2023-05-13 Complaint Gillian Potts

Details of Complaint about solicitor Gillian Potts

1. Have you tried to resolve the matter with the lawyer? How?

Note: an electronic form may lose text formatting, so I add the same information in a separate document as an attachment together with detailed info named “Complaint Gillian Potts”.

During the process of my claim I have contacted Gillian Potts and Ken Pryde several times when problems have arisen. Every time they pushed against my instructions saying that it is not allowed by law. For example I have asked to get a report from my psychologist Steve Sutton, but they refused saying that it can not be used. I asked to attend an informal settlement, but they told me that they do not allow it. I asked them to give me a copy of documents sent to CARs (PIC now), but they told me that they do not share this information. They promised to submit my claim to CARs for independent assessment, but they never did it. I became aware of the misinformation they give me about the law and process of personal injury claims only recently. I still had no opportunity to have a look at my file. I am trying to get it, but there were some delays. It is possible that there is more misconduct visible in the file, but most likely it does not change the general behavior of Gillian Potts and Ken Pryde for my claim.

2. Please tell us about your complaint

What happened? When? Who was involved?

I got injured in a road traffic injury on 2015-03-30. Solicitor Gillian Potts together with barrister Ken Pryde represented me for a personal injury claim from March 2018 to June/July 2020. Their legal representation best can be described as a scam. They grossly overcharged me, provided misleading advice, acted against my instructions under pretense that this is a law, manipulated me and took advantage of my illness. They lied about costs and presented me with grossly inflated costs to prevent me from accessing the legal process for my personal injury claim. They even went a step further and refused to act according to my instructions, because it can damage their friendly relationship with opposing solicitor Timothy Ceballos representing insurance. While many actions of G. Potts and Ken Pryde were at least dishonest and I believe illegal, when put together they come up in one big scam, that was run purposely from the start.

Few words about me. People used to consider me a very intelligent person. I was one of these people who are lucky to find a profession that they really love. I studied hard software development, often learning about interesting technologies even before it was a subject in my university studies. I have completed university bachelor, masters and PhD degrees and concurrently studied economy and management. I successfully worked as a software developer, starting from simple roles and progressing to technical leader and director positions. Later on I started my own business. I came to Australia in 2007 as a tourist, but loved it and stayed. I was about to start new chapter in my carrier, when I got hit by a car and it feels that my life got completely broken (see 2015-03-15 Alfonsas Stonis CV.pdf ).

In order for Gillian Potts to represent me I had to supply all information about the effects of injury on my physical and mental health. My main problem is PTSD. It makes it almost impossible to deal anything related to injury as any mention of it triggers flight, fight, freeze or fawn (to agree with everything to avoid the perceived threat) response. Mostly it is freeze or fawn response - very disrupting as it shutdowns my ability to think or take any action. I can not function in any face to face appointments including assessments that were so important for my claim. Instead of using this information to form the basis of my claim, she used it to spend time on activities that did not benefit my claim in any way, just created a lot of stress for me.

Because Gillian Potts (including assisting paralegal Melissa Rae) and Ken Pryde worked together I prepared one document and mostly refer to them as LawPartners. I put the whole story together, because if separated by Potts and Pryde it would be incomplete and hard to follow.

The result of LawPartners work:

● Difficult situation to get proper medical assessment due to failed attempt by not providing proper information for Matthew Jones assessment (see 2019-09-16 Matthew Jones Assessment.pdf )

● Inflated LawPartners fees of $178,327.22 ( see

2020-05-14 law partners Itemised Bill of solicitor client costs.pdf ) for no real work done. Instead they are charging for emails they asked for information, but the information provided was not used. They are charging for examination of multiple medical reports, when they didnt use the information received.

● LawPartners did not provide any information that was realistically used or helped for my claim. They insisted on incomplete versions of statements that I still have to use because they were already sent to QBE.

● The only few things she has achieved is to put me through additional stress for 2 years and lose the faith in the legal system.

At the end I am left in a situation where my claim is way much worse compared to where I have started with G. Potts. I am in a position where my illness prevents me from being able to represent myself and personal injury lawyers who were meant to represent me work against me. This puts me in a situation without any possible exit. Before I went through all this myself I could not believe that such things can happen. I felt trapped dealing with G. Potts and that the only option I have is to agree with all her demands. It is hard to believe how easy it is to control someone using fear and for someone having PTSD this fear is fear for life. I had no chance but to do as she says.

According to G. Potts words that “this is how they operate” and the impression I am left from her work this is her model of business: to trap client in false promises and fake actions, put a claim in position where it has very little chance to succeed, exaggerate the costs, put emotional pressure of the situation to the client so that he agrees to any settlement with non disclosure agreement that that her business model remains undisclosed. Unfortunately some misconduct might be difficult to prove. From the beginning Potts and Pryde provided some information only verbally. At that time it looked very strange. Now looking back it makes sense. I provide information as accurately as I can even if there were parts that I may not be able to prove.

I believe that LawPartners did not represent me properly. They have provided incorrect advice that served only one purpose: to increase their fees while damaging my case. They tried to scare me from getting advice from other lawyers or having access to the legal system. At the start they told me that the legal expenses for the whole case will be about $60 000 if the case is determined by a court. That it will be only half of it if the outcome is determined by government authority and I am satisfied with it. The legal expenses will be even less if there is a settlement before it. I was told that legal expenses most likely will be about $12 500. However, during the process Law Partners refused to get a key report from a treating psychologist that was very important for medical assessment giving a false argument that it is not legally acceptable. I was diagnosed with PTSD the same year I was injured. However, Law Partners made sure that PTSD was not mentioned anywhere in my statement and incomplete information was provided to an independent medical assessor. As a result PTSD was not recognized by the assessor impact of injury stated as minimal. Law Partners refused to seek review of assessment stating that this is what they agreed on. They showed little interest in information about my status instead pushed me to a settlement meeting that I did not ask nor was aware of. This was a very traumatic experience for me on top of PTSD from injury. My mental condition prevented me from realizing what was happening and taking any actions to fix it. I asked to stick with the plan of going to government authority to determine the outcome of the case, when Law Partners started pushing new advice conflicting with their previous advice. They told me that they will never allow my claim to be seen by an independent assessor and threatened me from seeking a second opinion. As a threat they send me an insanely inflated bill that I am left with now.

