FHO v Commissioner of Victims Rights

Decision at first instance

1. On 4 December 2019, an Assessor (Client Claims) issued a Notice of Decision, which determined that an act of violence was not established on the balance of probabilities and dismissed the application. The Assessor stated, relevantly: 4. According to the application form, (FHO) was the victim of assault committed by an alleged offender. The violence occurred between 1 January 2008 and 16 November 2009, at Matraville in New South Wales. 5. (FHO) describes the act of violence as follows: Being intimidated, assaulted by a number of males. 6. (FHO) has indicated he suffered by physical and psychological injuries as a result. 7. the matter was reported to police. What must be established for (FHO) to receive victims support? 8. For (FHO) to be considered eligible for victims support, the documentary evidence must establish that he was a victim of an act that apparently occurred in the course of the commission of an offence, which has involved violent conduct and has resulted in injury (physical or psychological) or death (s. 19). When all of these elements are established, he is considered to be a primary victim of an act of violence. 9. It is necessary for documentary evidence to be provided together with the application for victims support (s.39). For financial support for economic loss or a recognition payment, the following documents are required: 1) a police report or a report of a Government Agency or any other agency that provides support services to victims of crime; 2) a medical, dental or counselling report verifying the primary victim has been injured as a result of the act of violence. 10. This documentary evidence along with all other material submitted by the applicant will be considered by an assessor on the balance of probabilities. This means I must be satisfied that it is more probable than not that an act of violence was committed against (FHO). Consideration of the documentary evidence Reports to police and court outcomes 11. I have reviewed police records consisting of nine COPS event records. 12. COPS E32253175 dated 8 January 2008 records that (FHO) has recently moved into the location and states that he has been having problems with youth over the last few days. (FHO) reports that he heard something hitting his front door. He opened the door and saw a small rock before a group of approximately three males ran from the location. 13. (FHO) also reported that a few days prior a group of children started yelling at him and signalling rude gestures towards him. Police records state no offence was detected. 14. COPS E33920568 dated 6 May 2008 records (FHO) was at home when he heard an unknown male yelling outside his house. (FHO) walked outside and confronted the unknown person. (FHO) reports that the unknown person slapped him. (FHO) went back inside and called police. Police observed (FHO) to be heavily intoxicated and changing his story on a number of occasions. Police believe that the truth of the story is doubtful. 15. COPS E36573950 dated 5 February 2009 records (FHO) was at home when several young males threw rubbish into (FHO's) front yard. (FHO) then reports that 15 young males ran from his address. Police records state that no offence was detected. 16. COPS E36314932 dated 14 February 2009 records (FHO) as the person of interest. (FHO) reported that his vehicle windows had been tampered with by unknown persons. Police found no evidence of this and recommended that (FHO) get some rest. 17. COPS E36338852 dated 28 February 2009 records (FHO) reported that a group of small children have thrown small pebbles in the front yard of his property and that this has occurred on more than one occasion within an hour period. (FHO) called police on several occasions and each time police attended no persons of interest were sighted. Police could not locate any small pebbles at the location. 18. COPS E36639633 dated 14 March 2009 records (FHO) contacted them to report that people were knocking on his front door. (FHO) reported that people from the Klu Klux Klan were knocking on his front door and then running away.(FHO) stated that they did this four times and he could see them through the window. 19. COPS E36695817 dated 28 March 2009 records (FHO) as the person of interest. Police had been contacted by a neighbour who informed them that (FHO) was in his backyard and creating a disturbance. Upon attendance, (FHO) informed the police that he thought that there was someone in his backyard. Police were called four more times throughout the morning concerning people banging on (FHO's) door. 20. COPS E37751318 dated 16 June 2009 records (FHO) reported that his car had been damaged. 21. COPS E39569985 dated 23 June 2009 records that (FHO) has been having problems with his neighbours. (FHO) states that the offenders have yelled comments at him and that previously they had entered his property. (FHO) attended the police station the enquire about obtaining an Apprehended Violence Order. Police were unable to apply due to both the unknown identity of the persons of interest and the vague details provided by (FHO). 22. COPS E39128331 dated 26 October 2009 records (FHO) reported that a window has been smashed. Evidence of physical or psychological harm 23. I have reviewed a counselling report dated 25 April 2019. The report states that (FHO) resided in the property since December 2007 for a period of three years. (FHO) reported that there was a home invasion where four people broke into the property and assaulted him. (FHO) complained that there was harassment and attached (sic) on him throughout 2008 and 2009. 24. It is reported that (FHO's) presentation was consistent with the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. 25. I have reviewed the medical records produced by (name) Medical Centre. These medical records indicate that (FHO) did not attend the centre until September 2010 and as such they do not have any records for the period 2008 to 2009. FINDINGS What is the relevant law? … 28. Where an offence involving property has occurred and there is no element of direct personal violence against a person or persons, it does not meet the definition of an act of violence for the purposes of section 19. Is there an act of violence for the purposes of section 19 and 20 of the Act? 29. I have read the application form in which (FHO) has indicated he was subjected to assault, sexual assault, robbery and home invasion. 30. I note that (FHO) has reported to the counsellor that an event occurred which consisted of a home invasion with assault and sexual assault. There is, however, no police record of such an event occurring. Based on the available police evidence I am unable to say that an act of violence, as defined by section 19 of the Act above, has occurred. 31. The application for victims support must therefore be dismissed.

