ACCforum: GASLIGHTING - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

GASLIGHTING How they use “gaslighting,”

#21 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 22 April 2008 - 06:14 AM

Make your vote in poll: http://accforum.org/...wtopic=3866&hl= Are you being gaslit?
0

#22 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 28 April 2008 - 07:31 PM

:wub: Hi everyone ...

Did a Google on Gas Lighting ...

:wacko: :blink: Oooooooooooooooo nasty nasty psychological abuse with some not so nice outcomes for the victums ...

;) Trying to have a smiley day ...
0

#23 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 20 November 2009 - 05:20 PM

;)
0

#24 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 20 November 2009 - 08:00 PM

DateLine NBC Story Hits UnumProvident

Dateline NBC on Sunday night in its lead story said its investigation found "startling charges against the nation's biggest disabilty insuror" - Chattanooga-based UnumProvident.
The story included interviews of a number of former and present UnumProvident employees as well as Dr. Patrick McSharry, former UnumProvident medical director who has sued the company.

UnumProvident had been expecting the national TV story and issued a press release Oct. 2, saying it anticipated that "at least one national news organization is preparing to produce a negative news story on aspects of the company’s claims handling process which management believes to be incorrect in its implications."

UnumProvident told Dateline it paid out $3.6 billion in disability claims this year and turns down only two percent of claims.

In the wake of the expected report, shares of UnumProvident quickly fell $2.01, or 9.5 percent, to $19.26 on the New York Stock Exchange.

The story cited the case of a salesman who wrecked near Albuquerque, N.M., and was rendered a near quadriplegic. The man said he had been paying $59 a month for UnumProvident disability coverage, and he began receiving checks. But he said that after two years, he received a letter saying his benefits were cut off.

He said, "I was scared and frightened. I said this has got to be a mistake."

He later sued the firm, and his payments were eventually restarted. UnumProvident said it had a video of the man driving a van. The show said he is able to drive using a specially equipped van, but cannot work.

The Dateline story said the case of the salesman in New Mexico "may be part of something much larger."

It charged there was a "companywide policy of selling out people it promised to help."

The story showed interviews with three UnumProvident employees whose faces were not shown and whose voices were distorted.

One worker said there were incentives for closing out claims, saying, "You get to 30 and you get a pizza party."

Dateline said the firm in 1993 was losing millions of dollars, then it got new management and "began making millions." It says the company claims that is because of restructuring and smart business decisions.

The story interviewed Dr. William Feist, who said the firm had "no concern for the individual" and worked "to cut off high-dollar claims."

He said, "It became a witchhunt - all looking for loopholes to close out claims."

Dateline said cases in which there were "so-called subjective claims," such as mental problems, were a focus.

It says 10 UnumProvident employees agreed to speak with the show as long as their names were not given. It says they ranged from "claims representatives all the way up to vice president."

Dateline said some of those employees still work at the company, while some had quit and others had been fired.

Employees said there was "intense pressure to cut off claims" and said that terminated claims reached a record level under the policy.

It said goals were set for cutting off claims.

The story said it examined thousands of pages of documents and found a reference to having a goal of cutting $132 million in claims and a statement of "we need 18 more (cut) to meet projections."

It said the company had "fire drills" in which there was "an intensive effort to find claims to close."

The story also focused on Rosemary Wright, a teacher from Illinois with a fatal type of emphysema. It says she began receiving UnumProvident payments, then they were cut off.

She said, "I opened that letter and I couldn't believe it. They didn't just take the money away from me. They took my dignity."

She also sued and got the payments resumed. She has kept the lawsuit going, saying she believes the ordeal robbed her of a year of her life.

Dr. McSharry was interviewed, and he said UnumProvident pressured doctors to write opinions supporting claim denial.

He said he was pressed into doing so on one or two occasions, but later refused to do more and was fired.

Dr. McSharry said when he declined to write the denials, he was reprimanded, and "I was told I'd fallen off the career path."

