not an audit as Service NSW claimed.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

It was never a so-called ‘audit‘ nor a ‘compliance audit‘ nor ‘compliance review‘. Clearly, none of these ring-ins to execute Service NSW Grant Clawback Extortion programme is a qualified Auditors, let alone a qualified Accountant, nor Lawyer.

Rather it was a deliberate a bureaucratic extortion scam on a statewide scale overseen by Service NSW recently appointed CEO Greg Wells since November 2023.

‘Extortion‘ is a type of blackmail. It involves making an unwarranted demand with menaces to obtain a gain or cause loss. What Service NSW has been doing is (1) an unwarranted demand for debt repayment for an approved grant, (2) menacing to the paid grant recipients, and (3) seeking illegally to gain money from them. It is corrupt criminal conduct and punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

Following the Minns Labor election win in NSW on 25th March 2023, politically masterminded creating a secret inner debt collection department within Service NSW dubbed ‘Business Bureau’ to corruptly fabricate its 2021 COVID-19 Micro Business Grant paid out to becoming a contrived debt.

Service NSW accused all recipients of being “fraudsters” and extorting them to repay the grant to Service NSW in full. Service NSW has since engaged contracted debt collectors and referred many recipients to Revenue NSW for debt collection.

OMBO STATEMENT #6:

‘That Service NSW were not providing adequate opportunity for review, as they were issuing repayment through Revenue NSW and directing people to contact Revenue NSW.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

As explained, my complaint to the NSW Ombudsman was not about Service NSW review of Nature Trail’s grant application
Rather the complaint was about Service NSW’s co-ordinated extortion racket and behaviour
Part of Service NSW extortion method was indeed to ignore targeted grant recipients furnishing supporting evidence of grant criteria compliance
Another part of Service NSW extortion method evolved over the months from 2023 to fabricate the grant payments into loans and so contrive a debt instrument directing targets to contact Revenue NSW to repay else risk debt collection actions.

OMBO STATEMENT #7:

‘In Service NSW’s outcome letter, they advised you that you did not provide sufficient evidence to support eligibility of your application, however, Service NSW did not respond to you when you asked what further documentation they required.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Anonymous first name only debt collectors from Service NSW’ repeatedly emailed over many months claiming on standard templates that I had not provided sufficient evidence to support eligibility of your application
This is false in every way.
As per above at OMBO STATEMENT #2 – OUR CRITIQUE Sub-items #3 and #4:
Quote:

“(3) Nature Trail has extensive correspondence with Service NSW records proving that it provided all the requested evidence to support eligibility for the grant application. This was submitted to Service NSW (a) at the time of the initial application 1st August 2021, (b) prior in a previous bushfire grant application, and (c) multiple times in response to Service NSW Grant Clawback extortion Racket;”

“(4) The problem was that Service NSW did not keep records and the debt collection contractors failed to share evidence provided to each. They had no central database.”

Correct: ‘Service NSW did not respond to you when you asked what further documentation they required.’

OMBO STATEMENT #8:

‘Information from Service NSW

Service NSW provided our office with the following information in response to our inquiries about your complaint:
• Your application was digitally processed and paid based on declarations you made within the application. This means that your application was not manually approved by a member of Service NSW staff.

Following a decision of Government, digital processing and payments based on declarations made within the application was implemented from 6 August 2021 to resolve the significant backlog of approximately 19,000 2021 COVID-19 MBG applications and to ensure businesses in distress had timely access to funds.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Again, this is so off-topic of my raised complaint with the NSW Ombudsman on 4th September 2024. My complaint was not about Nature Trail’s grant application with Service NSW – (a) applied 1st August 2021, (b) approved 11 August 2021, (c) Service NSW extortion started 11 April 2023, (d) resolved by Mr Ridd for Nature Trail 30 April 2024.
It is a categorically false claim by Service NSW that grant applications NOT were “manually approved” by a member of Service NSW staff. They were in Nature Trail’s case (but again this is off-topic)
Mr Ridd holds written evidence that Nature Trail’s application for the grant was submitted by online by him on Service NSW website ‘secure’ portal on Sunday 1^st August 2021. He retains complete written records of that as well as written records of immediate subsequent email correspondence back and forth between him and Service NSW as they requested further evidence to support Nature Trail’s grant application.
Then afterwards on Wednesday 11^th August 2021, Service NSW approved Nature Trail’s grant application by email reply. Mr Ridd has further evidence that the approval process was indeed manually process by Service NSW staff

