Allianz NSW workcover case managers threaten aworkcovervictimsdiary with a lawsuit!

About two weeks ago, received a Word letter (!) from [popup url=’’] NSW Radford lawyers [/popup] sent to our generic email address, on behalf of three unhappy Allianz NSW workcover case managers, threatening us with a lawsuit for defamation, excuse us!

Allianz NSW workcover case managers threaten aworkcovervictimsdiary with a lawsuit!

Allianz NSW workcover lawyer’s threatening letter

Note: it is worth mentioning that the letter was only picked up 4 to 6 days after it was sent, and accidentally, because it had been spammed by our email software due to the WORD attachment!







We did not defame anybody! Who is there to de-fame, please?

Two of the mentioned workcover case managers, who so rapidly ran to their lawyer, were in fact publicly trashed in a derogatory manner in a publicly published COURT case, which we had published long before the lawyer’s letter appeared in our generic email inbox, and long before the letter was -literally- and accidentally un-spammed!

We did not intentionally meet the “demands” of said threat, however and most unfortunately perhaps, we did remove and censor some of the comments!

A. We will re-summarise the Allianz NSW workcover case here in case you missed it:

The case was published on 14 February 2012, in a blog post article entitled: “Bullying workers’ comp insurer Allianz pays the price

The “defamatory” comments as stated (alleged) in the said lawyer’s letter were mainly direct copies and pastes of the following court case transcript!

In this horrid case, an injured worker had, according to the Judge, “good reason” to feel harassed by the insurers (Allianz NSW) who managed her compensation claim. A NSW court has ruled in finding her anxiety and stress were work-related. The Workers Compensation Commission, Deputy President Bill Roche heard the worker had suffered chronic pain, insomnia, anxiety, social withdrawal and depression as a result of her physical injuries and the claims process.

An extract from the court case (transcript) which is publicly available on reads as follows:

“Ms Davis (plaintiff) spoke to Ms Reiner’s manager, Ms Rogers, and contacted WorkCover. She felt that the approach by Ms Reiner and Ms Rogers was unprofessional and constituted bullying and victimisation”.

“Following the exercise physiologist’s report, an officer from Allianz, Ms Reiner, telephoned Ms Davis, which made her angry and distressed “because of her thinking that she could intimidate me”.

Ms Reiner said that Allianz was aware that Ms Davis had an injury, but they did not think it was as bad as had been reported. She said that Allianz had video surveillance of Ms Davis and reports of her carrying out a number of activities. Ms Davis did not deny having carried her daughter’s school backpack over her right shoulder, using exercise equipment in the park (with no weight or resistance), and being able to walk. Ms Davis was further distressed when Ms Reiner threatened her when she said that fraud was against the law. She felt frustrated when she saw what had been reported because of the surveillance”

Ms Davis said she felt it was unreasonable for Dr Kafataris to expect her to increase her hours of work and that it was “more of the bullying tactics” that were being directed towards her by Allianz. She felt that Ms Reiner had bullied her by sending her job seeker diaries even though she had been certified unfit

The day after Ms Davis received the surveillance report in the mail from Allianz, she experienced two significant panic attacks and a third attack on 3 November 2008 when she listened to voicemail messages from Ms Burgess. She felt that Allianz, through its letters and “bullying telephone calls”, was sabotaging her attempt to get on with her life. She felt that Allianz was treating her unfairly, and disguising their treatment of her by talking about the Workers Compensation Act caused her distress”

“She [plaintiff] described her experience dealing with Allianz (NSW) staff as being bullied by a global organisation…

  1. First, they make the same basic error referred to above under “psychological injury”. The worker did not suffer a “psychological injury” and her counsel did not argue that she had. It was therefore not necessary for the Arbitrator to find injury under s 4 and that employment had been a substantial contributing factor to any psychological injury. The Arbitrator erred in finding that the worker had received a psychological injury. However, applying the correct approach, the conclusion is the same. Ms Davis’s psychological condition resulted from her physical injuries. Her symptoms (from her physical and psychological conditions) resulted in her being totally unfit from 30 October 2008 to 30 April 2009 and partially unfit thereafter.
  2. Second, Ms Davis’s psychological symptoms developed in 2005, not 2008, and the evidence from Ms Marshell clearly linked those symptoms to her physical injuries and the claim for compensation for those injuries. The management of a claim for compensation is as much a part of the claim as the treatment of the injury.

