Blog No. 166 - HCF Chairman Mark Johnson – Part 5: 5 February 2025

 HCF tries to cover its arse while agreeing it will obey the law.

****

Margaret on the 30th of August 2016 in Ketchikan Cultural Centre, Alaska.

****

En route to Alaska by boat on the 31st of August 2016.

****

The letter from Mark Johnson, dated 13th of May 2022.

As I said in Blog 165, on the 13th of May 2022, I received a letter from HCF Chair Mark Johnson.

****

Analysis of the Mark Johnson Letter

This is my analysis of the Mark Johnson letter.  The letter itself can be seen via the attached link.

****

My Complaints Discussed by the HCF Board

Dear Mr Hankin, I refer to your letter to me dated 5 May 2022. As I mentioned in my brief acknowledgement earlier this week, I can confirm that the HCF Board is in receipt of your letters and this matter has been investigated internally, including being reported to the HCF Board.

Translation ↓

The opening paragraph said the HCF Board had discussed my letter and a report had been given to the Board.   It is unclear whether the letters I sent to the Directors on 11 April 2022 had been relayed to them prior to my Mark Johnson letter dated 5 May 2022.  I suspect they were (at least initially) suppressed.

****

Never Plead Guilty – Even When You Are!

HCF is aware of its obligations under the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 (Cth) and its rules and we are very confident that the law has been correctly applied when reviewing Type C certificates submitted by Lift Cancer Care.

Translation ↓

I have to say this.  What else can I say?  I can’t just say HCF is guilty!

****

We Are Looking After Our Members!

It is important for members that there is proper control over the use of member funds and accordingly we have diligent processes in place to ensure payment is made only when claims meet regulatory requirements.

Translation ↓

Because we were members of HCF, HCF was actually looking after us when it refused to obey the law.  In reality, perhaps Margaret and I wanted HCF to screw us when Margaret attended lift! Meaningless words inserted by the lawyers.

****

(1) Everyone We Can Screw, We Do Screw!

HCF treats all providers equally when reviewing the completeness of Type C certificates.

Translation ↓

We obey the law for all health services providers who are large enough to be able to force us to obey the law.  Everyone else gets screwed.

****

(2) Everyone We Can Screw, We Do Screw!

With very few exceptions Type C certificates and claims submitted to HCF are compliant with the legal requirements and paid when first assessed.

Translation ↓

The Type C certificates submitted by Lift Cancer Care Services do not comply with the law because HCF says they do not comply, even if they follow the exact wording suggested by the Department of Health.

****

HCF Is Not Even Handed: We Have Only Screwed Lift!

To date, Lift Cancer Care has been the outlier in non-compliance with these requirements.

Translation ↓

The paid HCF management has assured me that no other health provider has been treated in the same way as Lift.  We have not treated anyone else in the same manner that we have treated Lift.  I am fully aware you think this is rubbish.

****

Forget What Sheena Jack Said

HCF has always been willing to pay benefits claimed by Lift Cancer Care provided that it can provide a Type C certificate with the information which would make the certificate compliant.

Translation ↓

The paid HCF management hope you forget that Sheena Jack put forward a completely different and nonsensical set of reasons for refusing to pay the Lift claims.  The lawyers who drafted this letter want me to rehash the same lies that HCF has already peddled to the Ombudsman.  Please forget the completely different set of lies put forward by Sheena Jack in her letter dated 3 May 2022.

****

(1) The Lawyers Insist I Say This

We have communicated our requirements to Lift Cancer Care numerous times, however they have not provided this information to HCF.

Translation ↓

The lawyers insist I say this.  We both know this is bulls**t, but I have to say it.

****

(2) The Lawyers Insist I Say This

HCF does not agree with your allegations that HCF and its employees have acted “illegally and improperly” or breached any laws in our refusal to pay benefits to Lift Cancer Care on the basis of the Type C certificates that we have received.

Translation ↓

The lawyers also insist I say this.

****

(3) The Lawyers Insist I Say This

HCF also does not agree with your allegation that it has tried to make Lift Cancer Care claims “disappear” or pretend “they never existed” – all claims submitted by Lift Cancer Care are traceable on our systems.

Translation ↓

The lawyers were most insistent that I say this.   We both know it is bulls**t.  Please forget about our false online official claims’ histories.