He said, "I vowed I'd never do it again. I just hope I didn't hurt somebody too badly."

The story also featured an interview of a Georgia insurance commissioner, who said he has been investigating UnumProvident.

He said he expects to bring disciplinary charges "based on what we have already found."

******************
UnumProvident Sued for Accessing Personal Files
January 27, 2007. By Heidi Turner

San Francisco, CA: Most people don't know this, but health insurance companies like UnumProvident can deny claims based on confidential information, even if the claimant has not given permission for that information to be released.

This is exactly what happened to one California woman who is now suing both UnumProvident for unfairly denying her claim and the hospital where she was treated for giving the insurance company her confidential information.

According to a report in The Wall Street Journal, the plaintiff contends that in 2001 she was in a car accident that resulted in four herniated discs and chronic back pain. However, when she applied for long-term disability leave two years after the accident, she was denied insurance coverage based on information UnumProvident found in her psychologist's notes; notes she was told were completely confidential. Not only did UnumProvident have access to her confidential records, she claims the company completely misinterpreted the notes and wrongly denied her insurance coverage.

The reason UnumProvident was able to access her confidential records was that her psychotherapy notes were scanned into a hospital computer record system along with her general medical records and therefore had no special protection for confidentiality. When the plaintiff applied for long-term disability, she had to sign a release that covered her medical records; she was told that if she did not sign the release her claim would be denied. The plaintiff says she signed the release only after she ensured that her therapy records could not be given out without specific consent.

In denying the plaintiff's claim, UnumProvident cited notes contained in the patient's files, notes the plaintiff says were taken out of context and entirely misunderstood. However, despite her ability to prove that the UnumProvident misread her file, the insurance carrier refused to alter its decision.

This is not the first time UnumProvident has been accused of improperly denying policyholders' claims. Back in 2002 a class action lawsuit was filed, along with 2,500 individual suits, claiming UnumProvident operated "disability denial factories," in which policyholders were wrongly denied claims.

In 2003, UnumProvident suffered a $31.7 million damage verdict against it after a jury found in favor of a doctor who claimed the company refused to pay the monthly benefit he was entitled to.

A 2004 settlement was intended to protect disabled workers from UnumProvident's dishonest practices. That settlement required the insurer to reassess previously denied claims, to restructure their claim handling procedures, and to pay a $15 million fine. The settlement was in response to an investigation conducted by the New York State Attorney General's Office, the New York State Insurance Department and state insurance regulators from various states.

If you are a UnumProvident policy holder and your claim has been rejected for unfair or illegal reasons, contact a lawyer to discuss your options.
0

#25 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 20 November 2009 - 08:04 PM

Unum Provident Agrees to Review Denied Disability Claims
Company Estimates Cost of Settlement With New York at $100 Million









November 19, 2004
A landmark, multi-state settlement with UnumProvident will impose sweeping reforms that will protect disabled workers nationwide, New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said today.

The settlement resolves issues relating to investigations into UnumProvident's claims handling practices. The investigations focused on assertions that UnumProvident had inappropriately denied claims for benefits under individual and group long-term disability insurance policies.

The settlement requires UnumProvident and its subsidiaries: (1) to reassess approximately 200,000 claims that previously had been denied; (2) to completely restructure their claim handling procedures to ensure objectivity and fairness; and (3) to pay a $15 million fine.

"This settlement sends a strong message to disability insurance companies that improper denials of disability claims will not be tolerated," said Attorney General Spitzer.

"These claim denials involved vulnerable workers � those whose illnesses and injuries prevented them from continuing their employment. I am very pleased that these individuals will have their claims reviewed, and that UnumProvident will now implement the structural reforms necessary to ensure that future claims are handled appropriately."


The investigation is unrelated to the separate probes into the payment of contingent commissions, steering and bid-rigging in the insurance industry.