Request for internal review

1. I note that FHO applied for an internal review of the Assessor's decision by way of a number of emails, which are set out below: 1. Email dated 23 December 2019, in which he stated: MEDICAL CERTIFICATE details, Proving Operation necessary due to malicious wounding to victims right knee. Date 16/11/12, 11am. Discharged from (name) Hospital, Inpatient on 14/11/12…MC (number provided)…AMO Dr Andreas Loeffler… Victims Services Case no. (provided) INTERNAL REVIEW TO PROCEED, for the purposes of section 19 and 20 of the Act, for support under the Act to be made eligible to Recognition payment. PRIMARY VICTIM. INTERNAL REVIEW TO PROCEED… 1. Email dated 1 January 2020, in which he stated: INTERNAL REVIEW TO PROCEED. (FHO) TO BE MADE ELIGIBLE ON CATEGORY B RECOGNITION PAYMENT. NOTE FURTHER SUPPORTING FACTS TO BE PRODUCED TO VS… 1. Email dated 19 February 2020, in which he stated: ANSER TO FURTHER STIPULATE CONSENT TO, VS, INTERNAL REVIEW,SENIOR ASSESSOR INSISTING FURTHER PERMISSION TO RETRIEVE & UNDERSTAND IN THE VICTIMS FAVOUR THAT CATEGORY B, C & D OFFENCES WERE COMMITTED WRONGFULLY AGAINST HIM FROM, WITNESSED EVENTS INFLICTED INTO HIM FROM THOSE PERPETRATORS. (FHO) RESIDED AT (ADDRESS) AS A TENANT WITH HNSW. DUE TO THE PERPETRATION OF CTIME INTERNAL REVIEW MUST PROCEED. REPORTS/STATEMENTS/POLICE EVENT 3s/WITNESSES/ACKNOWLEDGED. (FHO) HAS RECEIVED YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FURTHER DETAILS CONCERNING MEDICAL CERTIFICATE FROM (NAME) HOSPITAL, OPERATION. ie MALICIOUS WOUNDING/SEXUAL ASSAULT DETAILS. (FHO) RECEIVED A DISABILITY PENSION. PRIVACY/NO COMMERCIALISM/MEDIA,PUBLICATIONS/ETC, LITIGATION PROCESS IF ATTEMPTED &/0R BREACHED FOREVER AGAINST (FHO). BE FREE TO EMAIL TO EMAIL ADDRESS (PROVIDED) … 1. Email dated 22 February 2020, in which he stated: SUBJECT; POSTED TO VS ON THU20FEB2020, EVEIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS INVOLVED FOR RECOGNITION PAYMENTS CATEGORIES B,C & D ATTACH MEDICAL CERTIFICATE (NUMBER PROVIDED), DISCHARGE DOCUMENT (NAME OF HOSPITAL), TO VS REF#00217599, RECOGNITION PAYMENT, CATEGORY B, RIGHT KNEE OPERATION, HOME INVASION, MALICIOUS WOUNDING/SEXUAL ASSAULT. ATTACH STATEMENTS TO VS REF#280.581, RECOGNITION OAYMENT CATEGORY C GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM & CATEGORY D, ROBBERY INVOLVING VOPLENCE. (NAME) COURT, NSW, HAS BEEN UTILISED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES. KINGSFORDL LEGAL CENTRE SYDNEY HAS PROVIDED ADVICE… HUMAN RIGHTS PROVALE… 1. In his email dated 22 February 2020, he attached the following documents: 1. Medical Certificate from (name) Hospital dated 16/11/2012, which indicates that he was an inpatient from 14/11/2012 to 16/11/2012 and that he was treated for a "medical condition"; 2. Letter from Tina Teaho-Wilson of South Eastern Sydney LHD dated 2/09/2013, which stated that she reviewed (FHO) for "his severe sciatic pain." 3. Six-page handwritten statement to "Court Magistrate for AVO" dated 3 March 2015. 4. Email to the Ambulance Service of NSW dated 1 December 2015 - "Acknowledgment letter required for NSW Ombudsman" To the Manager, Dear Sir/Madam, I was blamed from a insane criminal perpetrator in early December 2015 for something I did not see or do. Date 14.10.2015. I only heard this insane criminal perpetrator while visiting my female friend at level 3 (address provided) and was only situated in her lounge room. I did hear that insane criminal swearing/shouting/yelling the cunt words and threatening someone from out the front of my friend's home. I was extremely frightened and alarmed again. This person has previously hit my back of my head with a baseball bat, while I was walking passed (address), even well before I met my friend who was living there at that time as I found out. This insane criminal also has slashed/cut my right eyebrow with a blade swinging it at my eye, assaulted me by grabbing my arm and forcing me into the corner of a brick wall, grabbing me and forcing me into a stairwell railing nearly knocking me out, wrongfully saying about his daughter, using me to blame threatening saying I owe him money, (I do not), stalked with intent to cause unknown threatening assaults while I'm going about my normal ways, and even more distressing threats while I'm simply trying to visit my friend at this building. Police knocked at my friend's door at that November time and wrongfully blamed me, for some thing that I did not do, and forced me after I said you are acting from a criminally insane person, from what I was making sense of. I told the police I have done nothing wrong at all, do not touch me I am still in pain from a work injury and am suffering from repertion pain from glass cleaning work. The police went ahead and assaulted me into handcuffs. I said you have violated me because of a criminally insane perpetrator. I said you have just done acts that that person, being (name & address provided) did. Now then, to the manager of the Ambulance service, I request a letter indicating that if you were told of my injuries you would never force me into handcuffs and force me into a van with handcuffs on to get a DVD recording that way at all because of what a known criminally insane perpetrator is again inflicting onto my very good existence while I am simply visiting my friend… (name) is not sane, he is a serious danger to the community, this has already been proven by the courts, thank you for a reply letter… 1. Email from the Ambulance Service of NSW dated 3 December 2015: Thank you for your email. Your situation appears to be a NSW Police matter and the NSW Ambulance cannot provide any comment. 1. "To the Magistrate" - Wednesday 6 January 2016 I was again victimised from x 1 male officer & 1 other who said to me "I'm a female officer." Once they assaulted me into handcuffs & made me go in further excruciating pain, while I was waiting in my friend's flat. They have acted for a criminally insane perpetrator & attacked me from apparently acting for that criminally insane perpetrator being (name & address provided)… 1. Statement to NSW Police - Thu 2 Sept 16 "Serious incident report Attention Magistrate (location) Court On Wednesday 28 Sept 16 after I fixed my hand brakes adjustment screws on my vehicle @ Rose Bay tennis court & helped small child to acquire toilet paper from within the Rose Bay tennis court child minding section x 1 small child (male) having difficulties cleaning himself up & operating the toilet facilities from when I needed it. It was necessary that I do a shop for food & money. @ about 5:30pm I go to Aldi's to shop. On waling in I did see a person resembling (male name provided) in Aldi's scattering his two hands & arm through a sellable items boxed stand. I shopped and proceeded to my vehicle parked on the (illegible) care park at Coles car park. I saw 100% ID, (name provided) come from the west side (illegible) car park towards my direction. I immediately became extremely concerned for my safety & immediately anticipated him to attack me. He did! He started yelling/swearing & displaying body language of violent build ups @ me. he was being extremely Hostel to me threating me about his son. I do not know his sone & would not be able to identify his son properly at all. I've seen his son only twice @ (address provided) while I'm disturbingly trying to visit & help my friend who lives at (address provided) in the same HNSW building, same block of units next to this insane criminal perpetrator being (name & address