****

We Will Pay Because We Have No Choice

While HCF maintains its view is the correct legal position, to avoid further member distress and cost, HCF has, without any admission of liability, subsequently paid claims on an “ex-gratia” basis, including reimbursement for claims paid by your wife Margaret.

Translation ↓

It has become too difficult for HCF to continue to ignore the law, so we will now obey the law.

****

We Didn’t Do a Dirty Deal with the Ombudsman!

Your allegation that payment of Margaret’s claims as an “ex-gratia” payment is because of a “dirty deal” with the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman, is not correct, rather it was a reimbursement of Margaret’s claims made at our discretion, despite the failure of Lift Cancer Care to provide a complying Type C certificate.

Translation ↓

We definitely did not do a dirty deal with the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman definitely did not ask us to make a payment to you so that the Ombudsman could dismiss your complaints.  I know this makes no sense but just ignore the fact the Ombudsman told you it had dismissed your complaints because HCF had given you some money.

****

Will You Now Bugger Off?

Lynette Macks (HCF Head of Membership) sent you a reconciliation of your claims to date on 12 May 2022. If you have further queries on this matter they might best be addressed by the HCF Chief Officer – Member Health (Julie Andrews, jandrews@hcf.com.au). Yours sincerely Mark G. Johnson

Translation ↓

Now please, please bugger off!

Blog No. 165 - HCF Chairman Mark Johnson – Part 4: 4 February 2025

Sheena Jack’s letter was stupid and filled with lies.

****

Margaret on the 19th of August 2016 in the Canadian Rocky Mountains. 

****

Another photo of Margaret on the 19th of August 2016 in the Canadian Rocky Mountains.

****

It was obvious that I would get only more meaningless words and a continued refusal to obey the law out of HCF CEO Sheena Jack.  I believed the policy of refusing to pay the Lift claims had been implemented because of direct orders from Sheena Jack.  I believed the HCF policy of “disappearing” claims involving Lift Cancer had probably been implemented because of direct orders from Sheena Jack.  

It was obviously pointless asking Sheena Jack to stop breaking the law.

****

I had to write yet again to HCF Chairman Mark Johnson.

****

My letter to Mark Johnson dated 5 May 2022 contained 13 pages.  Here are some highlights from that letter.

I believe there is a real possibility you did not receive my letter to you dated 11 April.  If you didn’t, I will send you another copy. The letter from Sheen Jack reinforces my belief that HCF has been knowingly involved in the commission of multiple offences against the requirements of a whole array of legislative requirements. The “apology” from Sheena Jack is rejected.  It was not sincere and Sheen Jack must have been personally involved in the actions taken by HCF. HCF and the Ombudsman did a “dirty deal” the effect of which was that the Ombudsman would terminate my complaints so long as HCF made me a payment of an amount agreed between HCF and the Ombudsman.  In agreeing to not carry out its statutory duties, the Ombudsman agreed that it would stop performing its statutory functions so long as a payment of money was made at the request of the Ombudsman to a third party – me and my wife Margaret.  I was not consulted and the “go way money” accepted by the Ombudsman was paid into my account without my knowledge before I was even told that the deal had been done. The legal explanation put forward by Sheena Jack to justify its refusal to obey the law was complete rubbish. I had made formal complaints to government agencies about the conduct of HCF and the crimes committed by HCF are in the process of being revealed by the searchlight of the law and public opinion.   HCF would be convicted through the legal process of a large number of wide ranging offences against an array of legislative provisions. It appeared to me that the actions of HCF might have been orchestrated to comply with advice provided by its lawyers as to how HCF could breach the law and best protect itself from the consequences of doing that  HCF needs to take active steps to immediately stop any continuation of its breaches of the law and assist the appropriate government agencies in carrying out a thorough investigation into what has happened.  I believed there was a high probability that other health funds have acted in a similar manner and that they have done so in full knowledge that their “competitors” have acted in a similar manner. As part of a “damage control” exercise, the Directors of HCF ought to consider the following actions. Immediate suspension of Ms Jack pending an investigation by external investigators of what HCF has done and the extent of its breaches of legislative requirements. If investigation reveals – as I thought likely – that Ms Jack has been a central figure in unlawful actions by HCF, she ought to be dismissed. A full confession should be made immediately to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.  If HCF confesses to the ACCC before any other funds, it might be able to obtain a lesser penalty than it might otherwise sustain. HCF should give deep consideration to what form of redress it should make to the victims of its unlawful conduct.  Those victims include Lift Cancer Care Services and the cancer patients whose claims for treatment have been treated with contempt by HCF.  Those victims include other health service providers who have been denied payment for services provided to their patients solely because HCF has decided to ignore its legal obligations in relation to those providers.  Some of those victims may well now be dead.  Some of the health providers have probably been driven into bankruptcy.  The list of victims was likely to be extensive. Any redress for the victims of HCF misconduct should be compensated not just by payment of the money that should always have been paid, but by payment of specific compensation based on the fact that they have been victims of crime.  If victims are dead, efforts should be made to identify their next of kin so that the appropriate compensation can be paid to the estate of the dead victims. If a preliminary check of HCF records reveals that the legal advisers to HCF have been involved in assisting in what has been going on (in effect, assisting HCF to commit crimes) the relevant documents containing any such legal advice should be provided immediately to the ACCC. Until Mark Johnson and his fellow Directors are convinced on the basis of persuasive evidence that no impropriety should be attributed to the HCF legal advisers, any future legal advice in relation to these matters should be obtained from legal advisers who might not subsequently be found to have played a role in what has gone on. I concluded by saying it was essential that HCF immediately stop acting unlawfully, own up to what it had done and take all possible steps to compensate those who have suffered because of HCF’s unlawful conduct.