Please read the court case – we are not defaming people – these are exact extract of a publicly available published court case –

B. The third Allianz NSW workcover case manager

With regards to the third case manager who ran to her lawyer in order to seek a lawsuit against me for defaming her, I wish to point out that a couple of our loyal readers had – rightly so it appears- flagged Ms S as a potentially “difficult” (shall we say) case manager.

As the letter correctly states, we did warn our readers and commentators that we would censor names if no evidence of wrongdoing was provided. This is also stated in our disclaimer. And we did in fact censor the names of all three case managers before the letter arrived! And we should not have had to!

Well, it turns out that Ms S has a lot of defamatory comments on the internet, and, rest assured, some of those date well before the existence of, which was only launched in August 2011. In addition, the authors and administrators of this blog reside in Victoria,  as is clearly stated on the left hand site of our blog (under the character). So to say that we would deliberately be spreading malicious ‘comments’ about somebody totally unbeknownst to us would be rather far fetched indeed.

But if that is not enough, folks, it turns out that Ms S, who is running to a lawyer to sue us for defamation – obviously because it is causing her harm and hurt – is in fact, herself, sourcing all those derogatory and defamatory comments on the internet about herself and LINKING them to her Facebook page and, hang on, is bloody well JOKING and MAKING fun of them! That is how “affected” (shall we say) Ms S is – how sick. So, in fact Ms S is responsible for spreading defamatory “stuff” like wildfire about herself and JOKES about it! That’s right, folks, but she sues US for allowing our readers and commentators to “flag” her in a comment, that was censored within days!? How pathetic.’s response to Allianz NSW workcover lawyer’s letter

We have taken the liberty to publish Allianz NSW lawyer’s threatening letter as we we did not defame anybody and if you are instructed and believe so we will provide you with our legal representatives’ address(es) for service of the Court Documentation.

What’s more a few lawyers including Atlas Legal Australia, specialised in Crime, Commercial Litigation and Intellectual Property Law Litigation, have also kindly volunteered to accept service of the writ or statement of claim for Defamation!

We would look forward to having all three women in the Witness box being cross examined.

We would also look forward to having Senior Allianz Staff at the court proceedings to enlighten the whole of Australia as to how Allianz trains it’s staff and issues procedural guidance. It should be an interesting case to deal with. It would undoubtedly cause a HUGE scandal and draw attention to workers plight.
You threaten to sue the blog owner -LOL- go right ahead it’s organisations like you without ethics and integrity that has cost me my career and assets.  I don’t have any; you want to bankrupt me go right ahead I don’t have anything to lose. But I will make sure in the trial ALL your dirty laundry is aired in public and what lengths you go to just to keep injured workers quiet about your corrupt system and morally corrupt employees.
Workcover victim also took the liberty to run your pathetic letter past Eric Brockovich during her personal visit. The first thing she had to say was that YOU are bullying an innocent, genuine injured worker and that YOUR intentions are clear, and that is that YOU (Allianz NSW) are desperately trying to shut up a strong, popular and ever growing VOICE for injured workers. The truth is obviously hitting a raw nerve somewhere, unfortunately this site is about the truth and nothing but the truth.
To go as far and as low as to intimidate an injured worker through a threatening lawyer’s letter  is nothing short of bullying. An unwarranted threat of this sorts puts a lot of unneeded stress and pressure on an injured worker and the last thing we want is to be bullied by lawyers or anyone about defamation or anything else.  Lawyers, and case managers (!) are trained in the art of bullying and they are very good at it. Unfortunately you have sent the letter to the wrong kind of person!
As stated on the disclaimer, and as any person in their right mind would do, and as stated in the defamation act, if any person has a concern about a derogatory comment or potential defamatory comment, the first thing they’d do is contact the administrators of the blog and discuss the issue.
There is NO NEED to threaten me/us (or anyone) or this blog with a lawsuit and make inappropriate, uneducated and rather intimidating demands.

Note: We do have more incriminating evidence of your wrongdoing, however we will keep that to hit the nail on your coffin in court, should you wish to proceed.