provided). Important, previous AVOs had to be activated against (him) by me, because of his violence & insane behaviour @ me whilst I was trying to visit my friend at (address provided). (name provided) now causes life threatening assault to me. Just before his attack to me the now known shopping employee pulled up in his work truck & trolly trailer. I immediately said, please stay where you are parked & witness what is happening. (name & phone number included) did witness insane attack to me from criminally insane perpetrator (name provided). The attack (name provided) violently & insanely lunged at me & forced me off balance with his then bloated stomach. He then kept yelling/swearing violently right close in front of me & struck my left side of my head with a potentially deadly strike causing me to be knocked off balance again. (name) witnessed this. I'm now hurt & dump founded as to function properly. I eventually manoeuvred away to his left I said only "I have not done anything". He insanely & violently attacked me. I dropped by shopping @ my vehicle & immediately sought help. I ask the fruit shop next to Aldi's to ph security, he did. I met (name) Eastgate Security Manager. (He) & I then met with (name) (the trolley worker) & confirmed together that this insane attack/assault to me was witnessed, (name provided) did say he saw this attack on me by (name provided). I spoke to car park attendant (name provided) to contact 000 Police. He did. Police arriving at 7:30pm. I told them of this attack. Police meet up with (name) (Eastgate Security Manager). I gave to, x 1 male police & 1 female police the incriminating witnesses ph#s (details provided). I told police I will follow this up. Police said goof. Lv 5 CCTV installed @ Coles car park insane attacker (name provided) was wearing white tee shirt & dark pants. I was merely going about my ways independently. All of these incriminating facts are true & witnessed. (name provided) must be isolated to an intern arrangement. I am aware of isolating categories for chronic malfunctioning humans. Serious action must proceed immediately because of this violent extent @ me. Note I mention to the 2 police who attended this insanity not to have (name) (the shopping trolley worker) @ court to be identified by criminally insane perpetrator, (name provided) the police said alright then. This must go for me also, I have got nothing to do with (name provided) at all, full stop. 1. Email to Local Court - "Attacked/Assaulted on Wednesday 28th September 2016 Level 5 Coles Car Park" - dated 13 October 2016. At about 5:30pm on Wed 28Sept 16 I go to Aldis to shop, on walking in to Aldis I did see a person resembling insane criminal perpetrator (name), in Aldis scattering his two hands and arms through a sellable items boxed stand. I shopped and proceeded to my car parked on level 5 Coles car park. I saw 100% the id of insane criminal perpetrator (name) come from the west side of level 5 car park towards my location. I immediately became extremely concerned for my safety and immediately anticipated him to attack me…He did. He started yelling/swearing/shouting at me calling me the cunt word and threatened to smash my face in. He then moved bloated stomach into me forcing me off balance still calling me the cunt word and threatening to smash my face in. He then with his right fist gave me a deadly hit to the left side of my head forcing me off balance again causing a hard knock to my head. This was all witnessed from the shopping trolley worker (name & phone number provided) Eastgate's security manager (name provided) also witnessed (name) acknowledging the attack onto me as the 3 of us confirmed the attack on me in the Aldis level (name & phone number set out). Waverley Court reception asked me to send a email. I phoned courts and (name) supplied the AVO case # (number provided). I informed my doctor and Housing NSW Client Feedback Unit (case # provided). I also gave my statement to Dr Large at (name) Hospital c/- The Kilo Centre… This person is a serious threat to the normal community. Previous AVO was breached three times by this insane criminal perpetrator. I have got 100% nothing to do with this person. On Tue 3 Feb 2016 this insane criminal perpetrator threatened me in Coles Car Park saying I owe him money. I do not. I am now not visiting my friend in (address) because of this person's insanity at me. He stalked me and attacked me. This is extremely serious at the community. I am a injured plumber since 1986. I am a very responsible person in the community. Police must take this matter against (name & address provided) he is a danger to the Australian Community. 1. Advice of Court Result Application for Apprehended Violence Order dated 20/11/2016. This indicates that the application was adjourned for mention on 22/12/2016. 2. Final Order - Apprehended Personal Violence Order issued against a named person for the protection of (FHO) and another person for the period from 19/07/2018 to 18/07/2019. 3. Letter from FHO to the Magistrate at (location) Court dated 19/07/2018, in which he stated: I deem the defendant to be grossly irate (sic) and violent. I deem the defendant to be a serious danger to the Australian Community. I deem the defendant to be a violent intruder to the Community. 1. Statement - The Following facts are terrible acts committed against my very good existence, since I moved to Sydney/Australia from the Australian Capital Territory in 1998" - Undated: 1. Musical instruments stolen from my renting location; Coogee 2. Motor vehicle stolen from a car park; Bondi Junction 3. Rented room broken into & equipment & money stolen; Coogee 4. TV stolen from another rented location; Bondi Beach 5. Stereo stolen from another rented room; West Ryde 6. Push bike destroyed at Building (address provided) while I'm visiting my friend. Assaults being inflicted to my existence & reported caused from criminally insane perpetrator (name & address provided). Malicious wounding from this person. 7. Viciously assaulted at Matraville Pie shop, Matraville Ambulance & Hospital treatment … 8. Home invasion at (address). Malicious wounding to my right knee from a criminally insane male. He force a nail into my right knee, this was witnessed. 9. Gross effects & assaults from a severely mentally ill male (address provided) rented address. 10. x 3 unjustified arrests to my existence, wrongfull fabrication against me. I did not do anything wrong. Wrongfully inflicted to me from humans at (address provided) 11. My vehicle stolen from its legally parked position at Botony then forgery act on a ticket from within the RMS Debt Recovery Office Important AVO abuse against me upheld Stolen vehicle abuse against me upheld All of these perpetrations against me are documented I am a responsible good person. 1. Letter from the Ombudsman dated 23 October 2015: Thank you for your correspondence dated 19 October 2015 about the New South Wales Police Force. This letter is to help you to understand what we will do with your complaint now. As a first step, we will assess all the information you have given us and decide about any further action we may take. After we have assessed your complaint we will contact you to let you know about our decision. We will contact you as soon as a decision has been made. …
2. FHO also attached a bundle of documents evidencing his trade qualifications and prior employment, but these documents are not relevant to the matter before me and I have not included them in this decision.

