Skip to main content

Dariel

Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.

Dariel is in his early 50s and has an acquired brain injury from a workplace accident about 15 years ago. He and his wife, Julie, had two young children at the time of his accident.

‘When I had my accident, I had to learn to walk and talk again,’ Dariel told the Royal Commission. ‘I had trouble with some parts of my conversation because I would say things in reverse – the opposite to what I wanted to say.’

A few years ago, Dariel received more than $1 million in compensation. The public trustee was appointed to manage those funds, ‘for three years … not for a lifetime’.

Dariel wanted ‘proof’ of how the trustee was going to invest the money – ‘where it was going, who was going to run it, what was going to happen with it’.

But the trustee refused to give him any information.

They can do whatever they want, and they basically told us that.’

Just before he got the payout, the couple had sold their house to fund his treatment costs. The administrators purchased a home for the family to live in using most of Dariel’s funds.

The house is falling apart but the trustee ignores his requests for help.

‘Every time it rains, water pours in to the roof ... My son was getting waterboarded in the bed. That’s how bad it was, and it still is. There’s water running down our walls. The electricity is buggered. They refuse to fix it.’

Dariel has had to fix the plumbing himself and has spent thousands of dollars in repairs. He said the trustee was charging him almost double the usual rates.

‘I mean, they’re robbing me. They’re doing this to hundreds of people … And they’re getting away with it.’

The office never replies to Dariel’s calls or emails, and won’t meet with him.

‘They’re evasive and don’t answer questions,’ Julie said.

Dariel feels they are discriminating against him.

‘When I started making complaints – things got worse. I stopped getting stuff … They say, “Oh [him], he’s had a head injury …  He’s difficult to deal with.”’

The trustee won’t let the couple buy another house. Nor will it cover the cost of Dariel’s medical treatment – claiming that’s the job of the NDIS.

‘I’m missing out on medication that costs $300 bucks a month … because they won’t pay for it.’

The situation has made Dariel’s ‘stroke-like seizures’ worse.

‘I was having a seizure every couple of years. Now I’m having four or five a month, every time I have constant contact with them.’

At one stage, he had up to four seizures a week and ‘was pretty ill’.

Dariel says his dispute with the trustee has ‘stripped him of all [his] dignity’ and damaged his relationship with his kids because he’s ‘so wound up all the time’.

‘I tried to take my life because of it …  It’s supposed to help people. They’re supposed to be public servants. They don’t give me nothing. They don’t do nothing for me.’

Now he ‘wants his life back’. He would love to work again.

‘But no one will hire me because of the tablets I take. You can’t have people walking around on morphine tablets on your worksite.’

‘[He] can’t retain new skills,’ Julie said.

She wants him to get out ‘and do some volunteer work’ or an activity like sailing.

‘He doesn’t like going out in public, but I’m trying to encourage that just so he doesn’t sit at home.’

Dariel is glad his speech is improving. He believes he can manage his own money and would like to administer his own affairs.

Settings and contexts
 

Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.