Oh and by the way

Updated 7 April 2012

click to enlarge

Our friends, whom you probably know very well, at state on their popular website that they:

“would highly recommend Michael Tehan or Paul Zawa of Minter Ellison to you Allianz, they both have some experience with defamation threats against impoverished Centrelink clients for publishing complaints on the internet. The keyword search engine optimization has just begun now Allianz have employed lawyers to try and shut-up injured workers and to intimidate a website detailing the experiences of aggrieved clients. Deny, Delay, Avoid and Intimidate seems to be the Allian of deatiln with injured workers. Radfords in NSW or Minter Ellison in Victoria, champions of the people, weasels being paid big money to silence unpaid injuered workers. Minter Ellison will do a basic cease and desist letter for $5,000. How much do Radford’s charge?

USA and International actions might not be their forté. Mark Radford demands that removes personal opinion even if it is true a basic defense to any false defamation claim, he also demands that they remove google cached pages which is beyond their power. Such a threatening letter to send to an aggrieved client. Alliaz are exposed again and again. Mr Radford and Minter Ellison will be rich on the proceeds of insurance policies that were meant to go to injured workers. Copyright and Access conditions Mr Radford. Previous aborted actions by Minter Ellison to try and silence aggrieved impoverished Centrelink clients”.


The Health and Safety for Beginners Daily

Updated 8 April 2012

The very popular Health and Safety for Beginners (HSfB) provides health and safety downloads, support for health and safety courses, toolbox talks, careers advice, vibrant discussion forums and much more… also published our article (with the full “intimidating lawyers letter!) on 7 and 8 April 2012 and circulated it in the UK (and worldwide) for all to see. Their digital magazine has been re-tweeted to date over 31 thousand times! Check them out –  and via twitter @hsfb

Isn’t there a saying, dear Ladies, that “what goes around comes around’? And that there is such a thing as “karma”!

The more you’ll try to -wrongfully- intimidate us in the hope to shut injured workers up (who have been ill-treated by ladies like you) the more your attempts to do so -wrongfully- will be spontaneously picked up by various popular media outlets and the more injured workers (and concerned, supportive members) will be aware of people like YOU!

It certainly appears to us, and in our very humble opinion, that your “lawyer” would have been better served instructing you on your rights and the relevant legislation… Or that YOU, lovely darlings, should have told your lawyer the FULL TRUTH!


We apologise profusely

We apologise for allowing our concerned readers to name you, and we apologise for having censored your last names in those comments to initials , but only after we gave them a warning that we would do so and only after a day or three, when we had physically a chance to do so. We sincerely apologise  that you had already been “defamed” in a publicly published NSW Court of Law and we apologise profusely of discovering that one of you finds it very funny that injured workers are very upset with the hurt you have caused them and that this person is now spreading those derogatory comments like wildfire, perpetuating her own “defamation”. We apologise even more profusely that you have now provided us with not only a very intimidating and demanding letter, but that you have also disclosed to us the first names of those ladies.

However, we do NOT apologise for showing Australia what you are trying to do to honest injured workers who are trying their best to expose the real workcover and the real workcover insurance practices in the hope of hopes to educate, and especially,  protect fellow and future injured workers from the further harm that you are so clearly perpetrating.

Click to view our official reply to those lovely ladies 🙂 🙂 🙂




86 Responses to “Allianz NSW workcover case managers threaten aworkcovervictimsdiary with a lawsuit!”

  1. What does Mr Radfords handwriting say about him? WOW! What a big ego, his signature covers a quarter of the page! This is a common personality disorder with mostly internet illiterate pompous weasles.

    Weasel Words n. 1 Words used by many solicitors. 2 hist. Manipulating language. weasel words adj. cheeving a loophole adv. [ORIGIN] Middle English via Old French weaselcus and ecclesiastical Latin weasilvidicus from Greek weaselarkos “able to mislead with words” (as weasel)

    A curious affliction of SOME very logical people to pedantically pick at words without any emotional involvement with the speaker’s meaning or the emotions and feelings of others who are hurt and in pain. An obsessive logical thinking disorder characterised by greed and a lack of empathy with others. A Narcissistic personality disorder, a need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. Solicitors personality types of Ambulance chasers a jibe aimed at legal practitioners used in the hurly-burly robustness of workers compensation law family law and aggrieved injured workers.