Internal review decision

1. On 11 March 2022, a Senior Assessor issued a Notice of Review Decision, which determined that there was insufficient evidence to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that (FHO) was the primary victim of an act of violence and dismissed the application. The Senior Assessor stated, relevantly: 9. According to the application form, (FH0) was the victim of assault committed by an alleged offender. The violence occurred between 1 January 2008 and 6 November 2009 at Matraville, in New South Wales. 10. (FHO) described the act of violence as follows: Being intimidated, assaulted by a number of makes. 11. (FHO) has indicated he suffered both physical and psychological injuries as a result. 12. The matter was reported to Police…
2. After setting out what FHO must establish to receive victims support and the reports to police and court outcomes, the Senior Assessor discussed the evidence of physical or psychological harm and stated, relevantly: 28. In order to be considered for a recognition payment or financial assistance for economic loss, the required evidence is a documentary report to police or a government agency and medical, dental evidence or a report from a Counsellor. 29. I have reviewed a counselling report dated 25 April 2019. The report states that (FHO) resided in the property since 31 December 2007 for a period of three years. (FHO) reported that there was a home invasion where 4 people broke into the property and physically and sexually assaulted him. (FHO) complained that there was harassment and attacks on him throughout 2008 and 2009. FINDINGS … Is there an act of violence, for the purposes of section 19 and 20 of the Act? 33. I have read the application form. (FHO) has indicated he was subjected to assault, sexual assault, robbery and home invasion. 34. I note that (FHO) has reported to the counsellor that an event occurred which consisted of a home invasion with assault and sexual assault. 35. I have considered the numerous reports from NSW police. These reports predominantly relate to unknown persons throwing rocks, yelling out to (FHO) and tampering with his car. 36. Section 19(b) of the Act states that there must be the element of violent conduct against one or more persons. (FHO) has reported rocks being thrown, people yelling out to him and his car being tampered with. In these circumstances, I am unable to find the element of violent conduct is satisfied. These incidents involving property and as such, there is no element of direct personal violence. 37. Even if I were satisfied (FHO) had been a victim of an act of violence, which I am not, (FHO)'s time for lodging an application expired in or around 2011. Section 40 of the Act sets out the time limits for lodging an application for victims support. (FHO) had 2 years from the date of the alleged acts of violence, to lodge an application for victims support. 38. There is an incident whereby (FHO) reported he was slapped however, the investigation by police could not detect an offence. Even if I were satisfied (FHO) had been a victim of an act of violence on this occasion, which I am not, (FHO)'s time for lodging an application expired on 7 May 2010. Section 40 of the Act sets out the time limits for lodging an application for victims support. (FHO) has 2 years from the date of the alleged act of violence (6 May 2008) to lodge an application for victims support. 39. There is no record in the numerous reports made to police of a sexual assault that occurred, 40. It is evident from the application form and the available evidence that the incidents that are referred to in (FHO)'s application do not satisfy the definition of an 'act of violence' as required under section 19 of the Act. 42. The application for victims support must, therefore, be dismissed…
3. I note that a copy of the respondent sent a copy of the review decision to FHO on 11 March 2020. I am therefore satisfied that the decision was served as required by the Act.

Application for Administrative Review

1. This Tribunal's powers in relation to an application for administrative review are governed by s 63 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) (the ADR Act), which provides: (1) In determining an application for an administrative review under this Act of an administratively reviewable decision, the Tribunal is to decide what the correct and preferable decision is having regard to the material then before it, including the following: (a) any relevant factual material, (b) any applicable written or unwritten law. (2) For this purpose, the Tribunal may exercise all of the functions that are conferred or imposed by any relevant legislation on the administrator who made the decision. (3) In determining an application for the administrative review of an administratively reviewable decision, the Tribunal may decide: (a) to affirm the administratively reviewable decision, or (b) to vary the administratively reviewable decision, or (c) to set aside the administratively reviewable decision and make a decision in substitution for the administratively reviewable decision it set aside, or (d) to set aside the administratively reviewable decision and remit the matter for reconsideration by the administrator in accordance with any directions or recommendations of the Tribunal.
2. On 17 February 2022, FHO filed the current application, which sought a review of the decision dated 11 March 2020, although he asserted that the decision was dated "11 March 2021", and he set out the following grounds: Victim Services document, Applicant/Appellant claiming for recognition payments Categories B, C & D, submitted on 1 April 2015, states, (he) has the necessary documentation. This information was documented with Dana Adam. Victim Rights Act 2013 and approved Mahashini Krishna (23 April 2015). Medical professionals documents have been produced & supplied. Necessary information has been stated to Local Court Magistrates & Judges.
3. FHO attached the following further documents to his application: 1. "Hand written" document from FHO dated 7 April 2021, which stated, relevantly: …Deferred on 6 May 2020. VS wants to investigate helicopter @ crime location/home invasion. This will prove date of actual violence act for section 19. See written copy from VS email (to) me on 6 May 2020. 1. Handwritten statement to this Tribunal dated 15 April 2021: …concerning VS Victims Services cases 217599X & 280581, which as from the submission on 1 April 2015, the claim for recognition payment was stated as having the necessary information to be considered by an assessor produced from Victim Services document, dated 2 Dec 2019, provided by Commissioner of Victim Rights… Category B, VS Case 00217599X, 217599 (x) 2175999 Medical evidence is documented, ie Medical Certificate produced by (name) hospital re: operation performed to right knee caused from an attack/sexual attack from defendants on 22 June 2009, important this date of home invasion can also be determined from a particular helicopter service which also responded to 000 emergency calls on that night. Important the victim was alone and had absolutely no idea of what was going to be inflicted to his existence… 1. Medical certificate from Dr Gazal dated 15 September 2016, which stated, relevantly, that (FHO) …has been very stressed in regard to his renting arrangements and in the past to the problems he has had with neighbours… (He) alleges that he was attached by his neighbour…" 2. Medical certificate from Dr Gazal dated 20 September 2015, which stated, relevantly, that (FHO) "…is still suffering from anxiety in relation to his current housing situation and the abuse he received and the subsequent AVO battles he has had with his neighbours. (He) appealed this matter and the court dismissed the charges. However, (he) has anxiety problems in relation to the negative feelings associated with his housing situatio9n and is constantly fearful of running into the neighbours responsible. I would appreciate if you could expedite his transfer." 3. Medical certificate from Dr Gazal dated 13 October 2021, which stated, relevantly, that (FHO) was "still suffering from anxiety in relation to his current housing situation and the abuse he received. I would appreciate if you could expedite this matter to a point of resolution…" 4. Clinical notes from Dr Gazal, which indicate that he did not treat FHO before 2010 and that he does not hold any records relating to the acts of violence alleged in the Application for Victims Support. 5. Letter from Kingsford Legal Centre to FHO, which stated, relevantly: We also advised you regarding to your victims compensation claims lodged 27 March 2015 and 31 July 2018. During our last meeting we sent a letter to the Commissioner advising of your change of address so you should receive all subsequent communications from Victims Services. We are not your legal representatives for your victims compensation claims. I note that (FHO) notated this paragraph as referring to VS cases numbered 217599X and 280581. 1. Letter from (FHO) to the respondent dated 8 March 2019, which stated: I have made two applications for victims support. They are yet to be determined. I am writing to provide Victims Services of my new postal address… Could you please update my records and provide me with an update for my two claims. 1. Email from (FHO) to the respondent dated 6 April 2020, with respect to VS case 217599X: To VS Client Services advisor… I received VS email on 20 March 2020, concerning the supporting medical operation documents proving malicious wounding/sexual assault was deliberately inflicted into my body from he victim witnessing that act, plus another witness, witnessing that act as it happened; ie nail in attacked into victim's right knee. More insane violence acts happened @ that location time. Victims interpretation of parts 28-31 is read from the application forms for support for primary victim. Answer to Q.28. Serious incident was reported to Emergency Services, PH,ed 000 answer to Q.29 on that night to Ph 000 answer to Q.30 reported to ph #000 police @ that location, HNSW tenants… Answer to Q.31 yes, Waverly Court… Female Magistrate was told about the malicious wounding/sexual assault puncture wound. Note victim did give consent to VS to further your investigations. The victims livelihood was grossly attacked. Thank you for your work. Human rights proval…
4. Email from the respondent to FHO regarding VS case no. 00280581 dated 8 April 2020, which stated, relevantly: Thank you for your submissions. After reading the Notice of Decision from 2 December 2019 related to claim 00280581, it appears your claim cannot be considered by the assessor until we receive medical evidence. In your submissions, you stated that you contacted emergency services. Can you please confirm if an ambulance came to assist you. With your written consent, Victims Services can write to the Ambulance Service of NSW and obtain records from the night of the assault. The assessor has also requested information concerning a civil claim you have or will commence, against the offender. Can you please clarify if you have commenced civil proceedings, and if so, provide Victims Services with a copy of any deed of settlement or agreement reached…
5. FHO also attached hand written documents relating to subsequent alleged acts of violence, which are not the subject of the application for victims support that was the subject of the decision that is under review.
6. FHO also filed a bundle of clinical records from (name) Hospital, including a Discharge Referral. This indicates that on 14 November 2012, he was admitted for an elective arthroscopy of his right knee and possible medial menisectomy and that Dr Loeffler aspirated fluid within the knee and performed a medial menisectomy. He discharged FHO on 16 November 2012.
7. I note that this admission is the subject of the medical certificate that FHO lodged with victims services in support of his allegation that he required surgery because a nail was driven into his knee during a home invasion. I also note that this also appears to be the only reference to any knee/leg injury in the clinical notes.