Short description

In my view LawPartners took these actions with the goal to grossly exaggerate their fees and possibly limit the payments I will receive based on their secret agreement with QBE:

1. LawPartners refused to get the evidence that was important to my claim (Steve Sutton report). 2. LawPartners insisted on not using PTSD diagnosis when providing my statement, while PTSD is the main problem that is caused by road traffic injury.

3. LawPartners omitted main problem caused by injury - PTSD and its supporting documents, when submitting documents for dispute of medical assessment

4. LawPartners provided false information about legal questions (like that report from a treating psychologist can not be used for my claim, or that there is no way to ask for review of assessment). 5. LawPartners organized so-called settlement conferences when there was no reason to do so, only to exaggerate their expenses.

6. LawPartners put enormous pressure on me to take actions that were not for my benefit and I was against.

7. LawPartners misinformed me in many ways.

8. LawPartners took and added lots of fake actions to inflate their bill.

3. How do you want us to help you to resolve your complaint?

1. Gillian Potts actions are qualified as professional misconduct - I believe this is so due to severe misrepresentation of my interest and I hope your will determine if it is true. Potts acted in her own interest with huge damage to my claim and my mental health. I believe that she breached the contract and I should not pay for any of her legal fees.

2. Gillian Potts should not be allowed to work as solicitor - I hope you will investigate her conduct and take appropriate disciplinary or other available actions to prevent her from causing harm to other clients. 3. If it is possible you will investigate Potts possible misconduct representing other clients - I believe this was not the first instance of similar conduct.

4. If possible investigate and determine conflict of interest between Potts, Pryde and Ceballos. I believe Potts acted together with Pryde against my interests and possibly to some degree cooperated with Ceballos. I believe that Potts' misconduct was deliberate and well calculated.

5. If you find that I failed to collect enough proof of Potts misconduct I hope that you will at least find her actions as unsatisfactory professional conduct and take appropriate action.

6. If it is your power I hope you find that I am not liable to pay LawPartners legal fees or at least much smaller than these grossly inflated fees.

7. Fees are not payable yet as a claim is not finalized. It is no win, no fee and 30% legal fees guarantee agreement. I want it not to become payable by default as I will dispute it.

End note

I think that LawPartners never intended to represent me properly and have my claim assessed. From the start LawPartners chose to do very little only to show that they were doing something, but only dragged time to create fees for no work done and then accept any QBE offer. Potts made the last push to settle on 2020-07-07 (see 2020-07-07 email from Potts offer to settle.pdf ). New solicitor Moya de Luca-Leonard informed me that she lodged an application in my name on 2020-07-31 (see

2020-07-31 email from Moya - FW 4A Application Received - 10280111 - Alfonsas Stonis - Claim number … ) and that there was some claim from Potts to stop her from doing it. This potential could make my claim fail. Only then I realized how far Potts was willing to go to stop me from accessing the legal system for personal injury claims (now called Personal Injury Commission PIC). I thought the deadline to report Potts and Pryde actions is based on July 2020 as the way they run my claim seems for me as one massive scam. The other reasons for delays were that my claim is still ongoing and some of the outcomes can be used as proof, like medical assessments (the information that LawPartners refused to provide for independent medical assessment was provided and my personal impairment was recognized to be over 10%, passing threshold required for compensation, see medical assessments in attachments), but some assessments are still in the future on 2023-06-28 (see 2023-03-15 email from PIC for 2023-06-28 - RE APP-10268809 - Alfonsas Sto… ).

I also got access to my file only very recently 2023-05-11. If some of Potts and Pryde actions were past the 3 years deadline please consider extending it as despite my illness I did all that is in my power to meet it.

I am trying to describe everything as accurately as I can. Unfortunately many of these memories cause high levels of stress. It quickly triggers PTSD response and shuts down my ability to think. Often I have to take a long break or can continue only the next day. I do not know if I need to describe every event when I believe

LawPartners acted unfairly in their own interests, completely breaking the whole foundations of the legal system. They lied that some actions will be in my benefit, while it served only their own benefit. This is the first time I am writing a complaint about a lawyer and due to my illness I may be missing important bits. If there is more information required please let me know. It is very important for my well being on many levels that I provide all the required information. I just need information about the process, for example do I need to provide all emails that I have exchanged with LawPartners or that is required only after you check the summary and decide that you will investigate this matter.

I have some technical difficulties preparing (exporting) phone call history and emails (even if I have done it in the past). I am not sure how detailed you need it and what is the best option to prepare it. I hope you will let me know how detailed you need it.

While I received a lot of help from many people, a huge contribution comes from my wife Juste Stoniene who helped me a lot in preparing this complaint.

Detailed info

Before contacting Law Partners

I got injured on 2015-03-30. At first I was thinking of doing all the paperwork for insurance myself. I had lots of experience doing all sorts of paper work. I was running a company in Lithuania, managing projects and dealing with contracts was an everyday job for me. I even had some experience with the courts in Lithuania. However, this time I found two new things. First QBE, the insurer of the driver who caused the injury, was completely ignoring the rules described on the government site. The examples would be: QBE was meant to cover all medical expenses for the first 6 months up to $5000 regardless of who is at fault. However, they simply told me that they will not pay a single cent. QBE is meant to accept or refuse driver liability within 3 months, but it took 3 years. The list is long.

I have noticed that there was something wrong with me as every time I needed to do anything related to injury I would get overrun with fear and would not be able to do anything. I would start panicking, excessive sweating, diarrhea, feeling notions to the point of vomiting, trembling. lose the ability to think and finally would not be able to speak. I was diagnosed with PTSD. I did not know anything about this illness, but it was making it impossible for me to do anything about the injury and insurance claim.

QBE refused to pay for any treatment without giving any reason. They also refused to discuss my claim saying that they were making a decision. I tried to find out what I can do, but left with information that QBE is required by law to reply about liability in the first 3 months and it would be easier if I had clarity about it. QBE were saying that they were making a decision and I should wait. I think in April 2016 they told me that they will make a decision soon. I also learned that I can apply to court if QBE does not admit liability. After many sessions with a psychologist I found strength to start looking for solicitors to help me with the court case against QBE at the start of 2018. I have contacted the lawyer Garry Penhal, who is a very distant relative of mine. At first he was thinking about taking the case himself as he had done some time of this work some years ago. QBE sent me a letter admitting liability in March 2018. Soon G. Penhal realized that the procedure for road traffic injury claims had changed and forwarded my case to LawPartners.