****

The complete letter to Mark Johnson is accessible through this link. If somehow you cannot view it, please email us at ‘admin@hankinredden.com.au’ and we can send you the document directly. 

****

Response from Mark Johnson 9 May 2022

I received an email reply from Mark Johnson at 11:40 am on Monday 9 May 2022.  It said this.

Dear Mr Hankin,  Many thanks for your letter.   I can confirm the Board is aware of your concerns and that they were discussed at our most recent Board meeting.  I am considering the detail in your note and will reply more fulsomely later this week.  Kind regards   Mark G Johnson

****

I received a letter from Mark Johnson on the 13t of May 2022 attached to an email which the computer says I received at 2:53 pm on 13 May 2022.  In effect, the Johnson letter confirmed that senior management of HCF had been directed to obey the law – even though the letter claimed HCF had not broken the law.

HCF was reluctantly about to start obeying the law.

****

I was on the verge of winning the struggle with HCF.  Margaret’s death soon drew much closer.

Blog No.164 - HCF Explains Its Refusal to Pay lift Treatment Claims – Part 3: 1 February 2025

Sheena Jack’s letter was stupid and filled with lies.

****

Margaret on July 7th, 2012.

****

Sunset on July 7th 2012

****

I Say Such Stupid Things!

In order for Lift to claim hospital level benefits for attending Lift for exercise classes, the doctors must certify that the GP consultation must be undertaken in hospital (as opposed to the exercise sessions). Lift's doctors have not certified this.

Translation ↓

In English movies, characters sometimes said “Bosh, Poppycock and Balderdash!” This means “Rubbish!”. **** Sheena is lying. **** Baldrick in Blackadder would have been bashed for saying something so idiotic.

****

Our Complaints Policy

Handling of your complaint  While I have explained above that HCF has rejected Margaret's claims for hospital benefits on the basis that the claims have not complied with the relevant regulatory requirements, there is a separate issue relating to the handling of your complaints when making these claims and seeking information from HCF.

Translation ↓

The way in which HCF “handled” my complaints certainly ignored the official HCF Complaints Policy.  This was no accident.  We were treated like rubbish because HCF thought I would go away.  Margaret wife was dying, so of course, I would go away.  HCF probably thought it a pity Margaret did not quickly die to make me go away. **** HCF never intended to follow its complaints policy about the Lift claims.

****

The “Investigation” of the Investigation (1)

HCF will undertake a thorough investigation into the way your complaints have been handled which will assist us to improve our complaints handling procedures and ensure that the correct information is consistently conveyed to our members.

Translation ↓

If HCF ever conducted a “thorough investigation” of my complaints, it has never told me the results.  No “investigation” was necessary.  Every aspect of the HCF behaviour followed the instructions of senior management – almost certainly including Sheena Jack. **** Former Premier of Queensland Joh Bjelke-Peterson said no inquiry should ever be happen unless the inquiry result was already known.  HCF already knew the result of its “investigation”.