Directions hearings

1. The matter came before me for directions on 25 March 2022. FHO appeared in person and Ms P Srikanth, Victims Services, appeared for the respondent. I ordered the respondent to file and serve its section 58 documents by 8 April 2022 and listed the matter for hearing on 3 June 2022, by way of telephone.
2. On 3 June 2022, the matter came before Senior Member McAteer for hearing. FHO appeared in person and Ms K Douch, Victims Services, appeared for the respondent. The Senior Member made an order under s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) (the NCAT Act) prohibiting the broadcast of FHO's name. He ordered FHO to file and serve a statement, ideally not exceeding 1 page (but can be longer if he wishes) setting out matters occurring in his life in the period 20 April 2020 to February 2022 which detail why he was not able to file his application to the Tribunal within 28 days of 11 March 2020. He listed the matter for interim hearing on 15 July 2022 in respect of an extension of time, noting that if the Tribunal granted an extension of time it may proceed to determine the substantive matter. The Senior Member also noted, relevantly: The Tribunal notes that the application for administrative review was filed some 22 months out of time (beyond the 28 day period provided in the Legislation). The Tribunal also notes that this issue appears to have not been raised either with you or by the Tribunal at the initial directions listing on 25 March 2022. However, the respondent has prepared submissions served 1 June 2022 pressing the out of time issue. The applicant has not had a chance to consider this issue as the resubmissions were received as a PDF on his mobile phone a day or two prior to the hearing. The Tribunal notes the applicant's position that the matter is not out of time where he believes it is within time.
3. The matter was listed for interim hearing before me on 15 July 2022. However, while the Tribunal attempted to contact FHO by telephone (mobile and landline) multiple times, he was unable to be contacted. The Tribunal dismissed the matter under s 55(1)(c) of the NCAT Act on the basis that applicant failed to appear at the hearing. It notified FHO that he could apply to reinstate the proceedings and that the Tribunal could reinstate the proceedings if it considered that there is a reasonable explanation for his failure to appear.
4. On 22 July 2022, FHO lodged an application to reinstate proceedings, in which he provided reasons for reinstatement as follows: INSTRUCTIONS: SEE: MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS DOCUMENTS SEE: STATEMENT DOCUMENTS PRODUCED FROM (FHO)
5. The following documents were attached to the application: 1. Medical certificate from Dr Gazal dated 20 July 2022, which provided: This is to certify (FHO) was not in a fit state, suffering from depression and shoulder pain on the date he was supposed to have a telephone appointment with the Tribunal on 15th July 2022. Thanking you for your consideration for reinstatement of proceedings. 1. Statement from FHO dated 11 July 2022, which provided, relevantly: …FROM MY NECESSARY INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESS TO BE JUSTIFIABLY COMPENSATED, CATEGORIES B, C & D; DESPICABLE PERPETRATORS STORLKED, TRSPASSED, TRSPASSED TO PROPERTY, HARRASSED, VANDALIZED, INTIMIDATED FIRST DEGREE BURGLERY, MSASS SEXUAL ASSAULT, MALICIOUS WOUNDING S61 S59 S59(2) S35 S37(A) SECTION 33; KNIFE FIREARM DISCHARGES, SPEAR, MARSHEL-ARTS WEAPONS, MACHETTY, ROCKS, HARD LARGE POTATOES PROJECTILES, PAINT, ARSON, DESTRUCTION TO CLOTHS, WRONG FIRE EXTINGUISHER VANDALISM. A QUESTION WAS ASKED FROM MEMBER McATEER OPON THE PHONE APPOINTMENT CONSENTED FROM (fho); FHO… ON, FRIDAY 3 JUNE 2022 IUE, NOTICE OF HEARING, ASKING (FHO) "WHAT HAVE I BEEN DOING IN 2021 & 2022?" I DID NOT INTERRUPT MEMBER McATEER FOR ASKING THIS QUESTION ECT! FIRSTLY I'VE BEEN RENTING A MODERN SOCIAL HOUSING UNIT. THIS UNIT & OTHER UNITS ARE RIDDLED WITH LOUD HARD WATER-HAMMER BANGS!!! 24/7, LOUD HARD ALERTING SLIDDING DOOR EXCESSIVELY FORCED SLAMMING SHUT 24/7, CAUSING HYPER-TENSION ONTO MY EXISTENCE, ON TOP OF MY 1984 WORK INJURY SUSTAINED ON NEW PARLIAMENT HOUSE CONSTRUCTION SITE (PLUMBER) ACT, CANBERRA ADDINT FURTHER NEGATIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL TORMENTING EXASERBATION TO THIS MATTER WHICH STILL IS NOT FIXED TO RESOLVE THESE DISPICABLE EVENTS. (FHO) ENDEVORS TO FUNCTION & MAINTAIN MY HEALTH SAFELY, CAREFULLY & AWARINGLY WITH IN THE COMMUNITY ECT & THE DIFFICULTIES DAY & NIGHT. 24/7. (FHO) INSTRUCTS NCATE/AEOD TO INCORPORATE HIS EMAIL SENT TO NCAT/AEOD ON, 1 JUNE 2022 (LEGAL PURPOSES). (FHO) PATIENTLY AWAITS THE NEXT PROCESS FOR FRIDAY 15 JULY 2022 PHONE APPOINTMENT, 11AM & REGRETTABLY GOS ABOUT HIS WAYS 24/7 REPELLING PROBKLEMS ECT. NOTE: (FHO) CAN PRODUCE INFORMATION NECESSARY ON MATTER/ISSUE.
6. The Tribunal listed the application for reinstatement for hearing before me by telephone on 29 July 2022. FHO appeared in person and Ms K Douch, Victims Services, appeared for the respondent.
7. When the hearing commenced, FHO demanded to know whether there were any witnesses present in the hearing room "because this is a serious matter". I advised FHO that the hearing was being conducted by telephone and that I was in the hearing room with two sound-recording technicians who were audio-recording the proceedings.
8. FHO then stated that he was recording the proceedings on his own recording device. I informed FHO that he was not permitted to do so and that s 9 of the Court Security Act 2005 (NSW) provides that it is an offence to use a recording device to record sound or images (or both) in court premises. FHO then replied, "Well I'll turn it off then."