Numerous other actions are still pending against UnumProvident, including a class-action lawsuit which charges that the company operates "disability denial factories" and at least 2,500 individual suits filed by policyholders. A California jury returned a $31 million verdict against the company in 2003 and the state of Georgia fined it $1 million after an 18-month investigation.

The reassessment process covers the vast majority of persons whose claims for group or individual long-term disability benefits were terminated or denied after January 1, 2000. UnumProvident and its subsidiaries are required to provide notice to those individuals of their rights under the agreement.

In addition, individuals whose disability claims were denied between 1997 and 2000 can also apply to participate in the claim reassessment process. Spitzer and Serio urged these individuals to contact UnumProvident at 1-866-278-4641 and ask that their claims be reassessed.

UnumProvident officials estimate that the settlement will result in expenditures of over $100 million in restitution to policyholders and in structural reforms to improve compliance and monitoring. Some of the structural reforms must remain in place for at least two years, while others are permanent.

The review process and restitution payments will provide claimants with a more expedient method of obtaining recoveries, and simultaneously will reduce the companies' exposure to litigation judgments and other costs.

If UnumProvident fails to implement the required changes in a timely manner as stipulated by the agreement, it will be subject to penalties of $100,000 per day until compliance is achieved. In addition, failure to meet acceptable levels of accuracy in making disability claim determinations will result in a penalty of $145 million.

The investigation was conducted by the New York State Attorney General's Office, the New York State Insurance Department, state insurance regulators conducting a multi-state examination led by Massachusetts, Maine and Tennessee on behalf of all the other states, and the United States Department of Labor.

The settlement covers Unum Provident and five of its subsidiaries -- Unum Life Insurance Company of America, The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, Provident Life and Casualty Insurance Company, Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company and First Unum Life Insurance Company.




Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/unum...l#ixzz0XNw70mRI




REPORT FINDS UNUM COMPLYING WITH TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
Multistate Action Results in Additional $676.2 Million in Benefits to Thousands of Disability Claimants by Nation’s Largest Disability Insurer


An examination of the disability insurance claim practices of Unum Group found the company is complying with the requirements of a 2004 agreement aimed at ensuring disability claims are promptly and properly processed, New York Insurance Superintendent Eric Dinallo announced today.

Consumers whose claims previously had been denied will receive a total of $676.2 million in additional benefits, Dinallo said. More than 23,000 claimants sought to have their denied claims reassessed as part of the settlement agreement and 41.7% of these were reversed in whole or in part. New York claimants gained benefits worth $59.8 million.

This follows a 2003 investigation into whether the company had inappropriately denied claims for benefits under individual and group long-term disability insurance policies. That investigation was conducted by the New York State Attorney General’s Office, the New York State Insurance Department, state insurance regulators conducting a multi-state examination led by Massachusetts, Maine and Tennessee on behalf of all the other states, and the United States Department of Labor.

As a result of that investigation, the four states and the Department of Labor entered into the regulatory settlement agreement with the company in November 2004 requiring Unum to pay a $15 million fine, to reassess the claims that previously had been denied, and to completely restructure its claim handling procedures to ensure objectivity and fairness.
“This is a clear example of state insurance regulation at its best, working cooperatively to protect consumers,” Dinallo said. “Thousands of consumers with worthy disability insurance claims received their proper benefits as a result of this action, and future claimants now know the process will be fair and clear.

“Unum is to be commended for its cooperation and its prompt implementation of the required reforms,” Dinallo added. “Its governance reforms and improvements in claim administration should yield ongoing positive benefits for disability insurance claimants.”

The examination report was prepared by Rackemann Sawyer & Brewster on behalf of the states involved. It found Unum complied with the changes in corporate governance and claim administration procedures and actions required by the settlement agreement. The company’s error rate was now substantially better than the standards required by the agreement.

Unum faced possible penalties of $145 million plus $100,000 per day had it not complied with the settlement terms. Based on Unum’s performance, no fines or penalties will be imposed.