List of problems

These were the main actions by Gillian Potts and Ken Pryde, that I complain about:

1. Getting locked with LawPartners. I have exchanged all info with Gillian Potts from LawPartners through Penhal. I think I spoke on the phone with Potts only once before meeting to sign the contract. She promised to help. She also told me that we need to rush as there is some paperwork that needs to be done before the 3 years term expires. She told me that it is a simple matter and they can do it on time. LawPartners submitted these documents just on the last day (

2018-03-28 LawPartners CARS Form 2A.pdf ). From that moment I felt that I am locked in with LawPrtners and if I try to go to other solicitors I will lose my claim entirely.

Only recently I found out that there were constraints about going to court, but for CARs application there were no time limits then. I also found that Potts did only a tiny amount of work as the form was very simple and she only submitted a few documents supplied by Penhal.

2. Lying about process and costs. I met Potts for the first time on 2018-04-10 (

2018-04-10 lawpartners cost agreement.pdf , 2018-04-10 No win no fee cap guarantee.pdf ). I was very stressed and went into a panic attack as soon as we started talking about the injury. She gave me a contract to sign without any chance to read it as I was panicking at that time, hardly controlling nausea and could not focus at all. Potts told me that I do not need to read it, it is a standard contract and all I need to understand is that there were stages for personal injury claims. She explained to me that their legal fees highly depend on how many stages the case passes. There are three possible options:

A. Court. According to her, the best result I can get if I go to court. However, there will be extra costs for additional court related expenses. So, the expenses for my case, after going to court, would be about $50,000 or maybe $60,000 (in the contract she wrote $70,000).

B. CARs. However, about half of it can be avoided if the outcome of the case is determined by CARs (government authority that is meant to simplify insurance claim process). In this case the cost would be about $25,000. G. Potts told me that most of the cases do not go to court and are determined by an assessor.

C. Early settlement. I was told that this is unlikely, but there is also an option that case can be settled after all documents were submitted to CARs, but before the case is determined by CARs appointed assessor. In this case legal expenses should be no more than $12,500.

3. I was told about government regulated costs for legal representation when I met current solicitor Peter Livers on 2022-12-16. Then I contacted SIRA to learn more about it (see

2015 MACR regulated costs.pdf ,

2022-12-19 email from CTP Assist regulated costs - FW REF NO. 20019875.pdf ). If Potts would have provided me with the correct information about legal fees (especially regulated costs) I would not agree with this contract and would look for another solicitor.

4. I also did not know that I could change solicitors without losing my claim. Potts told me that now they own the file and I can not move to another solicitor. If I had that information I would have taken action sooner, rather than being put in a situation where I had no choice.

5. I was told that the main expenses are because courts are very expensive. However, insurance companies try to settle before going to court, because their companies also have to cover most of my legal expenses for the court. Potts told me that if the case goes to court I will need representation from the barrister. However, she told me that I should not worry about it as it is only for the cases when there is a dispute of liability and in my case QBE already admitted liability.

6. She promised to keep the cost low and that I most likely will not even need a 30% max cost warranty (see 2018-04-10 No win no fee cap guarantee.pdf ).

7. When the discussion started about settlement she gave me an estimate of total legal fees for about 50 000 AUD. She would write it on the paper, would show me saying only the final sum I may get and then quickly hide it. I was led under the impression that this is because there were fees for submitting documents to CARs. Later it all proved to be not true.

8. I suspect they have misinformed about the way legal representation works. At the beginning they told me that they had submitted some required forms to CARs and that it was important that it was done on time. They explained that this more or less ment that only they can represent me as changing legal representation would be outside the deadline. I still do not know the details of how it works. However, the fact that another solicitor took my case means that the information given previously was incorrect.

9. Pointless meetings with a barrister. Potts told me that a barrister will be needed only if my claim goes to court. However, she sent me barrister Ken Pryde cost agreement dated 2018-05-29. I have never signed it (see 2018-05-29 Ken Pryde cost agreement.pdf ), because I thought it was still far away and I thought he was overpriced. However, during the next meeting with Potts Pryde was also there.

Potts told me that my claim can not go forward without initial consultation with the barrister. That was in contradiction to what Potts told me before.

10. Potts kept inviting Pryde to every meeting. That was simply a duplication of the work. So, Potts would spend most of the meetings doing other things, for example browsing something on her phone or reading documents, that were not related to my claim (I had a peek).

11. I understood that this was a plan to inflate fees only after a few years. Potts promised that fees will be low, that even in the worse case scenario fees will be no more than 30%. However, barrister fees were not included in this limit. So, Potts introduced the barrister to inflate their fees.

12. Not collecting evidence properly. They basically did not collect any information from my treating doctors, but instead forwarded all information to QBE and then used what they got from them (see examples with Steve Sutton notes and report). G. Potts told me that this is how it is required by law. She had no interest in reports from treating psychologists. For most of the time she was not interested in my day to day activities except one time when she requested to supply all information about my activities, about the projects I worked on before the injury and after and asked it to prepare in a few days, creating a lot of stress and making it difficult to collect all information properly. G. Potts dismissed some of the information I have provided. Later I found out that this information was essential for my claim. Unfortunately, I was not able to fix all of the problems caused by G. Potts' misconduct.

13. Incorrect advice about the disability pension. When I saw a psychologist from Centrelink for assessment (see 2018-01-05 centrelink assessment.pdf ), she recommended that I go on disability pension. I was scared to be disabled and on pension. So the psychologist suggested doing it after 6 months. I told Potts about this. She instructed me not to do this. According to her this disability would allow me to get cover for such things like mowing the lawn. She told me that this would only increase the amount I need to pay to Centrelink for administration. At that time Pryde noted in his advice to include the centrelink report in the medical assessment application, but it was not included (see 2019-04-30 LawPartners MAS form 2A.pdf ).

In 2022 feeling desperate not being able to advocate for myself I looked for help. I found that organizations that provide help for disabled people also can help by advocating for them. I think this was the main reason why Potts was against me receiving a disability pension. The other reason could be that already then they were against mentioning PTSD symptoms and presenting the impact of injury as less severe while this report basically was saying that I can not work in my current condition.