Reinstatement application

1. I asked FHO if he wished to provide the Tribunal with any further information about his failure to appear at the hearing on 15 July 2022 or if he relied only on the medical certificate from Dr Gazal? FHO replied to the effect that he relied on the medical certificate and he expressed the opinion that I was trying to deny him the compensation that he was rightly entitled to and that he intended to pursue his interests.
2. FHO's speech was garrulous and his tone was bombastic. He frequently interjected and spoke over the top of me, making it very difficult for the Tribunal to determine the issues before it.
3. The Tribunal asked Ms Douch whether the respondent wished to make any submissions about the reinstatement application and she replied, "no."
4. Ultimately, the Tribunal made an order reinstating the application for administrative review under s 55(2) of the NCAT Act.

Was the application for administrative review filed within time?

1. The Tribunal then attempted to ascertain from FHO why he believes that he received the Notice of Review Decision on 11 March 2021, when it is clearly dated 11 March 2021? FHO replied with a tirade about how the Tribunal was trying to prevent him from obtaining his rightful compensation for the despicable acts that were perpetrated against him. He expressed the opinion that the date of the review decision is irrelevant to him and he considers that the relevant date is 23 April 2015, because that is when he saw the counsellor from Victims Serviced.
2. I attempted to explain to FHO that the ADR Act provides that an application for administrative review must be made to this Tribunal within 28 days of the date of the decision that is the subject of the review and that this is what Senior Member McAteer attempted to explore with him at the previous directions hearing. However, FHO repeatedly interrupted me and repeated that the date of the decision is irrelevant and that the timeline starts from when he saw the victims services counsellor in 2015. He also repeated his belief that the Tribunal was trying to prevent him from recovering his just entitlements under categories B, C and D of the Act.
3. FHO repeatedly failed to respond to the Tribunal's question, which was why he asserted in his application that he received the review decision dated 11 March 2020 on 11 March 2021?
4. Ultimately, the Tribunal determined that it was appropriate to grant an extension of time to file the application for administrative review to the date it was filed under s 41 of the NCAT Act. The Tribunal did so in view of the nature and content of FHO's numerous email communications to the respondent throughout 2020, which clearly indicated that he did not understand that the application for victims support dated 27 March 2015 had been finally determined by the respondent and that his remaining rights for review lay with an application for administrative review to this Tribunal.

