Dealing with fraudulent invoices by Origen Recovery

Summary

I started working with Angelo from Origen Recovery in April 2026 as a psychosocial recovery coach to assist me with my NDIS plan, Functional Capacity Assessment (FCA), reports and communication with NDIS and my plan manager.

From the beginning, I wanted transparency about what work was being done and how much of my NDIS funding was being used.

On 7 May 2026 I signed the Origen Recovery Service Agreement and consent documents. On 11 May Angelo visited me at home and I provided my NDIS plan and supporting documents. During the following days he also communicated with NDIS regarding my plan, funding and plan manager.

After receiving the first invoice, I became more concerned about keeping track of the work. On 19 May I told Angelo that I normally used a Google spreadsheet with another support worker to record tasks performed and that I wanted to use the same system with him.

On 20 May Angelo confirmed:

“I’ve added all the information into the spreadsheet you shared with me.”

He also said that he kept his own records and case notes.

During June and July, much of the work related to reviewing my FCA. Angelo visited me again on 10 July to go through it, and later prepared a Recovery Coaching Progress Report, which he sent to me on 30 July.

In August I was travelling overseas and had not yet reviewed the report. On 20 August I told Angelo that the review could wait. On 28 August he replied that he would contact me again around mid-September.

However, invoices continued to include charges during this period.

On 21 September I questioned invoice INV-000103 and told my plan manager not to pay it. Angelo said that the charge related to a three-month review and provided the review document. He also acknowledged that the work had not been clearly recorded in our shared spreadsheet:

“I realise that I did not clearly reflect them in the Excel document, which may have made the charges unclear.”

I then asked that no further work or invoicing take place until I was ready to continue.

Because of these concerns, I decided to reconstruct the history from the invoices, emails, reports and other records and compare each billed date with the evidence available to me.

Invoices

Between May and September 2026 I identified 10 invoices totalling $2,305.82.

Together they contain approximately 23 hours of billed work plus 17 km of provider travel.

I classified the invoice entries using three colours:

GREEN – Work was done and I found records that reasonably confirm the activity.
YELLOW – Some work probably occurred, but I cannot verify the exact date, time charged or specific task.
RED – I could not find evidence supporting the invoiced work on that date and the charge conflicts with the communications I have.

INV-000010 – $210.70

GREEN

This is the easiest invoice for me to reconcile. Emails support work on 7, 11, 12 and 13 May, including the home visit and communication with NDIS.

INV-000017 – $228.25

YELLOW

FCA work clearly occurred, but I cannot independently reconcile the exact 1.45 hours charged on 4 June or the separate 1.30 hour and 0.50 hour entries on 12 June.

INV-000035 – $320.71

GREEN / YELLOW

GREEN – The 2 hour home visit on 10 July is clearly documented.
YELLOW – I cannot separately verify the additional 0.75 hours or the 17 km travel charge.

INV-000044 – $607.42

YELLOW

A Recovery Coaching Progress Report was produced, so work clearly occurred, but I cannot verify why 2.5 hours were charged on 22 July and 3 hours on 27 July.

INV-000064 – $165.66

YELLOW

The invoice charges 1.5 hours on 5 August. Related work was happening around this period, but I cannot find contemporaneous evidence verifying 1.5 hours specifically on this date.

INV-000076 – $165.66

YELLOW

The invoice charges 1.5 hours on 19 August. There is related correspondence the following day, but I cannot verify 1.5 hours of work on 19 August.

INV-000085 – $165.66

RED

The invoice charges 1.5 hours on 25 August, after I had already said that I was travelling and that the review could wait. I cannot find a contemporaneous record explaining this work.

INV-000092 – $138.05

RED

The invoice charges 1.25 hours on 2 September, even though Angelo had told me on 28 August that he would contact me again around mid-September. I cannot find a contemporaneous record explaining this work.

INV-000098 – $138.05

YELLOW

The invoice charges another 1.25 hours on 10 September. Work on this date is possible, but I cannot find a contemporaneous email or other record verifying the 1.25 hours charged.