14. Refusal to mention PTSD. Both Gillian Potts and Ken Pryde were strongly against PTSD being mentioned in my statement of 2019-04-29. They told me that there were legal restrictions and I could not use it. Despite PTSD being diagnosed by Joyce Chiu (see 2015-11-02 Psychological/Counseling Management Plan) and confirmed by Mulet (see 2017.10.23 EloisaMuletNotes.pdf ) and Steve Sutton (see 2019-11-16 Stephen Sutton Report.pdf ). They told me that they have many years of experience and that is their legal advice. Pryde even called me in the evening not to “tinker” with the statement and to return it signed, but otherwise unchanged without giving me a chance to read it or to process it. It felt unfair for me as PTSD was my main problem and I would rather use the name of the illness instead of listing its symptoms. However, I could not argue as I did not know legal requirements. I provide my recent statement for comparison when I was not restricted by solicitor to remove any information about PTSD symptoms (see 2023-04-26 Alfonsas Stonis further statement.pdf ).

15. Refusing to get a report about my mental health that was essential for my claim. G. Potts refused to get a report from Steven Sutton, psychologist that I have seen before and after the injury. Steve said that symptoms and diagnosis before and after were very different, while there some same words might be used to describe them in notes. The only way to get a full picture of my mental health as it has been seen by Steve would be to write a report. Steve even mentioned that it is not expensive and would cost about $400. I wrote several times to Potts (see

2018-05-10 Gmail To Potts - Previous mental health status.pdf ,

2018-05-15 Gmail From Potts asking only for notes.pdf ,

2019-04-17 email to Potts - FW Request for documents.pdf ). G. Potts refused to get a report from Steve saying that because he is my treating psychologist it will not be accepted and can not be used. Steve argued that this is not true. He wrote similar reports before (see

2019-04-17 email to Sutton and Potts - Clinical notes.pdf ). However, as G. Potts was refusing to use it. I had no choice.

G. Potts agreed to get a report from Steve only after evaluation of my mental health by PIC, when it could no longer help my claim. Later when I stopped working with G. Potts also proved not to be true and PIC took into account Steve and other reports and recognized that road traffic injury had a major impact on my mental health.

16. Failure to include information that was very important about my functioning before the injury. Even being rushed I have provided a lot of information about the project I have been working on before the injury (see 2019-04-23 email to Potts - The application I was working on before the incident.pdf ,

2019-04-23 contacts_task_application.pdf ). However, G. Potts with K. Pryde reduced it to one item number 31 in statement on 2019-04-29. They insisted that this is enough.

This was not enough. It did not reflect the amount of effort I put in nor my capacity to work. As a result it left room for speculation by QBE. This left damage on my claim when based on incorrect information from QBE and lack of correct one from my solicitors lead to error in assessment of my functioning prior injury. This significantly reduced my chances to get proper compensation.

For example, about my same topic, I wrote items 58, 63-69 in a new statement provided on 2023-04-26 and provided several supporting documents under the guidance of a current solicitor.

17. Misleading on the information needed for assessments. On several occasions I informed G. Potts that I have trouble providing information during interviews. Yet, she not only did not help (for example indicating what type of information I need to collect, like my daily activities and so on), but would send very generalized information before assessment. She would also repeat the same reminder several times including the paper version, while I told at the start that I prefer email (I learned that it was to increase bills in May 2020). So, for psychological assessment she sent me a reminder that I need to take all X-ray scans that are related to my injuries (see

2019-07-08 Letter advising of appointment.pdf ). Unfortunately scans were all I took with me to assessment. While I left at home lists of symptoms and daily problems that I created with my psychologist to help me to work on improving them. While during the interview being asked about it, I was not able to remember most of them. Assesson noticed that I was getting nauseous again, told that he did not need to go into details, he believed that my solicitors would provide all this information and pointed to a large folder. This lack of information added to not being able to get accurate assessment (Jones assessment, see 2019-09-16 Matthew Jones Assessment.pdf ) and removed chances to get compensation for non-economic loss.

These problems could have been easily avoided if Potts provided me the opportunity to supply this information in written form instead of relying on my memory, especially when I already wrote it anyway for treatment purposes, just had to make it into document (see 2019-10-22 Typical day.pdf ) or provide more information in the statement like 2023-04-26 Alfonsas Stonis further statement.pdf .

18. Incomplete information for medical assessment. Potts provided very limited information for medical assessment omitting some very important documents (see

2019-04-30 LawPartners MAS form 2A.pdf ). This is the only actual work LawPartners have done and it is very little (they indicated in the list items from the GP notes added Steve Sutton notes and one more Roberst report). There were following problems in this application:

a. did not include any submissions

b. in a form did not mention PTSD only existing depression and anxiety and its aggravation c. Psychologist Eloisa Mulet notes are only as part of GP notes and very easy to miss. However, they even marked PTSD diagnosis privately for them self (see

2018-07-03 McInnes Willson to LawPartners - GP notes, Mullet.pdf )

d. included only part of notes from psychologist Steve Sutton, missing all the actual notes where PTSD treatment is described. However, this is the last item in that part, so hard to tell was it actually included in documents sent to MAS.

e. did not include any additional information about my functioning and emotional being f. had only my statement that talked only shortly about depression and anxiety, but not PTSD under strict instructions from Ken Pryde.

19. Secret agreement on mental health assessment. Mathew Jones' assessment was very incorrect and I was trying hard to understand how this could happen. Unfortunately, I do not have proof of this as it was told to me only in person. However, after hearing it many actions of G. Potts and K. Pryde starts

making sense. After I got an assessment by Jones , I wrote to G. Potts a list of lots of errors in assessment and asked to request a review of assessment. When I met them G. Potts and K. Pryde’s response was that they were not going to do it: the assessment is exactly as they have agreed and complaining about this assessment will break their agreement and they will not be able to get favors for the next client. They told me that I will get enough compensation anyway and another client may not be in such a good position. They have not specified whom they agreed with, but I assume it could be QBE lawyer and/or assessor Jones. This explains why they refused to get a report from Steve Sutton, and why they have been so negligent preparing documentation for assessment. They have refused to seek review of assessment.

I know it is only one remark that I can not even prove. However, I thought I will mention it for completeness.

Lucky after I changed solicitors and Jones' assessment was replaced (see

2021-03-17 Wayne Mason assessment.pdf ).

20. Incorrect complaint about assessment. I was insisting on a request for a review of Jones' assessment. Surprisingly G. Potts wrote “there are grounds to seek a Review of the MAS assessment” (see 2019-10-24 Gillian Potts - Assessment appeal dead line.pdf ). Next day Pryde called me and told me that this was a typo and they meant “there are no grounds”. However, I insisted on appeal and this was probably the only time they followed my instructions (see

2019-10-30 LawPartners MAS form 5A.pdf , 2019-10-30 Claimants submissions for MAS 5A.pdf ). The request for review was denied and G. Potts told me that there is nothing I can do further. Later I found out that request was denied because it did not include required information, something that I believe could have been fixed (see 2019-12-16 Statement of Reasons.pdf ). Two years later when QBE made similar requests for review of Wayne Mason assessment and when they were denied, QBE submitted requests few times till they were granted. It seems that this is another example when Potts provided me with false information about law and procedures.