The full examination report is available on the New York Insurance Department’s website at http://www.ins.state...pt/62235m07.pdf. It may also be viewed on the websites of the three other lead regulators: Maine, Massachusetts and Tennessee.
0

#26 User is offline   MG 

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

Posted 22 November 2009 - 10:52 PM

It is a matter of record that ACC held shares in UNUM Provident at the time it was gaslighting these claimants. It is also a matter of record that UNUM Provident faces a large number of lawsuits, including class actions, resulting from its gaslighting. Unfortunately, this cause of action is not available to ACC claimants.
0

#27 User is offline   Maraqita 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 29-June 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 24 December 2009 - 12:11 AM

View PostMG, on Nov 23 2009, 12:52 AM, said:

It is a matter of record that ACC held shares in UNUM Provident at the time it was gaslighting these claimants. It is also a matter of record that UNUM Provident faces a large number of lawsuits, including class actions, resulting from its gaslighting. Unfortunately, this cause of action is not available to ACC claimants.
Shocking!

Quote

"Gaslighting " means to drive someone crazy. It comes from the 1944
film Gaslight, in which a husband convinces his wife she's losing her
mind. Gaslighting is the most potent form of psychological warfare
you can use without a license.
In Gaslighting : How To Drive Your Enemies Crazy, Victor Santoro
(The "Godfather of Harassment") shows you how to destroy your
target's confidence, self-esteem and reputation. Through a series of
small incidents, your target gets progressively more confused, until
he's "reduced to a shapeless mass of shivering, quivering jelly."
Some of the tactics covered include:
*Collecting information on your target
*Preparing for a gaslighting attack
*Creating tension, anxiety and sleeplessness
*Messing with your target's car, telephone and mail
*Gaslighting at your target's workplace and home
*Turning neighbors and co-workers against the target
*Covering your tracks *And much more.
Gaslighting will show you how to cause disorientation, get your
target off balance, and build up his paranoia. Finally, you
completely annihilate his reputation, leading to personal disasters
such as job loss, divorce, financial devastation &shyp; even jail.

Also gaslighting
A common form of brainwashing in which an abuser tries to falsely
convince the victim that the victim is defective, for any purpose
whatsoever, such as making the victim more pliable and easily
controlled, or making the victim more emotional and therefore more
needy and dependent.

Often done by friends and family members, who claim (and may even
believe) that they are trying to be helpful. The gaslighting abuser
sees himself or herself as a nurturing parental figure in relation to
the victim, and uses gaslighting as a means for keeping the victim in
that relationship, perhaps as punishment for the victim's attempt to
break out of the dependent role.

Example: If an abusive person says hurtful things and makes you cry,
and then, instead of apologizing and taking responsibility, starts
recommending treatments for what he or she calls "your depression"
or "your mood swings," you are in the presence of a gaslighter.

Etymology: Term is named after the film Gaslight (1944), in which the
villain used the technique.

Related: Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP).

Synonyms, nonstandard: gaslight syndrome; gaslighting syndrome.

0

#28 User is offline   Moeroa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 940
  • Joined: 20-November 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 22 February 2010 - 07:50 PM

This is what Blurb and a few of you others have gone through or about to.

Cheers Fran.

View Postfuckyou, on Feb 22 2010, 09:04 PM, said:

U on to it....... NO USE KISSING YOUR CM CORRUPT ASS ! because they will still fraud your ASS and call you a loser.
Do you think they will start to care or be nice....
You have to understand the concept GASLIGHTING.
POST up a storm or your going to lose without even a say.
@least the name of the fraudsters are out their for the people to be aware of their case managers and their PAST VICTIMS who lost... for the fraudsters holiday pay and bonuses.
Just remember that they HAVE done you harm and you kissing ass won't stop them from doing what works.
You being nice is only making gaslighting succeed without any known recognition.
I don't think they like their names posted next to their causation of bonus.
If you kiss ASS... Its who's next !!!
(GOOGLE will bring up their name first with a search so post their name as a Topic title with ACC also). :) ;) ;)

3

#29 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 23 February 2010 - 08:39 AM

Moe

This foul mouthed person has inferred that I am kissing A.. of ACC. Nothing can be further from the thruth. I have taken every 'no' they have given me and turned it into a postitive. I get all my entitlements, so I am hardly licking A..!!!

