ACCforum: Official Information request-IT Sweep - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 9 Pages +
  • « First
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Official Information request-IT Sweep the secret emails in your file

#161 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:47 AM

Mini

you are still missing the point!!!

slater was handed the spreadsheet UNREDACTED....

he ede, graham etc.....and whoever else they were in with, all saw the information before it was placed up onto the web, the day after the privacy story broke....

and if it wasn't THAT IMPORTANT....

why has Collins been stood down? (YEAH YEAH YEAH, SHE TOOK A STEP BACK, TO SAVE FACE, AND BEFORE ANY FURTHER SHENANIGANS COULD BE REVEALED)

and why was Nicki Hagar the subject of a search and seizure???

you are NOT the only person working on court documents but for some reason you are totally bamboozled about all of that scenario...

If you hadnt responded to lauda...carrapin.....you may have been left alone.....instead, you bit back and thats what feeds bullies.....keep quiet and they get bored!!!

and as for the Police being set onto Pullar.........


HERS WAS NOT THE ONLY COMPUTER AFFECTED BY AN UNREASONABLE DIRECTIVE FROM THE FORMER MOJ.......


the police dropped charges.......when they realised Ms Pullar WAS NOT THE PERSON WHO RELEASED THE SPREADSHEET TO ANYONE AT ALL!


facts, facts, fact..........which you are still rather confused of!
0

#162 User is offline   Campy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1386
  • Joined: 15-May 10
  • LocationAuckland Regional super city

Posted 30 October 2014 - 08:26 PM

Bastards!

View Postnot their victim, on 23 October 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

Rosey

fully aware of what acc has done ....NOW!!!

didnt until I got the Party Status File

acc stated I was receiving IA...so i asked them which bank account.......

oh dear....seems like im not getting IA after all.......funny that.....I should be BUT ACC confirmed there has been NO MONEY GONE INTO NTV'S BANK ACCOUNT......NOT EVEN THE BIG $$ AWARDED IN COURT!!!!

so who has got my money???.........

dirty politics aint the half of it.....

ITS FILTHY.......

no wonder theres a Media Ban on me! lol

ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ANYONE???

2

#163 User is offline   Rosey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1808
  • Joined: 25-December 09
  • LocationHamilton

Posted 31 October 2014 - 08:05 PM

If you're fully aware of what acc has done now and didn't until you got the Party Status File, I'm almost scared to see mine.

View Postnot their victim, on 23 October 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

Rosey

fully aware of what acc has done ....NOW!!!

didnt until I got the Party Status File

acc stated I was receiving IA...so i asked them which bank account.......

oh dear....seems like im not getting IA after all.......funny that.....I should be BUT ACC confirmed there has been NO MONEY GONE INTO NTV'S BANK ACCOUNT......NOT EVEN THE BIG $$ AWARDED IN COURT!!!!

so who has got my money???.........

dirty politics aint the half of it.....

ITS FILTHY.......

no wonder theres a Media Ban on me! lol

ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ANYONE???


WTF?!?! Why hasn't the money you say was awarded you in court, not been paid you? Its so unfair. I'm on my own and don't get a lot because of my injuries. I couldn't afford to miss out like you do. I've had people steal from me and I'm only on low income and its so wrong. Nicky Hagar's got nothing on you. I'm gobsmacked.



2

#164 User is offline   Rosey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1808
  • Joined: 25-December 09
  • LocationHamilton

Posted 31 October 2014 - 08:07 PM

Looks like you have good reason!

View PostMINI, on 23 October 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Thanks Rosey that is very kind of you although I do not use my bank accounts on line, for reasons of which I have just been speaking. The risk of being used by others is too great.

Mini

2

#165 User is offline   Rosey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1808
  • Joined: 25-December 09
  • LocationHamilton

Posted 31 October 2014 - 08:38 PM

View PostMINI, on 23 October 2014 - 03:58 PM, said:

please try not to worry too much about those named on the document. They have been redacted as you can see. Those documents are not recognisable as any one person. I cannot see three links as in my case that would say it is all the same person but not who, other than the Local office number. Maybe that could identify you to yourself, but it couldn't identify me to the document unless I had told you how many cases I had on there and you knew, which you would of course but only through LF letting out my house and address etc, and also bought over here for anyone to see all about mini.