Read as follows:

Hi Steve,

Thank you for your time on the phone today.
During our discussion we went through all the documents that you have provided through out the manual assessment process.
I confirm that we can accept your P&L and supplementary financial documents for primary documentation and have provided sufficient secondary evidence through business correspondence and can confirm your address by using the Tax return for 2018/2019. Therefore we have received everything that we require in order to process your claim.

Please find the reference number for your claim COL-2d02fe-SBS.

If you feel the need to confirm your bank account details with the Business Concierge Team please feel free to call them on 9132 2344.

Kind Regard,

Camilla

Camilla Betts
Middle Office
Service NSW

T: 137788

‘Following a decision of Government, digital processing and payments based on declarations made within the application was implemented from 6 August 2021 to resolve the significant backlog of approximately 19,000 2021 COVID-19 MBG applications and to ensure businesses in distress had timely access to funds.’
Well, that may be so, but Nature Trail’s grant submission was prior on 1st August 2021 and manually assessed, then manually approved by Service NSW staff by proven email exchange per above on 11th August 2021.
Service NSW grant processing incompetencies have no bearing upon the validity of the many legitimate applications submitted by NSW small business owners at the time. It is an unacceptable excuse for Service NSW to claim unreadiness – it is no fault of the 63,009 grant applicants. It is incumbent upon the NSW Government and Service NSW to wear the error of unpreparedness, not by its approved grant recipients!

OMBO STATEMENT #9:

‘• The application made by you was included in this backlog on 10 August 2021 and was paid because the application contained declarations that the business met the terms and conditions of the grant. The application questions aligned to the terms and conditions for the grant and during the digital processing, Service NSW relied on customer declaration to make payments to customers prioritizing speed during this difficult time.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

No, the application made by Nature Trail was NOT included in this backlog on 10 August 2021 because our application was made prior to that on 1st August 2021.
Further, during the approval process (and prior during our application for the bushfire grant) staff at Service NSW made several email contacts with us cat prior to approval.
Nature Trail satisfied all the terms and conditions, and guideliness of the grant.
So the statement above is completely false.

OMBO STATEMENT #10:

‘• In your application, you indicated ‘yes’ to the question ‘was your business’ national aggregated annual turnover between $30,000 and $75,000 for the year ended 30 June 2020’. However, sufficient evidence was not provided to demonstrate that your business Nature Trail had an Aggregated Annual Turnover of more than $30,000 and less than $75,000 for the year ended 30 June 2020, under clause 3.3 of the 2021 COVID-19 MBG Terms and Conditions.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

This statement is false and contrary to the Grant’s Terms and Conditions.
Terms and Conditions Attachment A – for a new business that meant Nature Trail did NOT need to have earned the arbitrary revenue range ($30,000 – $75,000), but instead just had to prove a 30%+ drop in turnover due to the lockdowns. This was demonstrated in the evidence supplied to Service NSW at the time of the application. Nature Trail suffered a 100% drop in turnover due to the NSW Government’s lockdown regime at the time.
This referenced clause is contradicted in OMBO Statement #13 below – so clearly, NSW Ombudsman’s Investigation & Resolutions Officer Hannah Versicano, is contradicting herself and her investigation is flawed.

OMBO STATEMENT #11:

‘• At the time of application, you supplied Proof of Income as a supporting document in the form of a handwritten Trust Tax Return for the 2020 FY indicating that your business earned $6,841.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Yes, however Nature Trail then immediately suffered a 100% drop in turnover due to the NSW Government’s lockdown regime at the time – both bushfire emergency statewide and pandemic back to back.