Further evidence

1. The respondent lodged copies of the COPS events documents that were produced by police in answer to a Summons. These indicate a total of 15 COPS events records between 1 January 2008 and 6 November 2009, as I have summarised below. Date Particulars 6 January 2008 Personal violence - not domestic - applicant named as the victim. FHO told police that over the past few days he had experienced problems with youths in his street and hanging around (name) park. The youths noticed him walking home and at about 12:30pm he heard something hit his front door and as he opened it, he saw a small rock hit the front of his house and then a group of approximately three male youths ran from the location. He also spoke to police a few days prior because as he was walking through that park young kids started to yell at him and signal rude gestures to him. 26 March 2008 (x 2) Powers-move-on - applicant named as the person of interest Based on the incident details, this event is not relevant to the current application. 30 April 2008 Stealing - applicant named as the victim The incident details indicate that FHO's bicycle was stolen from Eastgardens Shopping Centre. 6 May 2008 Assault - applicant named as the victim The incident details indicate that FHO was slapped on the left cheek and suffered a "red mark" by an unknown male who was yelling and screaming outside FHO's place of residence. FHO refused an ambulance and police noted that he was heavily intoxicated and that he changed his story on numerous occasions and that the "truth of this story is doubtful." FHO wanted a report made for the housing commission. 5 June 2008 Powers - move-on Based on the incident details, this event is not relevant to the current application. 4 February 2009 Occurrence only - applicant named as the victim The incident details indicate that several young males threw rubbish into FHO's front yard. FHO wished to obtain a report number "as he requires it to give to the Department of Housing." 14 February 2009 Mental Health Act - applicant named as the patient The incident details that police attended FHO's premises in relation to a "check bona fides". A short time after speaking with FHO, it was 'evident to police' that he was suffering from a mental health condition as his demeanour "was not that of a reasonable person." FHO told police that his vehicle windows had been tampered with and bent outwards by unknown persons. Police told FHO to go and get some rest, which he intended to do. 18 February 2009 Powers - move-on Based on the incident details, this event is not relevant to the current application. 28 February 2009 Occurrence only - applicant named as the victim The incident details indicate that police attended FHO's place of residence several times because a group of persons, possibly children, threw small pebbles into his front yard on more than one occasion. Police had difficulty locating any small pebbles in his front yard, which was covered with grass. Mental Health Act - applicant named as the patient 14 March 2009 The incident details indicate that FHO called police and told them that people were continually knocking on his front door. The report states, relevantly: … The VIC suffers from schizophrenia and take regular medication to treat this,,, The VIC stated that people from the Klu Klux Klan were knocking on his front door and then running away. He stated that they did this four times and he could see them through the front window… Police asked the VIC if they had tried to get in but he stated that they had not. The VIC appeared to police as though he may be under the influence of a drug, possibly cannabis. Police asked the VIC if he was taking his medication which he stated that he was, and he also stated that he was seeing his case workers from (location) mental health in the next couple of days. Police asked the VIC if he felt like hurting himself to which he replied no. He said he only phoned police to let them know that the Klu Klux Klan was in the area. Police advised the VIC to go inside and phone police again if there were any problems. Due to the fact that the VIC was not threatening self-harm, and that police had no fears for his safety, police did not see the need to schedule him under the mental health act… 28 March 2009 Mental Health Act - applicant named as the patient The incident report indicates that FHO's neighbour called police because he was in his backyard and was causing a disturbance. FHO told police that he thought someone was in his back yard. FHO called the police four more times throughout the morning stating that unknown persons were banging on his door. Police attended each time and spoke to FHO's neighbours, who said that they had not seen or heard anything. Police left a message for the (location) mental health team and advised them of FHO's calls. 15 June 2009 Malicious damage - applicant named as the victim Based on the incident details, this event is not relevant to the current application. 22 June 2009 Personal violence - not domestic - applicant named as a victim The incident report indicates that FHO was one of a number of victims who attended Maroubra Police Station to enquire about applying for a PVO against unknown persons of interest, who confronted the victims and yelled comments at them while they were in their premises. The report indicates that the persons of interest had entered the victims' premises on a number of previous occasions and that they feared for their safety. 15/08/2009 Major traffic crash - applicant named as the owner Based on the incident details, this event is not relevant to the current application. 25/10/2009 Malicious damage - applicant named as the victim Based on the incident details, this event is not relevant to the current application.

Applicant's submissions

1. The Tribunal asked FHO if he wished to make any oral submissions in support of his application for administrative review? He replied to the effect that it is all set out in his written statements with the application and he again expressed the view that the Tribunal was trying to stop him getting what he is rightfully entitled to and that he is entitled to the maximum and he intends to appeal if he does not get it.
2. The Tribunal asked FHO when he reported the sexual assaults to the police? He replied that he told 000 when he called for the police. I asked FHO if he ever provided a formal statement to police about the sexual assaults. He replied to the effect that he told them when they came to his property and that there was a helicopter in the air and he thought that "they would report it". I again asked FHO if he ever provided a formal statement to police about the sexual assaults? This produced a further unresponsive tirade from FHO during which he again stated that the Tribunal was trying to stop him form getting what he is rightfully entitled to.
3. I attempted to explain to FHO that there are no police COPS event records that refer to any sexual assault in 2008 or 2009 and that the Tribunal needs to be satisfied based on the evidence before it that more probably than not he was the primary victim of sexual assaults during the period alleged in the application for victims support.
4. However, FHO again stated that he "told 000" and the police who attended the scene and that he thought they would report it.
5. The Tribunal then noted that the application for victims support indicates that he suffered both physical and psychological injuries and I asked FHO whether he was still receiving treatment for his injuries. He replied to the effect that he has been prescribed medication by an Endocrinologist for "hormone issues" and that Dr Gazal is prescribing Magnesium for his depression and that he is no longer taking anti-depressant medication "because of side effects". He also said that the acts of violence made his previous work-related back injury worse and he suffers "muscle-spasming."

Respondent's submissions

1. The respondent filed written submissions dated 1 June 2022, which provide, relevantly: 19. The docume4ntary evidence required is set out in section 39, relevantly (with emphasis added): (b) for an application for financial assistance for economic loss under section 26 or 27 or for a recognition payment - is - (i) a police report, or a report by a Government Agency or any other agency that provides support services to victims of crime, sufficient to support, on the balance of probability, the applicant's claim to be a victim of an act of violence, and (ii) a medical, dental or counselling report verifying that the applicant or child who is the primary victim concerned has actually been injured as a result of an act of violence. 20. A further precondition of an application for victims support is that the applicant must be made within the time limits set out in section 40 of the Act. Relevantly, section 40(1) and (5) provides: (1) Except as provided by this section, an application for financial support or a recognition payment must be duly made within 2 years after the relevant act of violence occurred or, if the victim was a child when the act of violence occurred, within 2 years after the day on which the child concerned turns 18 years of age. (5) An application for a recognition payment in respect of an act or violence involving domestic violence, child abuse or sexual assault must be duly made within 10 years after the relevant act of violence occurred or, if the victim was a child when the act of violence occurred, within 10 years after the day on which the child concerned turns 18 years of age. 21. It is relevant to note that section 40 does not provide any discretion for an application to be accepted out of time as the Act does not permit any extension of time.
2. In relation to paragraph 21 of the submissions, the respondent relied upon the Tribunal's decision in DSK v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2019] NSWCATAD 170.
3. The respondent continued as follows: The alleged act of violence 22. The onus is on the applicant to provide the allegations of an act of violence on the balance of probabilities. A number of cases, or high authority, insist that for a tribunal of fact to be satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, of the existence of a fact, it must feel an actual persuasion of the existence of that fact.
4. In relation to paragraph 22, the respondent relied upon the Tribunal's decisions in BFV v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2014] NSWCATAD 170 at [48] and BYZ v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2014] NSWCATAD 168 at [30] and the decision of the Court of Appeal in Nguyen v Cosmopolitan Homes [2008] NSWCA 246 at [44].
5. The respondent continued as follows: 23. In the application, the applicant asserts that he was a victim of an act of violence involving physical and sexual violence between 31 December 2007 to 30 May 2010. In support of this claim, the applicant refers to various NSW Police event numbers dated between 8 January 2008 and 6 November 2009. 24. As the applicant applied for victims support on 1 April 2015, the applicant is out of time to apply for victims support in respect of any physical act of violence. However, the applicant is within time to apply for a recognition payment in respect of a sexual assault. 25. In addition, we note that the applicant has provided submissions and evidence in relation to alleged incidents which took place after the claim period. These submissions/evidence are not relevant to the determination of this matter. In this regard we note that the applicant submitted a further application for victims support in respect of alleged assaults between 3 February 2015 and 16 March 2018. This application was considered and dismissed on 25 June 020 in claim number 00280581. NSW Police/COPS Reports … 29. Relevantly, the NSW Police documentation does not reference any report of a sexual assault. Counselling report 30. The applicant was seen by Victims Services approved counsellor/psychologist who provided an initial assessment report dated 12 April 2016. 31. The report notes that the applicant reported the following: (FHO) reported that he lived in a Housing Department property on (address) since December 2007 for the period of 3 years. In 2008 he experienced home invasion and assaults by groups of people. He described how 4 assailants broke into his place and began to fight him. He managed to fight 3 of them out of the house but when he turned around more were jumping over his fence. After he managed to escape out of the house and run on the street completely naked, he saw a number of people in government uniforms attacking him with swords. Eventually, young boy and some girl, even children get into his home. They were humiliating him by pushing his head into toilet and strip his clothes, pin him to the floor and made him masturbate to full ejaculation. In the crowd of his assailants he could identify some moderately famous public figures. (FHO) complained that the harassment and attacks on him continued through 2008 and 2009. It seems that the events stopped when he moved to his present address. However, he stated that he cannot get these events from his mind and suffers anxiety since that time. 32. In respect of diagnosis, the psychologist stated: Notwithstanding that his event is delusional, (FHO)'s presentation is consistent with the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder. Although he was not suffering from psychotic symptoms at the time of our interview, it is not unusual that he believes his story since the hallucination is imprinted on his memory as any other event in his life would be. No act of violence 33. The respondent submits that the evidence before the Tribunal is insufficient to support a finding that the applicant was a victim of sexual assault in the claim period on the balance of probabilities. 34. While the applicant has reported an incident of sexual violence to his psychologist, the probative value of the applicant's version of events is complicated by the findings of the psychologist, the absence of any report to NSW police or contemporaneous medical evidence to corroborate the report and the improbable circumstances of the incident reported to the psychologist.
6. Accordingly, the respondent concluded that the correct and preferable decision is to affirm the review decision under s 63(3)(a) of the ADR Act.