The docuemnts I have seen purporting to come from Slater, and god knows where previous to that, only show one or two facts and that is there was a leak, and it was serious and big ( a lot of people). The problem would be that after being apoligised too by head office and said that it would not get out to the media, it actually has, or so we are lead to believe. There is some doubt in my mind, as it has not been linked to Slater, or it would have been noted when the police were doing the investigation and slater would have been bought into it then. he would have been Made to tell where he got it from and I would like to ask him why he didn't publish it in its intirety?? I can guess the answer now!! But I would love to hear his response to the question.

I will find my copies I was sent from the ACC and see if they fit with the ones supplied here. Because mine are not redated at all us under the privacy ACt I have the right to have them untouched. If mine are different in any way I will not only tell you up here but I will also be asking some serious questions of why ACC would want to 'pull the wool over my eyes' so to speak.

To me it would be another good reason why they are not trust worthy.

Mini


I'm still stunned by it all Mini. Thank you for thinking of me though.

However I'm not who LF says I am and am not the ladies who'd had the death threats or been persecuted so much by them that my wellbeing suffered, unlike two women I know. So I guess I'm grieving for the woman who died earlier this month.


The Nottinghams and their minions also hate the lady who took them to Fair Go, as if she was in the wrong when Dermott Nottingham stole her money. And they obviously have an unhealthy obsession with hukildaspida so that any poor women they assume to be her, cops all the visciously vindictive venom they have for hukildaspida. She is such a self righteous person but their harassments, stalking, false accusations and death threats against vulnerable sick women assumed to be hukildaspida (or Helen Miken as David Butler told them) are uncalled for and appalling. Now one lady has passed away, they're in for some very bad karma.


Did you get right through Dirty Politics?
3

#166 User is offline   Campy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1386
  • Joined: 15-May 10
  • LocationAuckland Regional super city

Posted 12 November 2014 - 02:02 AM

Lauda finem Nottinghams have persistently attacked women who've had nothing to do with them. Oh and they'll get what's coming to them.

View Postnot their victim, on 24 October 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Mini

you are still missing the point!!!

slater was handed the spreadsheet UNREDACTED....

he ede, graham etc.....and whoever else they were in with, all saw the information before it was placed up onto the web, the day after the privacy story broke....

and if it wasn't THAT IMPORTANT....

why has Collins been stood down? (YEAH YEAH YEAH, SHE TOOK A STEP BACK, TO SAVE FACE, AND BEFORE ANY FURTHER SHENANIGANS COULD BE REVEALED)

and why was Nicki Hagar the subject of a search and seizure???

you are NOT the only person working on court documents but for some reason you are totally bamboozled about all of that scenario...

If you hadnt responded to lauda...carrapin.....you may have been left alone.....instead, you bit back and thats what feeds bullies.....keep quiet and they get bored!!!

and as for the Police being set onto Pullar.........


HERS WAS NOT THE ONLY COMPUTER AFFECTED BY AN UNREASONABLE DIRECTIVE FROM THE FORMER MOJ.......


the police dropped charges.......when they realised Ms Pullar WAS NOT THE PERSON WHO RELEASED THE SPREADSHEET TO ANYONE AT ALL!


facts, facts, fact..........which you are still rather confused of!

4

#167 User is offline   Battleaxe 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8096
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 27 November 2015 - 12:58 PM

View Postnot their victim, on 28 January 2012 - 10:26 AM, said:

if you have adressed fraud within your file, and you are not happy with the response...please use the template posted in my subsequent thread...

apparently there are 2 Darrin/Darren Mitchell's at acc...(fraud investigation team) as i spoke to one of them, who said he had never heard of me or my correspondance...

just like the 3 "Jeans" within the same office, who instead of investigating medical misadventure, put me into Private Investigation!

go figure...

in my honest opinion, I think this is why acc cant keep track of their own paperwork..

the wrong info gets sent to the wrong person!

so, why bother with the minions anymore...

lets just go straight to the top!


OMG I was thrilled to read this post! And thank you for sharing it.