    Minter Ellison another favourite law firm of Allianz were named as bullies in other cases involving copyright. When Big Law turns to bullying.

    They are powerless on the internet, let the greedy have their imported luxury cars, but make sure on the internet they are remembered for what they did to injured workers to suck money from the pockets of injured workers. The leeches, we already have server space ready in Iceland.

    P.S. 30th August case in Melb Magistrates Court Tim Anderson v Allianz on trying to get back the massive shortfall on the six months PIAWE, after Allianz made an out of court settlement a year ago and then did not pay six months PIAWE at all. Get them into court, no settlement, no quarter on the internet for the ilk of Radford and Minter Ellison.

  2. Ahh Allianz NSW .

    It is very interesting that Allianz Insurance, during the Workers Compensation Inquiry particularly on television, increased their advertising two fold !!
    Currently this Insurance Company is saturating media coverage for what purpose ?
    One does wonder what the total cost that Allianz outlays for this increase and if this company will be transparent in making public the total cost for this venture.
    How many injured workers would benefit from the enormous outlay of monies for this media blitz by this company ?
    Has there been, in the last 12 months, in other states, an increase in this companies media coverage in the press and television and why ?
    I believe this companies board of directors and chief executive should be honest and be very transparent to the general public about the total costs and why they increased the media coverage !
    It is in the public interest !!

  3. What a fantastic site. I have been fighting for nearly 4 years and was just thinking about giving up when I found this site yesterday. I dealt with Allianz from 2008 until mid 2011 when I found them much the same, including a psych assessment to see if I was feigning, the 6 other assessments from various psychologists and psychiatrists, including their own, confirming my diagnosis obviously wasn’t enough. In mid 2011 my case was transferred to QBE to manage, don’t know why, and guess what they have a similar hostile claims process. Now it looks like they have lost my file or part there of and want my solicitor to provide copies of certain files to them. Oh, and now they have decided more medicals and assessments are required as the previous are out of date. I have been deemed as TPI caused by PTSD and placed on a disability pension. My condition makes me prone to severe depression and unable to cope with stress, so that gives you an idea of their level of compassion.

    Keep up the excellent work, I am no longer alone.


  4. Here is is claimed by “Concerned” that Ms Sonter no longer is in the employ of Allianz:

    “Callie Sonter no longer works at Allianz”

    If that really is the case, why then are Radford Lawyers representing and providing legal advice to the three Allianz ladies? (A bill likely being covered by Allianz, not the lovely ladies themselves.)

    This smacks of what News Corp did in the UK where it cast off people who were creating bad publicity for the company but it continued to pay the legal expenses of those people (in order for News Corp dirty laundry to continue to remain a secret, a strategy that has ultimately and spectacularly failed).

    Something smells fishy about this and I suspect that Allianz (as per usual) is not telling the truth, and that its corporate spin team is out in force infesting injured worker forums with untruths.

    Allianz is a despicable company, as are its employees.

    • Very very interesting comments have been made indeed on the IWSN, not only about Ms Sonter but more in general about some workcover insurer’s (Allianz) behaviour: see:

      It is however extremely interesting that Ms Sonter * allegedly * would no longer work at Allianz… Would it be coincidence that she deleted her facebook page, real twitter account and that Allianz NSW) suddenly stopped insulting us?

      S P

      June 9, 2012 at 7:22 pm (UTC 10)

      It is very difficult for Allianz and its employees to tell the truth — ask anyone who has made a workers compensation claim. After all, Allianz hires based on the ability of its applicants to deceive and deceive they do.

      It is shocking for Allianz to come in here, hijacking a forum for injured workers, and post all sorts of claims about them. If the claims made about “he/she was caught out committing large scale fraud” then surely there are some media articles about this.

      The fact is that Allianz and its staff believe that every injured worker is a fraudster, when all injured workers know that the only fraud being perpetuated is by those who work for Allianz. They ought to hang their heads in shame.

      I agree with Very Concerned, all of this seems like Allianz corporate speak….”

      workcovervictim3 June 12, 2012 at 5:06 pm
  5. Mr Radford, I await the next exciting episode of “The Ladies”. Do you know when this will be?