21. Refused to give me copies of the documents they have submitted in my name (CARs application and request for Jones assessment review). There was no explanation given (see

2020-04-23 email to Melissa asking application and response for review.pdf ,

2020-04-24 email from Melissa review reply.pdf ,

2020-06-18 email to Melissa - Copy of MAS and MAS review application forms.pdf ). The rejection to provide information was by phone.

22. Intentional draging of time during meetings. G. Potts and K. Pryde had an attitude towards meeting that can be only explained by intentionally dragging time. They were late every time, from 10 to 60 minutes. Pryde usually would come first, but then I would need to wait for Potts to come. Usually another 10-15 minutes. Then they would tell me that they need to discuss another case. I would be invited to join maybe another 15 minutes later. Then Potts and Pryde would discuss the weather and unrelated subjects for a few more minutes. My attempts to come to the subject come to nothing as Pryde would interrupt me every time and continue on unrelated subjects. On the first (June 2018) meeting Pryde got angry that I kept trying to bring back to my case. He started asking aggressive questions, like “how come you were not able to avoid the car hitting you?”, “don’t you know that cars are dangerous?”, “anyone else would get better by now, why not you?”. It triggered such a strong panic attack, that I could no longer understand what they were saying and had to rush out and look for toiled. Later, Pryde said that maybe he was too aggressive and that this was the first time he managed to force someone to vomit. In time trying to bring them back to the subject became too triggering and I had to endure empty talks. I remember that one time after Pryde's very long talk about nothing Potts nodded smiling that Pryde has skill to talk. Meetings in 2020 were even worse.

23. Dragging of time for the whole claim. My claim had many delays that were not explained. At first I was not worried about it. I was optimistic that I had started my claim and it felt like a big step towards getting better. I thought I will start getting better rapidly and so later it will be easier to deal with the claim and to provide accurate information. However, as a significant rapid improvement did not happen and my conditions started feeling like permanent the delays in claim started to worry me. The most painful ones were probably the delays for fake negotiations (listed in bill).

24. Lying about requirements to settle. After failing to get PTSD recognized as having an impact on my life, Potts told me that this is a good time to submit documents to CARs for assessment of loss of potential income. However, before doing this we are required by law to attempt to settle. When I came to the so-called settlement conference on 2019-10-20 it started the same way as every meeting with Pryde and Potts. Half an hour wait till Pryde and Potts came. Then we went to Pryde's office. They told me that they were going to negotiate now and we have to wait there. My wife and I were shocked. I was told that it is important that my wife accompanies me during negotiations as it may be stressful. I told them that I want to participate in negotiations, this is the only reason I came. I was told that due to procedural requirements they do not allow it. I asked them if I could at least meet them, so that I can put the face behind the name. They told me that they do not allow clients to meet insurance representatives. Just a few minutes later Pryde came back and told us that negotiations were not successful and we need to wait for Gilian. When Gilian comes back several minutes later and says that they have not spoken about the claim after Pryde left, only catching up on what is new in their lives.

Pryde told me that QBE offered compensation only for future loss, max $250k and he instead asked for $800k. QBE refused to negotiate. For Pryde it was not acceptable. I was told that there is nothing to do now for me. They will prepare and submit documents to CARs as QBE was not being reasonable. Up till this day I do not know if there was actually a meeting, it had no purpose, simple exchange of emails would have been enough, also my wifes and my participation was completely pointless.

25. Fake negotiations. Next time I was invited to meet they went for the new record of how long I had to wait. I think I waited more than an hour before someone showed up. I was under the impression that I needed to sign some papers for CARs application. Instead I was asked what sum I would be prepared to settle. I was not prepared for this. They told me that they were required by law to make another attempt to settle. I gave sum, something similar they have been talking about as a good result before. I was told that their fees were something about $50k and what I would get after subtracting medicare and centrelink. They have asked me to leave while they make a phone call. Again did not let me even hear what they were talking about. Few minutes later they asked me back into the room and told me that negotiations were not successful, but they were required to do this by law. This time I already got angry as I have seen this meeting as pointless. I have asked them to stop ambushing me with such a request to settle and to submit CARs application. They told me that they can not do it now because there is a request from QBE to have another assessment.

It might seem strange how I could be manipulated so much, why I did not protest. The answer is simple: they told me that they know what they are doing, that this is required in my case and I have to do what they were telling me. They played on my fears, telling me that this is a very unfair system and they were doing all that is possible to help me.

There was no real new information between these fake negotiations, they did no preparations, no new information passed to me. Just complete fake to extract money under false pretense.

26. Another example of fake negotiations. Melissa sent me an email inviting to meeting on 2020-01-09 (see 2020-01-09 email from Melissa - Next meeting 29th 15 00.pdf ). She did not provide any information for the reason to meet. Because I previously did not agree to the offer and asked to submit an application for an independent assessment I thought I needed to sign some papers for it or something like that. Meeting goes the same way, Pryde comes late more than half an hour, but he says he is busy with other things. We have to wait another half an hour for Potts to come. When the meeting starts I ask was the application submitted? Pryde asks if I mind if they make a call first to QBE. I agree. Maybe a minute later they ask me back and say that QBE offered $225,000 (of maybe $2000 or $3000 less). Do I agree? I say no, I want my claim to be assessed by an independent assessor. They ask me to think about it and if I do not agree they have no chance but submit the application for assessment. Later I get an email with offer after fake conferences: $225,000 total, $92,000 after deductions on 2020-01-29 (see 2020-01-30 email from Potts offer - YOUR MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM.pdf ). I do not agree on this and yet they do not submit the application.

27. Pointless communications. There was some repetition of communications, for example sending the same notification about an appointment in email, paper and phone, when I already replied to one of them. It looked strange at that time.

Now I see that the only reason for this request was to inflate fees.

