In this powerful interview, Thomas Flitner exposes what he alleges to be a long-running and retaliatory campaign by the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner (VLSB+C) — a campaign that, in his view, culminated in fabricated charges relating to the administration of his late mother’s estate. Thomas, a sole legal practitioner, recounts the deeply personal and professional toll inflicted upon him after years of resisting what he describes as regulatory overreach and unjustified intervention. At the centre of this story is a 5% commission agreement — a signed document between Thomas, his mother, and his ex-partner — which the VLSB allegedly lost. Despite no complaints by beneficiaries and no findings by a probate court, the Board pursued him with allegations of estate impropriety nearly six years later. Throughout the interview, Thomas describes: How the VLSB+C allegedly withheld or destroyed exculpatory evidence, including the original signed agreement for the 5% commission; How they brought charges only after other avenues of regulatory attack had failed, notably after he successfully challenged the Victorian Government Solicitor in April 2024; How no complaints were made by family or beneficiaries, and how the VLSB allegedly exploited family divisions to manufacture a complaint; His ongoing VCAT proceeding, despite the matter falling within the jurisdiction of the probate court, not a professional conduct tribunal; How his law firm was forcibly taken over by appointed external manager Nick Curran in late 2023 on dubious grounds, allegedly unconnected to the estate matter; And how the regulator's shifting justifications for its interventions signal a broader pattern of retribution against lawyers who challenge the system. This episode sheds light not only on Thomas’s personal ordeal, but on broader concerns about the unchecked power of legal regulators in Victoria — particularly their ability to bypass due process, lay charges without complaint, and pursue disciplinary action years after the fact. 📌 If you’re a lawyer, regulator, or anyone concerned about due process, legal ethics, or institutional abuse of power — this is a video you need to watch. 💬 Comment below if you or someone you know has been subject to abuse of power by legal or police institutions. Your voice matters. 📢 Subscribe for more investigations into legal corruption and whistleblower cases.
00:00And I've had a written document with 5% commission, signed by mum, myself and my ex, de facto.
00:08So they didn't like that, they had the original, I've told them if you lose that, I'll hold them accountable.
00:13That was given to them a couple of years ago, with the file, which I don't have a copy of.
00:18So the Victorian Legal Services Board had the original will?
00:21Yeah, and they've manufactured a complaint and that's what they've decided to take me to work out for.
00:25And they lost the will?
00:27My brothers had the will in the house while I wasn't there and it disappeared after her death.
00:33But did you say that a copy of the will was also in your office?
00:37No, no, no. She had a will kit and it was at home.
00:40Okay.
00:41And so what I did was as a reputable lawyer and also oldest brother, I made sure that I confiscated the unencumbered title she'd had for 30 years.
00:50Took them to my house, whereupon the middle brother, who had been receiving carer's pension, had two houses rented and paid off.
00:57Was living there for nine months rent-free, mind you.
00:59That's rubbish there for me to clean up in 15 mini-skips.
01:03Sorry.
01:04And having to clean that two houses out and five acres myself and sell things after a year of her passing and get rid of her cancer medication.
01:14And, you know, he'd ruined the new bathroom I put in for mum just a year before.
01:20And sell it all myself and then hand it out to checks.
01:23They said that that was all badly done by me and based on what they've spiked my younger brother up, I have done the wrong thing by the estate.
01:32I.e. I overcharged the estate for everything I did myself.
01:36So your partner is a witness to the...
01:42Signing of the document saying I can take 5% and waiving any requirement of the three boys, me and my two brothers, to repay the estate for gifts that she'd given us.
01:54Okay.
01:54And are they saying that they have an alternative version of the will or...
02:00No, none was found.
02:02Okay.
02:03So this matter is now in VCAT.
02:06That's correct.
02:06They're alleging that I have stolen from the estate the 5% commission.
02:13The issue there is that it's a probate court matter, but they have stepped in as a legal services commissioner saying that they're judge, jury, and executioner.