Act of violence

1. Section 23(1) of the Act provides that a primary victim of an act of violence is eligible for the support under the scheme described in s 26 of the Act.
2. "Act of violence" is defined in s 19(1) of the Act as follows (relevantly): (1) In this Act, act of violence means an act or series of related acts, whether committed by one or more persons: (a) that has apparently occurred in the course of the commission of an offence, and (b) that has involved violent conduct against one or more persons, and (c) that has resulted in injury or death to one or more of those persons. (2) For the avoidance of doubt, the reference to an offence in subsection (1)(a) extends to conduct of a person that would constitute an offence were it not for the fact that the person cannot, or might not, be held to be criminally responsible for the conduct because of the person's age or mental illness or impairment…
3. The onus is on FHO to prove the allegation that he was the victim of the physical and sexual violence that occurred during the period from 31 December 2007 and 30 May 2010.
4. However, as FHO applied for victims support on 1 April 2015, he was out of time to apply for victims support in respect of any physical act of violence that may have occurred during the period claimed in his application. This is because s 40(1) of the Act provides: 40. Time for making, and duration of, applications (1) Except as provided by this section, an application for financial support or a recognition payment must be duly made within 2 years after the relevant act of violence occurred or, if the victim was a child when the act of violence or act of modern slavery occurred, within 2 years after the day on which the child concerned turns 18 years of age.
5. FHO has lodged submissions and evidence that refer to alleged acts of violence that occurred after the period alleged in the application for victims support dated 1 April 2015. However, the decision that is the subject of the current application for administrative review is restricted to the acts of violence alleged during the period from 31 December 2007 and 30 May 2010.
6. In any event, this Tribunal does not have power to extend the time for an applicant to lodge an application for victims support beyond the time limits prescribed in s 40 of the Act.
7. In relation to the alleged sexual violence alleged by FHO during the period from 31 December 2007 to 30 May 2010, I note that the extensive police COPS event records do not indicate any report of sexual violence. There are also no contemporaneous medical records before me that corroborate FHO's allegations.
8. Further, it appears that the first report of any sexual violence is found in the counselling report dated 12 April 2016. I note that the counsellor/psychologist took a florid history of the events alleged by FHO as occurring approximately 6.5 to 7 years previously, including: (1) four assailants breaking into his place; (2) assaults by groups of people; (3) his escaping and running on the street completely naked; (4) his seeing a number of people in government uniforms attacking him with swords; (5) eventually, children getting into his home and humiliating him by pushing his head into a toilet and stripping his clothes, pinning him to the floor and making him masturbate. FHO also said that he identified "some moderately famous public faces" in "his crowd of assailants" and that the attacks continued through 2008 and 2009.
9. The counsellor/psychologist opined that the events described by FHO were "delusional", but also stated that he believes his story as "the hallucination is imprinted on his memory as any other event in his life would be."
10. While I accept that FHO believes that he was the victim of the sexual violence that he described to the counsellor/psychologist to during the period from 31 December 2007 and 30 May 2010, based on the opinion of the counsellor/psychologist dated 12 April 2016, that the events were delusional and a hallucination and in the absence of any contemporaneous corroborating evidence, I do not feel an actual sense of persuasion that the alleged sexual violence occurred.
11. Accordingly, I am not satisfied that FHO has established on the balance of probabilities that he was the primary victim of an act of sexual violence that occurred between 31 December 2007 and 30 May 2010.
12. As a result, I am satisfied that the correct and preferable decision is to affirm the decision dated 11 March 2020 pursuant to s 63(3)(a) of the ADR Act.

Orders

1. I make the following orders: 1. I extend the time for filing the application for administrative review to the date it was filed. 2. FHO is not eligible for victims support with respect to any physical injuries allegedly suffered during the period from 31 December 2007 to 30 May 2010 because his application was lodged out of time. 3. The decision dated 11 March 2020 is affirmed.

I hereby certify that this is a true and accurate record of the reasons for decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales. Registrar

Amendments 18 August 2022 - Anonymisation update 05 September 2022 - Anonymisation update Paragraph 33 onwards formatting update Paragraphs 68-78 deleted at request of Tribunal Member DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 05 September 2022