28. Refusal to take includes a report from a traumatic clinic. I went for treatment in Traumatic Stress Clinic from November 2019 to February 2020 (see attachment

2020-06-04 Traumatic Stress Clinic Report.pdf ). Specialists from the Traumatic Stress Clinic were the best experts on trauma I have seen and were essential for my claim. Actually this was the first time I was on treatment that focused on trauma by trauma specialists. I have realized that it was what I needed from the start. I was a bit lucky to get into this program as they were not only high level specialists in trauma treatment, but also conducting research in best practices of it. I spoke about it to LawPartners several times. Report from an independent traumatic clinic carries way more weight than a report from a psychologist hired just to write a report, at least in my view.

While it was dismissed by Potts as not useful, later it proved essential when PIC did assessment and recognized PTSD having a major impact on my life.

29. Lies about Moodley assessment before it. In a meeting on 2020-01-29 with Pryde and Potts was told that there will be an assessment by a psychologist hired by QBE. I was worried that a specialist hired by QBE might be not objective and might twist things in favor of QBE. Pryde told me not to worry and that there is one important thing he wanted to say to me about this assessment. Then he made a very long pause. Pause was so long that Potts started browsing something on her phone. Then Pryde finally added “this is all I want to say”. Potts nodded with a wide happy smile, while looking at my frustrated face. I asked what he meant. Pryde reiterated that this assessment is by a psychologist and made another long pause. I can imagine bad advice, but this was a new low. There was no point taking more abuse, so I have not repeated my question again.

It turned out that Moodley had no intention even to pretend to be even remotely objective. We counted 146 factual errors in that report (see 2020-03-18 Moodley report errors.pdf ). I could have not participated in that appointment at all. She wrote the whole assessment based on fictional events. Warning to be emotionally cautious would have saved me from a lot of suffering. Warnings about the process would have been useful too, like that I can ask for a break during the interview as I have continued it despite being very tired and badly needing a break. There is a strong chance that it would have saved me from some incorrect statements from Moodley.

30. Lies about Moodley assessment impact and my options to complain about it. When Potts told me that she got a report from Moodley at the same time I got a notice from the GP that there is an important report ready and I should make an appointment to discuss it (see

2020-04-29 email from Gillian Potts YOUR MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM.pdf ). Potts was reluctant to send me Moodleys report but when I told her that I am going to get it from my GP anyway she sent it to me. It turned out that the GP was talking about a report from a cardiologist that I forgot about. It was a shock to me. I expected to be mostly objective (Moodley fooled me well). While it had incorrect statements almost in every paragraph (146 errors in total 2020-03-18 Moodley report errors.pdf ), twisting the whole story upside down. It only proves how easy I am to manipulate as I believed her when she was assuring me that she will write the truth. However, her statements could not be true as they conflicted with each other, time scale and location.

For example she was saying that was so depressed before the injury that my wife had to make me lunch before going to work, or I would not eat. The problem is that I was not married at that time and Justė whom I married later was still living in Lithuania.

Another example: Moodley wrote that the next relationship was with Russian women in 2011, continued for 2 years and caused my depression to get worse. And because of the relationship breakdown (that would be 2013 according to Moodley) caused me to get depressed in 2011. Not true. So many things wrong. Our relationship started in 2009, I was working full time, was not depressed and it was good at the start. BTW splitting was a good thing as it was not working. There were many more time inconsistencies that continued all through the report. For me it looked more like a student who is learning a new foreign language and got a task to invert every sentence.

As it was very PTSD symptoms triggering to see my life story so twisted in the time given I wrote to them only about some errors in the Moodley report. However, it was enough to dispute this report's conclusions. To my shock Potts and Pryde were fine with Moodleys report. They told me that it does not matter even if she got every sentence wrong. It will be discarded as minor problems. The main thing for them was that she wrote that in her opinion I am absolutely fine and only pretending to be impacted by trauma. Pryde told me that no one will ever believe me now and that my mental health problems will never be recognized in one of the late phone calls with Potts and Pryde. I asked Potts to ask for notes from the interview for assessment as I remember that at least for one test I wrote answers with my hand and Moodley after checking them told me that I did not show any problems with my basic functioning. While in her report Moodley wrote that I was faking the test. Instead, Pryde called me and threatened that I will get nothing if I request for notes, it will only damage my claim and this request is against their advice and therefore I will be breaking the contract. Scared from their threats I withdraw my request for notes (see 2020-05-06 email from Potts further pushing me settling threatening with Moodley rep… ). The report stayed and damaged my claim. It might have been very different if I asked for data to prove that there were errors in tests too.

31. The only reason I can think of why Moodley wrote such absurd things in her report is that she knew that LawPartners would not dispute it. I can not explain it otherwise.

32. Potts the used this report to apply further psychological pressure to settle (see 2020-05-08 email to Potts - About asking for row data of test for Moodley assessment.pdf ).

33. Potts pushed me to accept the settlement as opposing solicitor Timothy Ceballos is going to get married soon and it would be nice to get a settlement before the wedding (like a present to him). According to her they worked together before and he was her boss. Later she changed her statement saying that she was concerned that he might go to honeymoon.

34. One of the most abusive calls was on 2020-05-06. Potts arranged a Zoom call with Pryde and me. I think that was the first time they tried Zoom and they had technical issues, especially Pryde. Pryde was complaining that he could not properly hear Potts. They tried reloading to the conference several times and played with their equipment, but could not solve their technical problems. At the end Pryde made a telephone conference and launched a brutal attack on me. He told me that everyone will believe only Moodley statement that I was so depressed before the injury that Juste had to make food for me before going to work, that after injury I fully recovered from my depression. He said that many factual errors in the Moodley report is a minor thing and he will not do anything about it. He made it sound that it was my fault that Moodley wrote so many lies in her report. Pryde told me that Potts' friendly relationship with Ceballos is the only reason QBE is offering something. Pryde demanded me to accept the offer instantly without thinking about it. Their explanation contradicted previous statements and did not make sense. I told Pryde that I would like a second opinion. Pryde pretended that he did not hear. Panicking and not being able to think I actually repeated it maybe seven times. Pryde every time pretended that he did not hear me (he was already laughing at me). Then I realized that he is against me talking to any solicitor and I whispered that I want to talk to my wife. Pryde told me to do so. This injustice was so triggering that I went into a severe panic attack, just managed to say that I need time to think and can not talk anymore. I was physically incapable of making any decision that day.

