Aug 09, 2018

Retirement village operator faces legal action

Almost a year after his retirement village faced a staff walkout, and eventually closed, operator Stephen Snowden is facing legal action.

Consumer Affairs Victoria has now launched criminal proceedings against Mr Snowden, the operator of Berkeley Village, claiming he operated the retirement village between July and September last year when he was not permitted to.

Staff walkouts, unsafe conditions

Berkeley Village was closed last November after the local council deemed it too “dangerous” for residents to live in.

In September, Berkeley staff had walked off the job, claiming they had not been paid in months. Some staff were left being owed thousands of dollars. The walkout left 16 residents to look after their own care.

And then in November, following an inspection by the council, residents were given fines and repair costs of more than $500,000. With residents unable to foot the bill, the village was closed.

Consumer Affairs will seek financial compensation from Mr Snowden.

The maximum penalty under The Retirement Villages Act is 50 penalty units, which amounts to $8.059.50, according to Fairfax.

Mr Snowden is known to be a convicted criminal and bankrupt, and he is rumoured to have links to underworld figures.

The Department of Health and the Victorian Coroner investigated Mr Snowden’s aged care business, Cambridge Aged Care, in 2013, in relation to poor care of residents.

The Supreme Court of Victoria also ruled in favour of Westpac after the bank chased Mr Snowden for $13 million he allegedly misappropriated, according to Fairfax.

Proceeds from unit sales gone missing

As many as 30 families of residents at Berkeley Village claim they have sold apartments after their family member left or died, but have never received the proceeds from the sales.

The revelations led to the establishment of various enquiries into the fairness and transparency of business practices in the retirement village sector, which in turn led to the government developing a draft code. But consumer movements claim the code as ineffective.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

What $14.50 per resident per day food budget actually buys

When food spend per resident is unknown to the chef and management alike, and a formal complaint chain produces no documented action, the gap between regulatory compliance and actual accountability is where provider risk lives. Read More

Families told about aged care incidents, but not always shown the report

The reformed Serious Incident Response Scheme strengthens the rules on neglect, psychological harm and open disclosure. One thing it doesn’t guarantee is family access to the written incident report. Read More

Canberra’s aged care “fix” had a hole in it big enough for Arcare to walk through

The regulator knew about Arcare's fee practices in 2024. It took a 60 Minutes promo, not years of complaints, to trigger an investigation. That's not oversight. That's a pattern. Read More
Advertisement