2. Flitner Explains How the VLSB is Notorious for Taking

Rule O’Flaw

Detrimental Actions Against Its Detractors In this powerful and deeply personal testimony, Victorian lawyer Thomas Flitner reveals how the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner (VLSB+C) allegedly weaponised their regulatory powers to destroy his legal career after he dared to win against them in court. Thomas explains how, after defeating the Victorian Government Solicitor in litigation, he was warned by his own lawyers: the regulator would seek revenge. And, according to him, they did ruthlessly. 📌 What you'll learn in this video: Targeted Regulatory Retaliation: Thomas describes how VLSB+C conducted repeated and invasive audits — not because of client complaints, but allegedly to dig until they “found something” to destroy him. He says that while most lawyers go their whole careers without such treatment, he was subjected to it twice — in what he describes as a deliberate psychological campaign. Personal and Health Crises Ignored: During this time, Thomas battled cancer, surgeries, and chronic pain. Despite these medical issues, he says the regulator showed no compassion and intensified their actions during his most vulnerable periods. A Shocking Internal Betrayal: He alleges that a senior associate at his firm — a lawyer with a criminal diversion history she did not disclose — opened her own firm while still employed by him, poached 78 clients and multiple staff, and then submitted damaging letters to the regulator to falsely portray him as incompetent. Weaponising Disability Stereotypes: According to Thomas, the VLSB leaned on his Asperger’s diagnosis to further claim he was “not a fit and proper person” to manage a law practice. He has since lodged a formal complaint of disability discrimination against the regulator with the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission. Conflict of Interest at the Core: The auditor appointed to investigate Thomas — Damian Neylon — was selected by Alice Duggan, a former legal placement student in Thomas’s own firm, whom he had personally supervised and signed off on for admission to practice. Thomas raised this prior relationship and called on Duggan to recuse herself due to a clear conflict of interest. She did not. 📂 Why this matters: This isn’t just about one lawyer’s ordeal. Thomas’s story raises serious concerns about: The use of regulatory audits as retaliatory tools Unaccountable appointments were made despite conflicts of interest The discriminatory use of mental health or neurodivergence to remove professionals from practice The lack of procedural fairness and oversight in one of the most powerful legal regulatory bodies in Australia 💬 As Thomas says: “When you’re in their sights, you’ll always be in their sights.” This video is a must-watch for lawyers, regulators, legal academics, human rights advocates, and anyone concerned about the misuse of institutional power and the silencing of dissent within the legal profession.

Transcript

00:00So you told me that your lawyers have warned you that once you've beaten them in court

00:09they would want revenge and they would essentially weaponize their regulatory

00:16powers to make your life difficult. Were they right? They were right and this is this

00:24knowledge in the legal profession because they knew from experience that the legal

00:29board have so much power and resources and always use the largest law firms and QCs and

00:36King's Councils now and lawyers to break lawyers and they don't let up. When you're in their sights

00:44you'll always be in their sights so it's just a matter of time until they find something or do

00:50something. And what did they do against you? Well as I said they sent in audits they then did special

01:00audits on files they then sent in auditors other lawyers that are auditors twice to come in and

01:10look at files and try and find out something that they could find out about my practice that was

01:17possibly not going correctly or whatever. So most lawyers probably 99% never had this happen in

01:23their whole career. So this was quite unusual how they were going about it systematically trying to

01:30have me either close down or have a mental breakdown and then eventually what they did is they they just

01:38stole my business lock, stock and barrel on the 11th of October 2023. So their main job is to make sure that

01:49the clients of the legal profession have confidence in the profession. And the public also protected.

01:59Yes. So did one of your clients make a complaint against you? I had complaints made against me just in

02:07terms of costs and that's a regular occurrence in the handling of legal practice. But the auditor's

02:16appointment, was that in particular triggered by a consumer complaint against you? No it wasn't, no. I actually

02:23ended up having a bookkeeper steal close to $200,000. We reconciled it to $135,000 and I received $130,000

02:34back from insurance. That was in August 2018. In October 2018 I was diagnosed with cancer.

02:43I had treatment in January 2019 operation and treatment for cancer. I'm now in remission.