****

The “Investigation” of the Investigation (2)

HCF will investigate each of the allegations you have made in your letter, including in relation to the claims that are missing from HCF's claims history record for you and Margaret and your interactions with Ms Lindsay and Ms Harwood.

Translation ↓

The “missing” Lift claims are still absent from our HCF online official claims’ history. I still wait for Sheena to tell me what she discovered about Junita Lindsay and Rachael Harwood. Ms Lindsay has changed jobs.  I assume Ms Harwood still works for HCF.  I presume both did exactly what they were told to do by HCF management.

****

Rewriting History (1)

While contact was maintained during the investigation of your complaint …

Translation ↓

Stupid; why claim “contact was maintained” with me when I have complained about total lack of “contact”?  An Outright Lie.

****

Rewriting History (2)

HCF was advised by the Ombudsman on 2 February 2022, that you remained dissatisfied with the outcome and the complaint was escalated within the Ombudsman’s service for their investigation.

Translation ↓

I heard nothing from the Ombudsman until 28 January 2022 when I received a call from Sarah De Sade.  She told me no one had looked at my complaints while she was on extended leave.  She confirmed nothing was done by the Ombudsman and she was awaiting orders telling her what she should do.  I heard nothing about any Ombudsman’s “investigation” until April 2022. **** The “outcome” with which I was dissatisfied on 2 February 2022 was the “offer” made by HCF on 21 January 2022 to pay on an “ex gratia” basis, the gap fees we had paid to Lift - but only if we: Falsely said Lift Cancer Care Services did not tell us the estimated costs of its services; and only if Provided copies of our invoices for the gap fees we paid to Lift Cancer Care. If we did this, HCF would refuse to pay anything for any future Lift treatments. I rejected this by letter dated 24 January 2022.   I refused to lie and I refused to permit HCF to ignore the law.  Sheena Jack turned this into a claim HCF only knew I had rejected the HCF proposal when the Ombudsman told it this on 2 February 2022! Another outright lie. **** On 2 February 2022 Sarah De Sade emailed me saying the Ombudsman had “requested a formal response from …[HCF] in relation to” my complaints and when it received the HCF response, it would “carefully” consider it.  Sarah De Sade “respectfully ask[ed me] not [to] contact HCF about this specific complaint while [she was] investigating.” Neither HCF nor the Ombudsman had done any “investigating” of my complaints as at 2 February 2022 – 2 months after I complained.  This is what really happened. When the Ombudsman received my complaint on 3 December 2021, it did zero. HCF also did zero.  It had a “template” response to complaints like mine and it applied the template – do nothing. HCF made me the 21 January 2022 offer –which had been successfully used in the past. When I rejected the HCF offer, HCF probably told the Ombudsman on 2 February 2022. After being told I had rejected the HCF offer, the Ombudsman requested an HCF “investigation”. This Ombudsman investigation request was what the Ombudsman called “escalation” of my complaint. The Ombudsman did nothing while HCF conducted its “investigation”.

****

The Ombudsman Made Us Do It!

As part of that escalation, the Ombudsman requested that HCF did not correspond with you about this matter while they conducted their investigations, our apologies for any frustration this may have caused.

Translation ↓

Sheena Jacks tries to create the impression that the failure to communicate with me was the result of a request by the Ombudsman. Rubbish; HCF continued its policy of ignoring me – hoping Margaret’s health would deteriorate and I would go away. **** Sheena Jack knew the Ombudsman could not conduct any investigation until given permission by HCF.  No “investigations” were conducted by the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman had zero interest.

****

Hopefully You Will Now Go Away

I trust this letter clarifies HCF's position on the claims made by Lift, HCF will continue to engage with the Department of Health on the payment of hospital benefits for Type C procedures.

Translation ↓

Hopefully this bulls** has you baffled!  Go away!

****

Bugger Off

In closing I would like to apologise again if HCF failed to provide clarity in its communications on this issue and the time and energy you and Margaret have spent seeking answers. Yours faithfully, Sheena Jack CEO & Managing Director Copy to: Mr Mark Johnson, HCF Chairman

Translation ↓

Bugger off and don’t come back!  We refuse to pay for services provided by Lift. The law is irrelevant. We have the backing of the Department of Health and the Ombudsman.