INV-000103 – $165.66

YELLOW

The invoice charges 1.5 hours on 16 September. Angelo later provided a three-month review document, so some work was done, but I cannot verify that 1.5 hours were worked specifically on this date. The charge was also not clearly recorded in our shared spreadsheet before I questioned it.

Event timeline

2026-04: I started working with Angelo from Origen Recovery for psychosocial recovery coaching and assistance with my NDIS supports.

2026-05-07: I signed the Origen Recovery Service Agreement and consent documents.

2026-05-11: Angelo visited me at home. I also provided my NDIS plan and supporting documents.

2026-05-12 to 2026-05-13: Angelo communicated with NDIS regarding my plan, funding, consent and plan manager.

2026-05-19: After receiving the first invoice, I told Angelo that I wanted to use a Google spreadsheet to keep track of tasks performed.

2026-05-20

Angelo confirmed that he had added the information to the spreadsheet.

He also told me that he kept his own records and case notes.

2026-06: Much of the work related to reviewing my Functional Capacity Assessment.

2026-07-10: Angelo visited me again to go through my FCA.

2026-07-22 to 2026-07-27: Angelo later invoiced 5.5 hours of work across these two dates.

2026-07-30: Angelo sent me the Recovery Coaching Progress Report.

2026-08-05: 1.5 hours were invoiced. I cannot find a contemporaneous email explaining the work on this date.

2026-08-19: Another 1.5 hours were invoiced.

2026-08-20: I told Angelo that I was travelling overseas, had not reviewed the report and that the review could wait.

2026-08-25: Angelo invoiced another 1.5 hours ($165.66).

2026-08-28: Angelo told me that he would contact me again around mid-September.

2026-09-02: Angelo invoiced another 1.25 hours ($138.05).

2026-09-10: Another 1.25 hours ($138.05) were invoiced.

2026-09-16: Another 1.5 hours ($165.66) were invoiced.

2026-09-21

I questioned INV-000103 and told my plan manager not to pay it.

Angelo explained that the invoice related to a three-month review and provided the review document.
He also acknowledged that this work had not been clearly reflected in our shared spreadsheet.
I asked that no further work or invoicing take place until I was ready to continue.

What is wrong with the invoices?

I am not claiming that every hour for which I cannot find an email necessarily means that no work was performed.

Some work can happen without sending me an email. Preparing reports, reading documents, making phone calls and writing case notes can all take time.

However, I should still be able to reconcile an invoice with a proper record showing what was done.

The invoices become increasingly difficult to reconcile from late July onwards.

For some entries I can establish that general work occurred. For example, I know that a Recovery Coaching Progress Report was prepared. What I cannot establish is why a particular number of hours was allocated to particular dates.

For other dates I cannot find contemporaneous evidence at all.

The period that concerns me most is 25 August to early September.

I had already told Angelo that I was travelling and had not reviewed his report. The review had effectively been postponed.

On 28 August Angelo told me that he would contact me again around mid-September.

Nevertheless:

1.5 hours ($165.66) were charged on 25 August.
1.25 hours ($138.05) were charged on 2 September.

I cannot currently reconcile these charges with our correspondence.

There is also a transparency problem.

I specifically created a shared spreadsheet because I wanted to track the work being performed. Angelo confirmed that he was using it.

When I questioned the September invoice, Angelo himself acknowledged that the work had not been clearly reflected in that document.

If detailed case notes or other records exist explaining these entries, those records would be important in resolving the issue.

Hourly rate

There is also a substantial difference between the hourly value I have recorded as agreed and the rate used on the later invoices.

The agreed value I have recorded is:

$72.30 per hour

The earliest invoices were charged at approximately:

$70.23 per hour

However, from July the hourly invoices were generally charged at:

$110.44 per hour

This difference becomes significant when it is applied across many hours.

New calculation

For comparison, I recalculated the invoiced hours as though $72.30 per hour had been used throughout.

The calculated total is approximately:

$1,662.90

The actual invoices total:

$2,305.82

The difference is:

$642.92

The $1,662.90 calculation excludes the separate 17 km travel charge because this is a distance-based charge rather than an hourly charge.

This calculation does not by itself determine what amount should have been charged. It simply shows the financial effect of using the hourly value I had recorded as agreed rather than the rates later used in the invoices.