02:50Then I also had a bunion operation in July 2019 which ended up having a first metatarsal break. So

02:58a new surgeon had to correct that in December 2020 which led to a practitioner I've employed as a senior

03:07associate dealing with the legal board on other issues with the legal board that they had regarding

03:14other files etc. And also writing to the legal board without my knowledge saying that I wasn't managing my

03:21practice which all came out after the fact especially when I was back in operation and I was still

03:29managing my files. Through COVID we all had boxes. Everyone got paid the same rate of pay. I didn't

03:35devalue anybody, take any conditions off anyone. So we made it all through that. We made the hard yards

03:41through the cancer diagnosis and treatment. We made the way through the bunion operation and the second

03:48operation there. Other medical conditions I have now still and have ongoing like chronic original

03:55pain syndrome in the foot as a result of this scarring and bad foot just for a basic bunion correction.

04:03So what happened the upshot was that this senior associate had been there for five years

04:07decided to open up her own practice and have set that up already in and called herself a sole

04:14practitioner in November 2020 while I was just before the operation while she was still employed

04:21in my practice as a senior associate. Also she didn't disclose to me that in 2020 she had had a

04:28diversion program. She had agreed to a diversion program in the Magistrates Court so she had disclosed

04:35it to me and I'm not sure if she didn't disclose it to the legal board that she had had to pay a fine

04:42and there were threats that she had done assault on someone that she had pleaded guilty to for the

04:51diversion program. So the upshot was that when I came back into the office in February, March 2021

05:00I found that this senior associate and three other lawyers that she took with her to a practice living

05:06with no staff had effectively been poaching clients against the employment contract. Turns out 78 clients

05:14were poached or written to being told that I wouldn't be back and it was done under it was under done by

05:22stealth and I found that out after the fact which I reported to the first auditor Damien Naylor when

05:29he came in to do the audit that was in around about August 2021. He was appointed by the

05:36Victorian Legal Services Commissioner under their own motion to come and do an audit. Now in his report

05:42he did acknowledge that this senior associate had taken 78 files and that there was a minor dispute between

05:49us two but I would categorize it as a major theft of property intellectual property and ongoing billing

05:57from my practice which had been operation since November 2002. So you're effectively saying that

06:04she had decided to steal your business and clients and staff and in order to create an excuse for

06:18taking away your fines and uh your staff she made an allegation to say that you're not managing your

06:27business properly. I'm not functioning. And then that would justify her taking all those people

06:34that's correct and your uh heart developed business away. She manufactured a complaint

06:40and was told by the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner which I hadn't seen

06:43that I wasn't managing and they would have then used that with their Asperger's view that I'm not a fit and

06:53proper person to run a practice. So you're saying that they effectively determined that all Asperger's

07:04syndrome um or all people that uh have that condition are incapable of running uh a legal practice

07:14properly? That's correct or running their life and can't deal with people. Okay and that's what you're

07:23currently um challenging before the Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission? That's correct.

07:30there's a complaint against the Attorney General Legal Services Commissioner for compensation for breaching

07:36the law in relation to discrimination for the person with Asperger's in employment. Okay now we've spoken

07:44extensively about uh Mr. Naylon's appointment and um can you uh remind me again uh who the appointer

07:55of Mr. Naylon was in the obvious? It was a Mrs. Alice Duggan from the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner

08:01and she wrote to me in mid 2021 saying hi Thomas we haven't spoken for many years um she actually did

08:09her Leo Cousins um placement to become a lawyer in my practice in 2011 I recall and I passed and ticked off

08:18on her placement that said she could be admitted into the profession as a first-year lawyer.

08:23So it was quite interesting for me to see that she was saying in her original letter to me first

08:31letter that she's made the determination that I need to have an order to come in and go through my

08:36business to which I responded well you did your practical placement at my firm I was good enough to

08:43sign off on your admission and that you're competent but here you are now saying that I'm not competent

08:50and so she she just um still made the appointment and didn't address that and didn't recuse herself

08:56either so from that decision. So you're saying that you raised that she had a conflict of interest

09:03then that you were her boss prior to the uh her employment at the Victorian Legal Services Board or

09:11uh if not immediately prior to that then some years prior to that and she refused to recuse herself.

09:18That's correct. Did she advise you that she had um referred this matter to a supervisor and they had

09:26found that there was no basis? No. So she did not even escalate the matter to? No.

Category

Transcript

Recommended