  6. second hand evidence  and you say that it wont be sufficent in a court of law and your charging allianz for this advise  what your forgetting you so called highly educated soulicitors i johnny rotten will stand by what i write here or anywhere else about your client allianz in a court of law go to back to your client and tell u have givien them bad advice and give a refund and tell the bastards that i want my nappy money

  7. Dear Mr Radford,

    I read with interest your letter to this website.

    I keenly await the next exciting instalment. In particular, I’d like to hear more about “the ladies” whose reputation you so valiantly defend. May we hear a little bit about their background?

    Also, where did you meet these ladies? Was it in a bar (a nice bar of course), or was it somewhere a little more private? Did they come to you or did you go to them? It all certainly seems like a very interesting arrangement, cosy, if I may.

    Did “the ladies” brief you of their background? What sort of ladies are they? I’ve never met a true lady, one of fine breeding and all that. Perhaps you could put me in touch with them? A blind date, of sorts.

    Also, I see that you do a lot of “insurance work”. Are you on a retainer to one of the insurance companies? Where can we read more information about this arrangement?

    I hope that you appreciate my interest in this matter, and of course, in “the ladies”.

    Please write to me at to arrange a meeting. Discretion is assured and expected.

    Patiently Waiting.. April 13, 2012 at 9:51 pm
  8. Anyone notice the strange signature of radford?

    • I certainly did. I mean, what is that thing? He’s trying to show how “big” he is, or how “big” his p****s [censored!] is.


  9. @grathom kindly passed on , via Twitter,  this interesting link to the Hansard (NSW):

    The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Earlier in question time Mr Shoebridge asked me a question about bullying allegations at WorkCover. I think I inadvertently referred to the independent report as being by the Independent Commission Against Corruption. In fact, an independent report into allegations of bullying and harassment within WorkCover was requested by the previous Labor Government. PricewaterhouseCoopers conducted the review on behalf of the Department of Premier and Cabinet. Staff were asked to participate in an anonymous online culture survey, which provided them with the opportunity to make comment on the culture of WorkCover as well as workplace bullying and harassment.

    In addition, individual interviews were conducted with staff. The report was released by the previous Labor Government on 3 March 2011. No matters were referred for further investigation. The report outlined the need for clear, internal communication and engagement strategies, transparent recruitment processes, robust performance management, an effective grievance handling framework and strengthened leadership capability. WorkCover immediately accepted all of those recommendations and when I became Minister I asked for an update on what was happening in relation to implementing those. A more detailed examination and engagement with staff about the report’s finding and culture generally is underway.

    Steps have been taken to increase the level of communication and engagement across the organisation, build teamwork, develop new leadership framework, review recruitment practices, simplify and improve grievance handling and improve the capability of the People and Culture group and managers to support employees who report inappropriate behaviours. WorkCover provides regular reports on its culture to the WorkCover board. The previous Minister, Mr Daley, wrote to the then chief executive officer of WorkCover and provided a copy of the report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, indicating that it had been referred to him, that is, Mr Daley, for consideration. Mr Daley wrote to the then chief executive officer as follows:

      I request that you develop a detailed implementation plan, including key milestones within one month. I would also appreciate a quarterly update being provided to the Minister’s Office on the implementation of these recommendations.

    I have continued to seek those updates.

    [God knows they may just be bullying each other! 😉 ]

  10. Just thought I’d pop in and check for updates from Mr Radford. Nothing so far I see 🙂

    I can imagine the high-powered pow-wow they’ve had 1st thing this morning with Ahh-ahhh-vomianz.

    And how about our “ladies”. Any update on them? Too busy assisting injured workers with getting back to work, I presume.

    What’s that I hear you say? They’re off on workers’s comp? Ok ok, I’m kidding, I don’t know about that one :p

  11. Oh to be a fly on the wall of:

    * Allianz Charlestown office
    * Radford Lawyers office
    * Allianz Corp head office in Market St Sydney

    Could even a fly stand the stench in these places? I think not.

    I do note that Radford’s office is just a short stroll from Allianz headquarters. How convenient for transferring cash in brown paper bags.