02:22And that is the basis now that they have me on charges.
02:26The original basis for not to fit in a proper person were the management system directives and not letting Hubbell marry it in.
02:36Now it's changed to the charges they put on eight months after they robbed me of my business.
02:43So you're saying that you weren't found by probate court to have done the wrong thing?
02:49Nothing's gone into the probate court, no.
02:51If there was any issue, my brother should have raised a dispute.
02:55There was no dispute raised with the probate court or the legal services commissioner.
02:59They came in, did an audit in January 2019.
03:03Under just an audit, there's no delegation, there's nothing there, and just decided to investigate from January 2019.
03:112019, 20, 1, 2, 2.
03:13So, five and a half years, effectively, before they charged me.
03:19There's a statutory limit on that, too, but they took five and a half years to charge me.
03:23So, you're saying that they came in and no one had complained about this matter?
03:31The checks had been distributed in 2015.
03:33How did they know about your brothers?
03:36I don't know 100% about that.
03:39Perhaps someone said something.
03:41It wasn't from my brothers.
03:41Because there was no complaint to this date.
03:44They then asked for details of my brothers to contact them.
03:47And I provided their details, their contact details.
03:50Is it possible that they learnt about it when they were going through your personal files?
03:54That could have been the case, yes.
03:56Or they went through the probate court and did a search.
04:00And my name would have come up as administrator.
04:02And then from then on, they decided to take on a personal bent.
04:06And a personal vindictive.
04:07Knowing that there's a family fracture, which goes back decades.
04:11With me and my brothers.
04:12They were always feeling jealous about my mum coming into my practice and dropping in.
04:18For many years.
04:20For about 12 years before she passed away.
04:23And she would just come in just to be part of the community.
04:29I'm very proud of me.
04:30They also did things, but they were very jealous.
04:36And that jealousy translated now to them getting hold of them and manufacturing allegations that now they're both upset at me.
04:47So, are you saying that there was some way they could have known about that?
04:52There is a way they could have known about it.
04:54Either through a staff member.
04:57Perhaps that senior associate or someone of that.
05:01They've done their homework.
05:03Let me just say they've done their homework.
05:04And the, yeah, the allegations don't stack up.
05:11The length of time to do the investigation was so obvious that after I won the, with the Victorian government solicitor that matter on the 15th of April, 2024,
05:24they had nothing to have the basis to take my business because I'd already lodged a VCAT application that they had no basis in November, 2023, about a month after they'd done their move on my practice.
05:38So, therefore, they manufactured on the 27th of June, I recall, around about that date, 27th of June, 2024, charges that I had done something wrong with my late mum's estate.
05:50They had taken five and a half years.
05:52So, you're saying that all this while, until they had exhausted every other option, they weren't very keen on bringing these charges?
06:07No, because they thought they might win the other matter.
06:10But they'd also moved in prior to me winning that matter, giving me no income source and no ability to pay my lawyers.
06:16And this was the appointment with Nick Curran?
06:19That was when they moved in with Nick Curran, yes.
06:20But I also had that other case going.
06:22And the basis for the Curran's appointment, as you've said before, was the failure to adequately follow.
06:34You say that you followed adequately, of course.
06:40We diarised meetings.
06:41We had meetings with staff.
06:43They were very, they were putting onerous restrictions on me, which I complied with, and I had always been complying with, that every account would go through me for vetting.
06:54Did they identify what you weren't doing, right?
06:57They just said I didn't comply.
06:59Without explaining what, in what way?
07:01Just said I didn't comply in the letter.
07:03On the 11th of October, 2023.
07:05And so that appointment, as we've discussed, it had nothing, they said it had nothing to do with my late mum's estate that I was still investigating, which they charged me later.
07:16And it had nothing to do with the Victorian government solicited a case against me either.
07:21And it had nothing to do with the Victorian government solicited a case against me either.
