ACCforum: Accountability Of Assessors - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Accountability Of Assessors Apparently there is none

#1 User is offline   Ivan 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 22-September 04

Posted 08 October 2004 - 11:40 AM

I've just had my attention drawn to what appears to be a very serious matter regarding the accountability (or lack thereof) of ACC appointed assessors.

Note page 5 paragraphs 22 and 23 of the attached Medical Council document:

"Non-Treating Doctors Performing Medical Assessments of Patients for Third Parties":

Review of medical assessment opinions

22. Any challenge by a patient or representative of the patient to an opinion in a medical assessment report should be done through the third party.

23. In past cases, the Health and Disability Commissioner has concluded that a nontreating doctor is not providing a health service to the patient. Instead, the service is provided to the third party. As a result the Commissioner is likely to refer any complaint to the third party in the first instance because the Commissioner's
jurisdiction is restricted to services provided directly to a patient by a health provider."


However, the definition of 'treatment" contained in section 8 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 is:
"treatment" includes --
...
c)an examination for the purpose of providing a certificate including the provision of the certificate".


Nevertheless, the Code of ACC Claimants' Rights specifically excludes, at Clause 1.4, treatment providers from the ambit of the Code:

"The provision of treatment services is not covered by this Code, and continues to be covered by the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights. In addition, any treatment and disability services purchased by ACC are covered by the Health and Disability Sector Standards and the Health and Disability Services (Safety) Act 2001.

Complaints about the quality of health and disability services continue to be covered by the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights".


So it appears neither of the Health & Disability Commissioner's Office or the ACC Complaints Investigation Office assume any responsibility for dealing with complaints from ACC claimants dissatisfied with an ACC appointed assessor's professional conduct, with the result that the assessors are completely unaccountable.

I'll be talking with Green MPs about how best to raise this issue with Government, but people on ACCForum might also want to express their concern about it to the Minister.

Attached File(s)


0

#2 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1159
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 08 October 2004 - 01:06 PM

Under the 2001 act I believe the assesors must consider all relevant previous reports. Unless you question the assesors about what documents/reports they
are basing their findings on, you will never know.

They are only responsible for the report on supplied info. or their observations
at the time. If a previous report findings are not know,then how can they perform
a true report based on whole person, if the IP. does not inform them of these reports, as ACC seems to forget them regularily. :angry: :angry:
0

#3 User is offline   MG 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 503
  • Joined: 05-February 04

Posted 08 October 2004 - 01:38 PM

Ivan, you're absolutely right about this. I even wrote a paper on this topic for my law and medicine course a couple of years back. There is a great medical journal article by John Quintner on this topic, too, where he says that Australian inusrance doctors during their "RSI epidemic" [sic] acted as "medical police". The recent WA workers compensation scandal reported in this forum adds fuel to the flames.
The ACC doctors rely on English authority to claim that they owe no duty of care to examinees. This view has been challenged in some English legal literature and may clash with the European Convention on Human Rights. But, of course, our politicians do not give their citizens this level of protection from bureaucrats or their agents.
0

#4 User is offline   fairgo 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 08 October 2004 - 03:12 PM

Yes Ivan what you have picked up on is absolutely true. We took it up with the medical council when they were creating the guidelines for third party medical assessors and were most disappointed when the guidelines said that complaints must be back to the referrer (ACC) in the first instance. We also took it up with the H&D Commissioner when he was here earlier in the year consulting on the code. We were whitwashed yet again. There is NO accountability and both the assessors and ACC know it.
0

#5 User is offline   happy1 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 14-October 03

  Posted 12 July 2008 - 05:07 PM

View PostNoDrsl, on Jul 12 2008, 04:23 PM, said:

Are there any improvements on this situation?



NO ,DID YOU EXPECT SOME ?
0

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 13 July 2008 - 04:00 PM

How is accountability possible if there is no mechanism of measurement?
0

#7 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 13 July 2008 - 04:41 PM

Try pushing hard enough for common sence might be a good start.

After a few have been to court and come out in our corner, we may be able to use them as case law to good effect.

Even one would be handy.
0

#8 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 13 July 2008 - 05:19 PM

Mini unfortunately commonsense is not very common. Notwithstanding the very obvious in as much as "commonsense" is not the criteria as was confirmed by Beattie J. in the Burnett decision. In a very robust way Beattie J. confirms that the ACC must rely upon criteria and measurement so as to make determination prior to coming to a decision.

This is a paradigm shift from the notion that common sense will do or take the place of criteria.