OMBO STATEMENT 12:

‘• Upon initiation of the compliance audit process, you were then given an opportunity to provide missing evidence to support your declarations. Other documents supplied at the time of the compliance audit did not comply with evidence criteria under sections 3.8 to 3.17.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

At no time did Nature Trail have any missing evidence to support its declarations. This is prior to this specific grant application, at the time of the grant application and then much later during Service NSW Grant Extortion Clawback Racket.
Service NSW did not explain to Nature Trail how any documents supplied at the time of the so-called ‘compliance audit’ did not comply with evidence criteria.
So this statement is false.

OMBO STATEMENT 13:

‘• It was noted that your business had not been operating for the full year to 30 June 2020.

The 2021 COVID-19 micro-business grant – Guidelines include Alternative Circumstances (6.8) ‘businesses not operating for the full year to 30 June 2020 (e.g. new businesses)’ and state that ‘Businesses in these circumstances should contact Service NSW to determine if an alternate comparison period, or alternative supporting evidence, can be applied’ and Attachment C states ‘Businesses applying for the Micro-business Grant must show the equivalent of more than $30,000 and less than $75,000 in annual turnover.’ ‘If a business is unable to demonstrate turnover for a full year, a shorter period can be accepted provided that shorter period is representative of the “normal operating environment” of the business. The turnover for this shorter period will be annualised to get an equivalent annual turnover figure for the business.’’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Yes, Nature Trail had not been operating for the full year to 30 June 2020. Rather the business was launched
Yes, under the grant, if a business is unable to demonstrate turnover for a full year, a shorter period can be accepted provided that shorter period is representative of the “normal operating environment” of the business. This is what Nature Trail provided. As a new business, the so-called “normal operating environment” was an invalid concept.

OMBO STATEMENT 14:

‘• Service NSW did not finalise your compliance audit’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Idiots! It was not a “compliance audit”. It was extortion.
Service NSW did not finalise its compliance audit. It gave up on extorting Nature Trail.

OMBO STATEMENT 15:

‘(Service NSW) waived the debt on Hardship grounds.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

This is false, Nature Trail never applied for relief to Service NSW on any hardship grounds. Rather, Nature Trail had successfully met all criteria of the Grant’s Terms and Conditions as well as the Guidelines all along.

OMBO STATEMENT 16:

‘• Service NSW has acknowledged that the initial communications sent to you emphasised the outcomes of non-compliance to providing evidence as a focus’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Service NSW communications sent to Nature Trail were unjustified, intimidating and threatening. It was extortion.
But this is irrelevant to Mr Ridd’s complaint to the NSW Ombudsman.

OMBO STATEMENT 17:

‘(Service NSW is) and therefore are able to issue an apology letter to you.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

How tokenistic! Service NSW abandoned its extortion against Nature Trail on 30th April 2024. Service NSW emailed Mr Ridd its apology dated 28th March 2025 – so a year later! It is meaningless.
Mr Ridd’s complaint about Service NSW to the NSW Ombudsman was on 4th September 2024 about a separate matter involving others and about Service NSW extortionate programme targeting multiple recipients of the NSW Government’s 2012 COVID-19 micro Business Grant for unconscionable repayment of that grant totalling $781.1 million

OMBO STATEMENT 18:

‘Service NSW have also acknowledged that this audit was a fast-paced program development, and they had opportunities for learning along the way, and they are happy to offer you an apology letter to explain these changes.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

This is unacceptable.
Nature Trail’s grant approval by Service NSW was manual, not fast-paced nor automatic – so this is a misleading statement.
One does not accept that Service NSW has any intentions of “learning along the way”
Service NSW apology letter to Nature Trail dated 28th March 2025 has failed to explain any changes.

OMBO STATEMENT 19:

‘• On 28 February 2025, Service NSW provided confirmation to our office that they have issued you an apology letter for your experiences with Service NSW.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

No, try 28 March 2025, NOT 28 February 2025
The apology is irrelevant to Mr Ridd’s complaint to the NSW Ombudsman

OMBO STATEMENT 20:

‘We will not take further action on your complaint’

OUR CRITIQUE:

The NSW Ombudsman has completely avoided Mr Ridd’s complaint to it submitted on 4th September 2024
As a result, Nature Trail is writing this article and it shall go public

OMBO STATEMENT 21:

‘We have considered the information provided by you, as well as the information provided by Service NSW in response to our inquiries (as outlined above).’