35. Refusal to submit my claim to an independent assessor CARS. From the start Potts assured me that if I am not happy with the offer from QBE I can go to an independent assessor and geet assessment that QBE must accept. As LawPartners have been giving me lots of conflicting advice I asked to submit documents to an independent assessor and let him decide. I first asked for it verbally, after the first failed informal settlement conference. I asked for an independent assessment during every meeting. Till I finally felt frustrated enough to ask for it in a separate email (see

2020-03-20 To Gillian - Minimum for agreement.pdf ). However, they still refused to do so. At the end they put a demand to accept grossly overpriced fees if I want to go forward (see 2020-04-14 Authority Rejecting Solicitors Advice.doc ,

2020-04-14 email from Potts demand to accept overcharged fees to go forward.pdf , 2020-04-14 Letter Advice - from counsel - dated 20.3.20.pdf ). However, Pryde told me that if I accept this their fees after CARS assessment will be higher than the payment I will get and I will end up paying them.

36. Gross exaggeration of costs. At the first informal settlement Potts mentioned that the total legal costs are below $50,000. The sum stayed similar till March 2020 when Potts informed me that she changed her mind and more or less the same QBE offer that was from December 2019 is now acceptable. There were jump legal fees without any work done. There was an even further jump in legal fees in May 2020, when LawPartners contacted me again with demand to settle instead of following my instructions and sending an application for PIC assessment. Poots wrote that LawPartners legal fees are $82,500 (including GST) with 30% cap ($104,819 without cap including GST). I was trying to understand what was happening and was recommended to ask for an itemized bill to see where I am (see

2020-05-14 LawPartners - Request for list of Expenses.pdf ). It felt that Potts realized that I may be looking for a second opinion despite their instructions not to do so. I was hit with grossly exaggerated legal fees for LawPartners of $145,539 (including GST) (see

2020-05-14 law partners Itemised Bill of solicitor client costs.pdf ). They exaggerated all costs: simple notifications about appointments, reading reports, pointless conferences where they dragged

time, even the welcome gift of a few notes pages and envelopes got added at a value of $500 (see picture 2018-04-10 Law Partners welcoming gift.pdf ).

37. Threats to damage my claim. Pryde, with Potts agreeing, told me that they will prevent me from going to PIC for assessment. They also told me that I will not be able to continue my claim with another lawyer. I have contacted solicitor Moya de Luca-Leonar for a second opinion and she offered to take my case in June 2020. De Luca contacted Potts asking for a file. Potts requested to agree with exaggerated costs removing the 30% cap before agreeing to pass the file (see

2020-07-17 Tripartite Deed.pdf ). I did not agree with such gross overcharge. I was left without a LawPartners file. However, when I got it, I saw that they basically have not done any preparations for my claim anyway.

38. Lies about the status of my claim. It may be coincidence, but after Potts refused to submit an application for assessment of damages, Ceballos (QBE) submitted an application for damages on 2020-06-01. Potts kept telling me that I have only two options: to agree to settle with the QBE offer or to agree to be grossly overcharged by LawPartners (see

2020-07-07 email from Potts offer to settle.pdf ). Later this information proved to be false. De Luca applied for a new medical assessment and provided all information about my mental health (most of it LawPartners also had). PIC assessed that road traffic injury caused PTSD and had a major impact on my health (see medical assessments in attachments).

39. Put psychological pressure that no one is going to believe me. Starting from November 2020 Potts and Pryde started telling me that the personal injury claims system is very unfair and I am at risk that no one is going to believe me. Early March it got more intense when they started pushing me to accept the QBE offer. After the fraudulent Moodley report, Potts and especially Pryde started calling me all sorts of names like useless, good for nothing, worthless weakling, who tries to profit from an honest insurance

company. It got even worse in May. For example I asked for time to think and got a reply pressuring me to settle urgently (see 2020-06-02 email from Potts presure to settle in reply for a time to think.pdf ). As sad as it sounds, Pryde's words that no one is going to believe me stuck in my mind for a long time.

40. Potts passed the file only in July 2022, when it was no longer useful for my claim (see 2022-07-21 Moya informed that she got file from LawPartners.pdf ). I got access to it only on 2023-05-11 and I hope it will be useful at least for this complaint.

Summary of the impact

1. The work done by LawPartners did not result in compensation for non-economic loss, while there was lots of evidence of PTSD. If that would be the end of the claim Gillian Potts work was at least negligent or even worse.

2. The work done by Gillian Potts did not assist in the latter work by Moya de Luca-Leonard trying to have my impairment properly recognized.

3. As a result I strongly believe that my claim would have been better if Gillian Potts would never have gotten involved.

Impact on mental health

There is one thing when an insurance company writes statements about you that are not true and can not be true, without even taking care to make sure that it is physically possible. You still have a chance that you can dispute it in court or some other institution that has power to oversee the insurance claim process. However, it is a very different story when your personal injury lawyers side with the insurance company. When they say (I try to remember as exactly as I can):

“Yes, it is a lie and it is having a major negative impact on your claim, … we will do nothing about it. We have a good relationship with insurance company lawyers, we have worked for years with them ... Disputing the way they have treated you would be opening a can of worms and we are not going to do it. There is nothing you can

do about it. They were not required to provide originals of the test where you might be able to prove that report is incorrect. It will greatly increase your legal costs, … it is against our advice and no one will believe you. This is a very ugly system where you will never get any justice… Take what we are offering you as no one else will offer you this much.”

These were the people that meant to help you. They kept telling me that they are required by law to look after my interests and now they do the opposite. There is no one else to turn to. I feel completely crushed by the system. There is no way to get any help. It was bad that they have been very unprofessional managing my case, not doing tasks that were required for the claim, refusing to collect information about my mental health (which is the main part of my problems), providing false statements about the law, but now openly siding with the insurance company. I feel like I was being scammed by a con man. Only in most cases can you seek justice after being scammed, but this time you were scammed by people who meant to help you. To put salt on injury they mentioned that the insurance company lawyer is getting married and it would be a nice wedding present if we settle the insurance claim before it. Later they changed it saying that it will simply cause a delay.

To have my insurance claim prepared I had to tell Law Partners all details how vulnerable I am and now they use it against me. I feel like my life is in danger again and nothing I am doing is helping me. I have tried very hard to find help, both legal and for my mental health, with very little success. I could not touch anything related to it.

This was a re-traumatizing event and put my treatment back for a long time. The only hope came very recently when the medical panel reviewed my case and confirmed that I have PTSD (depression is one of the symptoms) caused by road traffic injury and basically threw away most of the false statements provided by insurance people. So, despite spending more than 2 years trembling in fear, now I have a small chance to write about it without being overtaken by fear just from thought about it. However, it is difficult for me to present my case properly. Some parts of memory get blocked sometimes and I may go to small details while missing to write some important bits. However, I am trying my best to be accurate.