    • Oh mate, you are cracking me up – my belly hurts so much from laughing 😉

      workcovervictim April 8, 2012 at 9:20 pm
    • As I am aware that Radford Lawyers may be seething and seeking to sue me for defamation I make the following clarifications:

      * There is no suggestion that any of the abovementioned offices smell like shit
      * There is no suggestion that any of the employees of the abovementioned locations are the source of any shit odour that may or may not exist
      * There is no suggestion that any brown paper bags have actually been transported between the offices of Allianz and Radford but merely that the locations are convenient to each other and that they are conducive for the transportation of cash in brown paper bags.
      * There is no suggestion that there are any actual flies or other bugs on the walls of the above locations. An apology is extended to any fly which may have been offended by my suggestion that they might frequent any of the above locations or be associated with any individual at the above locations.

      Thank you.

  12. Am I mistaken, or, has a certain Allianz “lady” deleted or simply locked down her Facebook profile?

    What luck then (though maybe not so for Mr Radford and his litigious ways) that relevent copies have been made of the said profile pages prior to Mr Radford’s (rather untimely) advice to the Allianz “ladies”.

    Anyone who has bullied an injured worker should expect appropriate attention. This is just the beginning. You will be exposed. Your actions will haunt you forever.

    Expect us.

    • How INTERESTING indeed – she certainly learned a lesson the HARD way and we have also noticed that certain mentioned ladies have refrained themselves from further INSULTING us and fellow injured workers! They should remember that injured workers are also not powerless but that we are also able to spy with our little injured eyes, duh. Be afraid, be very afraid – the time has come to treat genuine injured workers with respect.

      workcovervictim April 8, 2012 at 3:49 pm
      • Don’t think for a moment that any of this will change their behaviour internally!

        We need to be constantly vigilant about the behaviour of these “ladies” and of others within Xchanging, Allianz, GIO, QBE and so on.

        Clearly, however, the main offenders appear to be the employees of Allianz and Xchanging.

        As others have said, “Expect us”. I’m never going to stop watching, I’m never going to forgive & I’m never going to forget.

        They really can expect us (and when they least expect it).

  13. The very popular Health and Safety for Beginners Daily  (UK) also published our article today :

    Thank you to Healh and Safety for Beginners Daily for publishing this very important matter indeed! The whole world needs to know how injured workers are being treated by “lovely ladies who are employed as Allianz NSW case managers” and to what length some of these ladies will go to SHUT UP genuinely suffering injured workers who have been ill-treated by case managers. The Health and Safety for Beginners Daily magazine has to date been tweeted over 35 thousand times! 😉

    • Yeah, was removed, do you know why, because our lovely fellow blogger MIS– USED it and  tweeted that we we “deserved to be sued”… (to undermine our blog and credibility of course) –> check out our insult page and scroll down to ” workcover victims victoria’s personal opinion” (WTF!)….We still don’t understand why she behaves like she does, God knows… but it is my personal opinion that she does what she does because she is insanely jealous of aworkcovervictimsdiary’s success. Also, since she as “boycotted us” she has not only tweeted our articles (WTF) but (as we said there is no such thing as bad publicity as people inevitably are curious) – has increased our followers dramatically- by at least 50 in 2-3 days 🙂

      workcovervictim3 April 6, 2012 at 11:59 am
  14. Just noticed, with delight, that “what goes around comes around”. Just did a GOOGLE search on one of the 3 sweet ladies, namely CS and guess what, check out what comes up:

    More specific,check this one out (and it wasn’t me)

    🙂 🙂 🙂

    • Considering that at least one of the “ladies” so kindly named by Mark Radford of Mark Radford lawyers has been engaging in self-vilification on her own Facebook page, but then has the temerity to threaten this blog with a lawsuit, one has to wonder whether any of those internet posts have in fact been made by those allegedly defamed, or perhaps by their representatives.

      We all know, and it has been well-documented on this blog and in other places, that the insurance companies will seek to malign injured workers in order for their sick and twisted messages to gain more traction.

      That is, the insurance industry and those who represent it, keenly engage in dirty tricks campaigns.

      Could it be the case that some of this alleged defamation has indeed been spread around by the insurers themselves? This would not surprise me.

      Perhaps Mr Radford might like to be a litte more forthcoming about such information. What say you my learned Mr Radford?