OUR CRITIQUE:

But you have not dealt with my raised complaint made to the NSW Ombudsman
So it has been a big waste of time and effort

OMBO STATEMENT 22:

‘The available information indicates that you did not provide sufficient evidence to support your eligibility for the COVID-19 MBG in accordance with the 2021 COVID-19 MBG – Guidelines and Terms and Conditions.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Wrong. Mr Ridd did provide all the documentary evidence asked of him by Service NSW to support Nature Trail’s eligibility for the 2021 COVID-19 Micro Business Grant in accordance with the Guidelines and Terms and Conditions.
Nature Trail retains all documentary evidence and correspondence to this effect
So the above OMBO Statement 22 is baseless.

OMBO STATEMENT 23:

‘Despite this, our office acknowledges that Service NSW’s practices throughout their compliance review could be considered unreasonable.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

OMBO STATEMENT 24:

‘However, we have assessed that Service NSW have since taken the necessary corrective action in relation to your particular matter.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

I have no evidence of this

OMBO STATEMENT 25:

‘As Service NSW have waived your debt on Hardship grounds, actioned changes to their processes, and issued you an apology for your experiences, our office considers your matter resolved.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

No, Service NSW did not waive any debt incurred by Nature Trail, since the grant was applied for assessed, approved and paid.
The grant was never a debt.
Service NSW unconscionably fabricated the grant as debt retrospectively along with thousands of others to criminally mastermind corrupt extortion
No, Nature Trail never applied to Service NSW on hardship grounds. This is a categorically false statement
There is no evidence that Service NSW has actioned any changes to their processes, and the NSW Ombudsman has show any such evidence to Mr Ridd
Mr Ridd considers Service NSW apology is disingenuous, but would accept financial compensation for experiencing such corrupt conduct and the costs involved to combat it. He would accept no less than $15,214.
The NSW Ombudsman may consider Mr Ridd’s matter resolved, but it completely failed to deal with the matter he raised.

OMBO STATEMENT 26:

‘Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention. The information from your concerns and our inquiries has added to our understanding of Service NSW’s operations.’

OUR CRITIQUE:

Clearly, this exercise has been a complete waste of time for all involved
The NSW Ombudsman has failed to explain to Mr Ridd how this matter has added to its understanding of Service NSW’s operations.

CONCLUSIONS:

Nature Trail’s complaint case has been mishandled, and basically ignored by the NSW Ombudsman. Similarly affected other grant recipients should not expect support for the NSW Ombudsman about complaints of NSW Government departmental wrongdoings.

We consider from our experience, that NSW Ombudsman is a waist of time resources and taxpayer funding.

As far as we know, Service NSW continues to perpetuate its Grant Clawback Extortion Racket to this day under Godfather CEO Greg Wells, and with exposed knowledge and in full complicity with Premier Minns and his select ministry (‘Minns Mafia’).

So this is a 208 day turnaround by the NSW Ombudsman to my compliant. It is not an organisation to be relied upon to fulfill its Fraud and corruption control policy in this instance.

Yet the NSW Ombudsman has done nothing about it, just as ICAC has said it’s not its problem. Further, the NSW Police Commissioner Karen Web APM has refused to publicly release the $20+ million fraud investigation out its Strikeforce Sainsbury announced back in November 2021. It was all public money that had gone missing and the investigation was publicly funded.

Yet despite, Mr Ridd on 26th December 2024 requesting the NSW Police Commissioner allow the Strikeforce Sainsbery investigation report to be publicly released,

Taking too long?

Reload document

Open in new tab

Download [190.07 KB]

In closing, our NSW Ombudsman case Reference Number with the NSW Ombudsman was ‘C/2024/17563‘. One will always wonder how many of the 17563+ complaints for that year 2024 were against Service NSW?

How’s the NSW Ombudsman’s motto – “Pursuing fairness for the people of NSW” – they should add…”when it suits us”.

It all smells corrupt to high Heaven. There must be an election coming up.

What a croc!

References:

[1] ‘Fraud and corruption control policy‘, Version 7, 2023-10-24, NSW Ombudsman, website, ^https://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/about-us/what-we-do/our-policies

[2]

[3]

[4]