Unfortunately the commonsense or she'll be right culture that is expressed in the provinces and in the regions of New Zealand cannot play a part in legislation or the judicial system and certainly may not take the place of my self determination.
0

#9 User is offline   Easyrider 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 111
  • Joined: 16-September 03

Posted 13 July 2008 - 06:21 PM

The only way to keep them honest, is to give them the right information. Take letters from your GP and specialist telling them what your injuries and capabilities are. These Toadys will not go against their peers. And tape the assessment.

And make sure the right questions are asked during the assessment.

Give claimaints the right information as to what they face and how to deal with it.
0

#10 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 448
  • Joined: 03-February 07

Posted 13 July 2008 - 07:44 PM

View PostEasyrider, on Jul 13 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

The only way to keep them honest, is to give them the right information. Take letters from your GP and specialist telling them what your injuries and capabilities are. These Toadys will not go against their peers. And tape the assessment.

And make sure the right questions are asked during the assessment.

Give claimaints the right information as to what they face and how to deal with it.

Hello Easyrider it is Darrell Pearce here. I have managed to get my hands on a copy of the Medical Council's Guidelines for Non-Treating doctors Performing Medical Assessments of Patients for Third Parties. The point i am about to make is this point 4. If a conflict of interest exists, then the doctor is required to decline to see you. The guidelines are on the medical council's website. So i strongly suggest you obtain a copy.
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce
0

#11 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 July 2008 - 11:52 AM

TROUBLE WITH THAT DARRYL IS YOU HAVE ALREADY SEEN THEM BEFORE YOU GET HOLD OF THE ASSESSMENT TO READ AND THEN THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS BLOWN OUT OF ALL PROPORTION.

I STARTING TO WONDER IF ACC HAVE EVEN GIVEN MY REQUESTS TO THE ASSESSOR TO PUT RIGHT.

AM ON THIRD, YES THIRD REVIEW FOR THE EXACT SAME ISSUES NEXT MONDAY. AND LITTLE BY LITTLE MY WISHES ARE COMING TRUE BY OBVIOUS MISTAKES BEING CHANGED TO WHAT I ASKED FOR OVER 11 MONTHS AGO!!

YEEE BLOODY HAA WHEN THE LAST ONE GETS CORRECTED.
MINI
0

#12 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 448
  • Joined: 03-February 07

Posted 14 July 2008 - 12:33 PM

View PostMINI, on Jul 14 2008, 11:52 AM, said:

TROUBLE WITH THAT DARRYL IS YOU HAVE ALREADY SEEN THEM BEFORE YOU GET HOLD OF THE ASSESSMENT TO READ AND THEN THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS BLOWN OUT OF ALL PROPORTION.

I STARTING TO WONDER IF ACC HAVE EVEN GIVEN MY REQUESTS TO THE ASSESSOR TO PUT RIGHT.

AM ON THIRD, YES THIRD REVIEW FOR THE EXACT SAME ISSUES NEXT MONDAY. AND LITTLE BY LITTLE MY WISHES ARE COMING TRUE BY OBVIOUS MISTAKES BEING CHANGED TO WHAT I ASKED FOR OVER 11 MONTHS AGO!!

YEEE BLOODY HAA WHEN THE LAST ONE GETS CORRECTED.
MINI

Hi Mini it is Darrell here. There is no accountability when it comes to these assessments. The acc will deem your assessment a reassessment as they did in my case. So be careful there. They will say whatever they like. As for these so called reveiwers there is no accountability there. Judge Cadenhead in my latest application for leave has said that the review hearing was not carried out impartially. I can ask the High Court to refer the matter back.
Anyway all the best.
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce
0

#13 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 14 July 2008 - 01:36 PM

darrel you need to get a copy of this document that relates to your hearing.

take note that the reviewer is only supplying information to show that the reviewers decision is correct.

It is not a decision to see if the reviewer had other information that show the reviewers decision was wrong.

Attached File(s)


0

#14 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 July 2008 - 03:24 PM

Get ya Darryl

That is one mistake that was fixed before second review.

I hope it ends up at Court cause DSRL have been so slack in first Review that they should get a charge up the Punjab!!

Time will tell I guess. We can only do what we can do!!!

Cheers Mini
0

#15 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 14 July 2008 - 05:08 PM

The accountability of anyone making a false document falls into sections, the civil court pecuniary and exemplary losses in a criminal court to address the criminality of the false document.

Obviously these assessors will claim that they are only assessing the information that was given to them by the ACC in accordance with a contract with the ACC.

ACC as an employer will ensure that they have employed stupid people who failed to give the assessors sufficient information to make a proper decision and will claim a mistake in defence of an intention to procure a false document.

There is no mechanism of complaints for the occupational assessor and the Medical Council has sidestepped any form of censure for the medical assessment given that it was not for the purposes of treatment. The ACC will of course state that the assessments were carried out independently of themselves despite the fact that they had handed the assessors a loaded gun with preferential information.