The fact that I am still fighting is a sign that I have not licked A..!!

I simply am telling them they will get bugger all by not treating them as ordinary workers 'taking home the bacon' for their familys and with a bit of respect.

If you have the strength after you have the entitlements you have asked for, then you can call them anything you want, however, be aware they can be taken off you a lot easier than it was to get them. It is all up to you really. Do you want then or not.

If as you say some don't want them because the amount they get is not worth the effort, then I would have to ask what would they need the forum for. If WINZ gave me more, I would certainly have stayed on that. But it didnt. So have got my entitlements. Hard going as it is. It at least keeps the brain active.

Mini
0

#30 User is offline   Moeroa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 940
  • Joined: 20-November 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 23 February 2010 - 10:14 AM

View PostMINI, on Feb 23 2010, 10:39 AM, said:

If you have the strength after you have the entitlements you have asked for, then you can call them anything you want, however, be aware they can be taken off you a lot easier than it was to get them. It is all up to you really. Do you want then or not.
I have decided I don't want them if it means getting so ill as that nurse had, I almost lose life and precious living with my whanau. Or becoming so bitter and twisted like too many of the toxic characters on here, that I cannot smell the roses with my loved ones.

View PostMINI, on Feb 23 2010, 10:39 AM, said:

If as you say some don't want them because the amount they get is not worth the effort, then I would have to ask what would they need the forum for.
Talking to that nurse and the mother of a seriously disabled son and reading the forum has taught me that it's not worth the bother. Just looking at all the ones whom ACC has turned so sad and so bitterly obsessed by ACC's shenanigans has helped me decide not to bother anymore. That's what I have drawn from the forum. Of course for the ladies whom were working full time, they can get a lot out of the archives but do not wish to tarry long on site. I actually believed this forum could be an excellent resource and support network.

View PostMINI, on Feb 23 2010, 10:39 AM, said:

If WINZ gave me more, I would certainly have stayed on that. But it didnt.
WINZ IB is $250 so the $305 a week isn't worth the aggro or stress. I want to have a life.

View PostMINI, on Feb 23 2010, 10:39 AM, said:

So have got my entitlements. Hard going as it is. It at least keeps the brain active.
Great it keeps your brain going.

One of the reasons I fought to get compo in the first instance was for the rehabilitation their glossy pamphlets promise. Now we all know that "rehabilitation" ACC style is merely a euphemism for the Phil Riley "exit".
4

#31 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 29 March 2010 - 04:35 PM

:wub: Hi everyone ...





Interesting reading.





;)
1

#32 User is offline   Campy 

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

Posted 09 August 2010 - 04:01 AM

View PostMadMac, on 10 April 2007 - 05:18 PM, said:

;)


What's been done with health insurers in the USA - note the similarities:

4

#33 User is offline   Moeroa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 940
  • Joined: 20-November 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 08 July 2011 - 03:48 AM

  • Psychologist Martha Stout states that sociopaths frequently use gaslighting tactics. Sociopaths consistently transgress social mores, break laws, and exploit others, but are also typically charming and convincing liars who consistently deny wrongdoing. Thus, some who have been victimized by sociopaths may doubt their perceptions.[6]* Jacobson and Gottman report that some physically abusive husbands may gaslight their wives, even flatly denying that they have used violence.
  • Psychologists Gass and Nichols use the term gaslighting to describe a dynamic observed in some cases of marital infidelity:
"Male therapists may contribute to the women's distress through mislabeling the women's reactions. [...] The gaslighting behaviors of the husband provide a recipe for the so-called 'nervous breakdown' for some women [and] suicide in some of the worst situations."[7]
  • The Manson Family, during their "creepy crawler" burglaries of the late 1960s, would enter homes and steal nothing, but would rearrange furniture to upset and confuse residents.[8]



View PostMadMac, on 29 March 2010 - 04:35 PM, said:

:wub: Hi everyone ...