My chances to write a successful complaint is also reduced by limited cognitive capacity, especially when it comes to matters related to the injury.: ability to focus, analyze, look at different aspects. The only thing that makes it possible to write this complaint and I hope one day the whole story is the fear that if I will not do this and will not seek justice I will be stuck in this suffering for the rest of my life. Imagine how unfair it is that after all this misconduct by Gillian Potts and Ken Pryde they may demand gross exaggerated fees for their misconduct.

How I got into this mess

It might sound strange that I got into this mess. It felt unreal for me. However, psychologists provided me with a good explanation of how trauma and PTSD made it impossible to be able to have any better control of the situation than I did. I mention only a few things that I think LawPartners were aware of and abused seeking their own gain.

It is hard to describe how debilitating PTSD is. It can prevent you from doing tasks that you so desperately need to do and there is no way you can deal with it by yourself.

I provided information about my constraints so that they can represent me for my claim, but they used this information to manipulate me. The way they did this leaves me with the feeling that they have done this many times before.

To high levels of stress

Anything related to the injury is causing me to feel unsafe as if I am in danger of getting hit by a car. I know I am not going to get hit, but the fear is overwhelming. At the time when I had to deal with LawPartners I would get very easily triggered. While stressed I lose any ability to think and it is easy to manipulate me to agree to anything.

Reduced cognitive ability

Even if I am not triggered by anything I still remain in a high level of agitation. Together with lack of sleep and feeling exhausted all the time I can not analyze anything in detail. So, I have to rely on a simplified version of explanation. LawPartners used it fully to their advantage. They provided simple explanations in words and then very different details in written form.

Dependency on any help even if it is not real

The problem with PTSD is that you live with the feeling that your life is in danger all the time. So, when someone promises you to help with the things related to it you believe in these promises with all your heart.

Even when they misuse your trust and are abusive and you feel that they were not helping you mind plays tricks on you. It does not allow you to question all the lies told to you and you do not see any other alternative. One of the wake up calls was the dramatic scene I have seen when US troops were leaving Afghanistan in 2021. Afghans were clinging outside of the plain while it was taking off and dropping to their death when it took off. I can identify with them. You can ask why they do not put an effort to protect themselves, better die fighting for your rights. They have been given a chance. But they do not see that option, they see clinging on the plain as the only option of survival. This is what trauma does to you. It makes you blind. I do find myself being blind same way. I may not see some path now too. So I hope you will let me know, if I provided some information incompletely or if I need to contact another organization for some of the matters I am referring to you.

Attachments

2010-12-16 - 2018-07-11 Steve Sutton Clinical notes.pdf

2015-03-15 Alfonsas Stonis CV.pdf

2015 MACR regulated costs.pdf

2015-11-02 Joyce Chiu Managment Plan.pdf

2017-10-23 EloisaMuletNotes.pdf

2018-01-05 centrelink assessment.pdf

2018-03-28 LawPartners CARS Form 2A.pdf

2018-04-10 lawpartners cost agreement.pdf

2018-04-10 No win no fee cap guarantee.pdf

2018-04-10 Law Partners welcoming gift.pdf

2018-05-10 Gmail To Potts - Previous mental health status.pdf

2018-05-15 Gmail From Potts asking only for notes.pdf

2018-05-29 Ken Pryde cost agreement.pdf

2018-07-03 McInnes Willson to LawPartners - GP notes, Mullet.pdf

2019-04-17 email to Sutton and Potts - Clinical notes.pdf

2019-04-17 email to Potts - FW Request for documents.pdf

2019-04-23 email to Potts - The application I was working on before the incident.pdf

2019-04-23 contacts_task_application.pdf

2019-04-29 Alfonsas Stonis statement.pdf

2019-04-30 LawPartners MAS form 2A.pdf

2019-07-08 Letter advising of appointment.pdf

2019-10-22 Typical day.pdf

2019-10-24 email Gillian Potts - Assessment appeal dead line.pdf

2019-10-30 LawPartners MAS form 5A.pdf

2019-10-30 Claimants submissions for MAS 5A.pdf

2019-11-16 Stephen Sutton Report.pdf

2019-12-16 Statement of Reasons.pdf

2020-01-09 email from Melissa - Next meeting 29th 15 00.pdf

2020-01-30 email from Potts offer - YOUR MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM.pdf

2020-03-18 Moodley report errors.pdf

2020-03-20 To Gillian - Minimum for agreement.pdf

2020-04-14 Authority Rejecting Solicitors Advice.pdf

2020-04-14 email from Potts demand to accept overcharged fees to go forward.pdf

2020-04-14 Letter Advice - from counsel - dated 20.3.20.pdf

2020-04-23 email to Melissa asking application and response for review.pdf

2020-04-24 email from Melissa review reply.pdf

2020-04-29 email from Gillian Potts YOUR MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM.pdf

2020-05-06 email from Potts further pushing me settling threatening with Moodley report.pdf 2020-05-08 email to Potts - About asking for row data of test for Moodley assessment.pdf 2020-05-14 law partners Itemised Bill of solicitor client costs.pdf

2020-05-14 LawPartners - Request for list of Expenses.pdf

2020-06-02 email from Potts presure to settle in reply for a time to think.pdf

2020-06-04 Traumatic Stress Clinic Report.pdf

2020-06-18 email to Melissa - Copy of MAS and MAS review application forms.pdf 2020-07-03 Dr Peter Anderson - assesment.pdf

2020-07-07 email from Potts offer to settle.pdf

2020-07-17 Tripartite Deed.pdf

2020-07-24 Dr Peter Anderson WPI.pdf

2020-07-31 email from Moya - FW 4A Application Received - 10280111 - Alfonsas Stonis - Claim number … 2021-03-17 Wayne Mason assessment.pdf

2022-06-27 Alfonsas Stonis further statement.pdf

2022-07-21 Moya informed that she got file from LawPartners.pdf

2022-09-30 PIC Review of medical assessment.pdf

2022-12-19 email from CTP Assist regulated costs - FW REF NO. 20019875.pdf

2023-03-15 email from PIC for 2023-06-28 - RE APP-10268809 - Alfonsas Stonis Upcoming scheduled a… 2023-04-26 Alfonsas Stonis further statement.pdf

Dr Alfonsas Stonis 2023-05-13

15