I had the misfortune of getting a call from Mr Darren Mitchell - and you're right that there are two Darrin/Darren Mitchell's at the ACC's Fraud 0800 number. I had reported a fraud at my review hearing on 21 March 2014, included the information in my written submissions with evidence. The reviewer never blinked an eyelid when I complained about this and of course didn't mention it in her decision. The ACC - who rudely phoned in - said they may need to look into this. No advice about their being an ACC Fraud Unit or suggestion that I contact this office with my complaints. I only learnt very recently through the i.net that the ACC has a Fraud Unit. Called there, was asked a heap of dumb questions - unrelated in my view - about the providers height, weight, hair colour, eye colour ... as if they were about to send the Police out to arrest him and had to be certain of his identity. I mean, I told them he owns and operates the business which ACC provided funds to, what more did they need in terms of identification? So all this rubbish questioning and very little asked about the actual fraud. I was assured that an investigator would call me to discuss the complaints, no-one did, so about a week later I called again. The call taker at the Fraud 0800 number told me - after listening to what I had to say - that she would go away and talk to her supervisor, and I held on. When she returned she said her supervisor had suggested that she put through a message to the investigator to call me. Mr Darren Mitchell did and what an incredibly rude, obvious and arrogant person I found him to be. I was so shaken and upset by this man's attitude and conduct that I called him back a few minutes later ... he had threatened the end his call to me and then did so during this back to him. I though got said most of what I wanted to say and although my voice was shaking (as were my hands) I made sure he knew how extremely unacceptable his attitude and conduct had been. He kept repeating "OK" each time I ended saying something - after pauses of a few seconds - and I told him at one stage it is not "OK". Notably he never explained his attitude of conduct or apologised. I tape recorded my call back and have done a strong complaint letter to the OCI and sent them this sound file.

I also recorded a message on his supervisor's answering machine. The ACC's Risk and Operations Manager, Integrity Services, Mr Dominic Drummond, subsequent claimed in an e-mail that Mr Hansen was away on the day I did this but his telephone message said nothing about his claimed absence nor did his e-mail respond with an automated reply saying he was away (when I subsequently e-mailed confirmation that I had recorded a message on his answering machine). This man, Mr Hansen, clearly is not interested in listening to complaints from claimants about one of his team being rude, discourteous and disrespectful and got his Manager to respond - cowards that they are to 'front up' to claimants like me who are enraged - rightfully - by the way the ACC deals with them.

Slap in the face was Mr Drummond claiming that I had previously been advised that the complaint file has been closed. Mr Darren Mitchell never told me this during either his call to me or my call back to him, and I vehemently refute that any investigation was done within the 2 week time-frame from the time I reported the fraud telephonically to the Fraud Unit telephone operator and when Mr Drummond advised me that the file has been closed. Yet another example of whitewashed / swept under the carpet complaint.

Adding insult to injury I have been told that I have no right to any information about the purported investigation outcome. I had asked that I simply be advised whether or not my complaint was upheld or not, I don't want to know what action - if any - the ACC may take against the provider, and that I need to know this for review purposes since the ACC is relying on the fact that the provider did not make a contemporaneous record of me reporting my accident and left foot injuries to him but is refusing to recognise that this was because the provider had misled and deceived the ACC into approving a funding request on the basis of a historic claim for my right foot. I have strong evidence supporting my complaints that prove my complaints to be well founded but apparently this has also been ignored.

I have now made a S28 OIA request for the abovementioned information that was declined by the ACC on the basis that it would disclose the private information of the provider.

Has anyone else had dealings with Mr Darren Mitchell, Mr Hansen and/or Mr Drummond?




1

#168 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 28 November 2015 - 11:54 AM

one darrin mitchell is a consummate liar

the acc fraud squad covered for the liar

the dropped the liar in the doo doo.....as they do....


then the fraud squad committed further fraud....

thats the problem with liars...

they are so smarmy they think what they write because of their "title" will be believed....

trouble is, they should go back and read what they have previously written....and not commit ultimate fraudulent statements to paper

laughing all the way to the bank!!!..........as the idiots eventually trip themselves up while the truth never changes!
0

Share this topic:


  • 9 Pages +
  • « First
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users