Frequently the first opportunity to address an incorrect is at a review hearing. As there is no actual criteria for occupational assessments the judiciary will invariably accept the assessors subjective opinion given the current impossibility of an objective criteria being met, except in a cue occupations that need objective calibrations/licenses etc such as truck drivers through to hand surgeons.

I would imagine that someone as significantly brain-damaged as Mr Burnett would not be let loose on the road to drive a truck 70 hours per week as he has been doing. Unfortunately it is only when someone gets killed that anyone uncovers these mistakes. Or a hand surgeon that has no qualification or experience in orthopaedic surgery accepting a contract from the ACC to carry out an orthopaedic procedure.

Opps I think I might have made a mistake, the ACC covers everybody's mistakes as well. So it is nobodys fault and the injured party cannot sue anybody.
0

#16 User is offline   Spacecadet 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 24-January 07

Posted 14 July 2008 - 06:22 PM

What the fuck do you know about assessors Thomas?
You have never been near one apart from in you fantasies.
You were exited by you own bullshit before you got that far into the system.
0

#17 User is offline   Medwyn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 01-November 05

Posted 14 July 2008 - 06:29 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on Jul 14 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

Frequently the first opportunity to address an incorrect is at a review hearing. .

Opps I think I might have made a mistake, the ACC allows for Mediation long before you need to go down the road of review, and I should have seen that pages and pages ago.

0

#18 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 15 July 2008 - 12:05 PM

ACC only allow for mediation when they think it will help them. Not when it will help us claimants.

And Mr thomas you are as boring as 'cleaning the toilet'. Honestly, you piss on about criminality this and criminality that.

Who the hell gives a puck!!!??? We are only trying to get our rights, through the legislation avaliable which allows us to do this.

The people who carry out all this shit are not criminals. They are merely doing what they are told, or what they beleive to be so. It is our job to point out that they are wrong in what the think or what they have been told. That is why we have the Act to rely on.

if you wanna see criminality, come for a little journey with me in october to a different Court, and then give an overview of what you consider has been going on behind your back!!!!

But even I am not so naive that the Judge will see criminality in the case I put forward. It will if I am lucky enough to win, simply be administrative errors!!!

You cant see the wood for the trees again.
0

#19 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 15 July 2008 - 12:21 PM

Medwyn the purpose of the quotation facility on this site is to cut and paste what another person said. I note that you have manipulated this document in a most disgraceful way. You are of course welcome to quote me so could you please edit your post number 17 to state what I actually did say and then outside of the quote make your response or comment so as not to maliciously mislead other members of the site.

"...Mediation long before you need to go down the road of review, and I should have seen that pages and pages ago."


When you make the changes I will respond to the extent that ACC have never made an assessment nor made any opportunity for mediation despite my many many requests.



Mini I am quite aware that you would not want to disturb your relationships with the criminal is that work within the ACC as it will undoubtedly affect your entitlements. ACC staff cannot hide behind the "I was acting under orders" when they commit crimes. Mini your mentality is back with THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY of the 1930s-40s. Unfortunately you also seem to aligned yourself with the mindset of aunty Helen who keeps employing or more state servants at an alarming rate who are otherwise unemployable but hellbent on maintaining their jobs by obeying orders. Of course they are criminals, are you mad. Have you bought into the propaganda.

The National Socialist party, various Communist systems and of course socialism relies upon alienating or disenfranchising 10% or more of the population and messing with the economy without having any focus whatsoever on the economy being proactive.

It is not our job to be telling state servants what they are doing wrong, it is the legislation and that personal integrity. If these people are unwilling to obey the law and they take from or otherwise harm others such as invalids they are criminals on many different levels and belong in jail.

I certainly can see the wood and the trees. I am very much acquainted with every single tree and the entire forest, every highway and by-way through the forest. I know when I am being robbed and I know when someone is trying to piss in my pocket. Moreover I am not stupid.
0

#20 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 15 July 2008 - 12:47 PM

To all when Allan stops preaching to all of us them he will be going forward.

Allan knows the law in that if he get a charge on his case manager the ones above can be found to be automatically guilty.

Its called chain of responcability.

the transport industry is using this in a very good way. Reporting the over loaded container to the police will have the person who loaded the container charged. the truckie does not loose his licence and his job as he was not responcable for placeing the goods into the container.

Now Allan wants to get all of his false information, prove that its is false and go to the person who made the false information and proscute. As Allan is saying that he knows all of the trees (he got all of the information) then he should be well on the way to acheive his goal.

Remember Alan you will get paid twice as you will be also looking at these to also to pay what you were entitled to.
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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