Interesting reading.





;)

1

#34 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 17 July 2011 - 09:39 PM

View Posttonyj, on 06 August 2006 - 07:08 PM, said:

I have a fully documented file compliled over a 14 month period .
Starting with a letter regards it to Gary Wilson within the first three months of gaslighting being obviuose ...and him assuring me it was just not possible... so instead of actually fixing it I made sure we create an indisputable paper and recorded trail never expecting it to carry on for sooo long but the reality is it just compounded the matter .

It really is a sorded tale .. Once the guy has settled down again ,he is rather jaded at the moment and is recovering from the stress and trauma of it all we will be presenting Jan White with the file in total...

BUT its spells out gaslighting and leaves no question as to what was going on and the methedologies used ...

tony


Hey Tony, if you're reading this can you let us know how you got on with Jan White?
0

#35 User is offline   Rosey 

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

Posted 05 August 2011 - 03:53 AM

View PostBLURB, on 17 July 2011 - 09:39 PM, said:

Hey Tony, if you're reading this can you let us know how you got on with Jan White?

I'll say! Please do tell Tony!
2

#36 User is offline   mimi 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Posted 17 October 2011 - 06:57 PM

The Corporation’s declining claims is because New Zealand is a guinepig country, the only country on earth where Torts Law is replaced by business called Accident Compensation Corporation. This national Corporation is an ideal business that lives on mandatory tax payer’s funds. As a business the corporation’s duty therefore is to protect grossly reckless doctors and award butchery. NZ doctor’s are fully aware of this fact and they are even told of this fact by the representative from the HDC office that they both ACC and HDC protect reckless doctors. I have attended a lecturing in which HDC representative said that they protect doctors NOT the people of NZ and was giving examples what they say when declining claim.

Weak up NZ.
0

#37 User is offline   Rosey 

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

Posted 06 December 2011 - 06:53 AM

This was in the Press newspaper

20 Hallmarks of a psychopath are:
1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
4. Pathological lying
5. Cunning/manipulative
6. Lack of remorse or guilt
7. Shallow effect
8. Callous/lack of sympathy
9. Parasitic lifestyle
10. Poor behavioural control
11. Promiscuous sexual behaviour
12. Early behaviour problems
13. Lack of realistic long-term goals
14. Impulsivity
15. Irresponsibility
16. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
17. Many short-term relationships
18. Junvenile delinquency
19. History of breaching bail, escaping or offending while under supervision or parole
20. Criminal versatility.... http://www.arkancide...psychopathy.htm

View PostMadMac, on 28 April 2008 - 07:31 PM, said:

:wub: Hi everyone ...

Did a Google on Gas Lighting ...

:wacko: :blink: Oooooooooooooooo nasty nasty psychological abuse with some not so nice outcomes for the victums ...

;) Trying to have a smiley day ...




2

#38 User is offline   not their victim 

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

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:13 AM

and doesnt that just describe each of the toadies?

in my honest opinion of couse lol
0

#39 User is offline   Moeroa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 940
  • Joined: 20-November 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 30 December 2011 - 01:16 AM

And it's the ACC which bullies disabled claimants to pain psychiatrists at the expense of their organic injuries, then shifts the blame onto their victim.

View Postnot their victim, on 06 December 2011 - 11:13 AM, said:

and doesnt that just describe each of the toadies?

in my honest opinion of couse lol

2

#40 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 04 May 2012 - 11:37 AM

12332 hits todate
0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 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