ACCforum: Where Does Your Money Go? - ACCforum

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Where Does Your Money Go?

#1 Guest_IDB_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 03 November 2004 - 01:55 PM

Claimants have been asking some questions
hearsay says The ACC legal team, headed by MIKE MERCER apparrently is where the
legal frustratuions are designed/spearheaded that claimants are on the receiving end of, there are suggestions mike mercer may not have renewed his practicing certificate, but because he is an advisor but does not go to court proceedings this seems to exclude the need to be registered. this is what im told....im sure someone with time on their hands might like to look into this deeper. hearsay suggests there is a team who discuss and drive the acc direction regardless of how it affects claimants, the acc investment vehicle still has $3 billion dollars of your money still to go into it at least

Technical Claims Managers - aparently none of them are qualified accountants yet make financial decisions, of interest, are the decisions they make in regard to interest payments awarded to claimants.

THeres been a number of court cases over the years in regard to the status of interest payment to claimants, is the interest compounding, or is it simple interest?

Documents exist produced by the ACC, ACC Informe documents clearly stated that interest payments were compounding - apparently, judge beattie told acc that document was an embarrassment to their organisation......why would judge beattie say something like that?.....it brings back to mind the recent media reports that question the independance of the judiciary from govt influences....

now claimants are reporting that upon the awarding of a judgement in their favour, the penalty interest payments are being seriously interferred with so that the claimant deliberately misses out on what they have been legitimately entitled to, example, the ACC claim the interest is calculated under the "Simple Interest" rules and that the ACC are forcing injured claimants back to court to fight on acc's interpretations of what actual date they are meant to be paid to, claimants have reported the ACC are re-interpreting court judgements which make judgement statements like:

Payments of interest to be paid up to date (or similar)

im told the ACC are challenging those decisions with claimants winding back the dates the acc consider to be "üp to date" - claimants have reported can be several years prior to the actual judgement date the interest was awarded and should have been paid up to.....now we find out many claimants are being denied their full interest payments well over a year after court judgements awarded them.

so where is the monies that is destined for claimants, but not paid to claimants, where is that going to?

the infamous ACC WCAP (Work Capacity Assessment Process) was ACC's EXIT vehicle - many of the so called independant assessors have since been identified as been well used by the acc, and OSH. How many people who were exited from the acc scheme under the wcap scheme have successfully been re-instated?

claimants have reported they have been unfairly, unjustly declined their lawful entitlements under the wcap scheme and have been frustrated by the ACC scheme since - forcing claimants to operate at a highly specialised lawyer level because if a claimant makes just 1 genuine mistake, the ACC paperwork then on focusses on that error as the acc's way out of helping while the ACC will actively ignore mistakes it makes.

sent to winz instead......to further challenge the acc's exit decision it is reported that the claimant must HAVE FURTHER ASSESSMENT showing deterioration and that they no-longer have the capacity to work - claimants are reporting the immense frustration of having to prove this when they did not have the capacity to work when exited by acc. in addition, when proving further deterioration from the injury, the acc aspect of deneneration is thrown in to make matters worse.....so the injured person and their families end up having to engage lawyers and advocates to fight the acc case managers, the review system, their medical advisors and then face the court system.....during all this is the injured person still receiving their required medical treatment???

on winz - they state they do not provide health care services - so how are claimants to get their health care needs attended to when the system thats ought to be there to assist is spending is immense resource on the denial of essential services...
historical media clippings show the regular call by GP's and other medical professionals for increase in funding.....strange how during the last 30 years we cannot find any calls by ACC's favoured medical advisors for improved funding or services -

in our hospitals and health boards for a long time theres been a lot of talk about the lack of funding, so where is the money going that ACC is suposed to be spending to help injured people? investments? increased staff salaries?? flash conferences???

so where is our money really going to?


see what just turned up in the news!

Quote

DHB wants community feedback
04 November 2004
By KELLY ANDREW and PAUL MULROONEY

Capital and Coast District Health Board wants more community feedback before deciding how much patients will be charged for treatment of routine conditions at Kenepuru Hospital's planned accident and medical centre.

The board debated the controversial issue of part charges at a meeting yesterday.

Members voted to postpone their final decision till a special meeting to be held in the next two weeks.

This would allow time to get more information from the community on how much maximum charges for GP-type treatment at the Porirua centre, due to open next April, should be, and how they will be applied.

People going to the centre with more serious conditions that need hospital-level treatment will not have to pay.

Board chairman Bob Henare agreed to meet community advocacy groups Porirua Healthlinks and Kapiti Healthlinks to hear their views before the special board meeting.

Capital and Coast chief executive Margot Mains recommended patients pay fees ranging from $15 for under six-year-olds to $55 for adults without a community services card.
Advertisement
Advertisement

People who experience barriers to accessing health services such as transport problems or cannot afford to pay, would be exempt from any charges.

Patients would not be charged for an initial assessment of their condition.

But, Ms Mains said if patients did not have to pay for any after-hours care across the district then it would cost the health board an extra $5 million a year.

A decision on part charges was needed by early December to allow the planned new centre to open on time.

Board member John Cody wanted more input from people who would use the service before a decision on charges was made.

"We should not pre-empt what might come through from the user side of things. This is the first step in establishing a community hospital."

Board member Helene Ritchie opposed patients having to pay for routine treatment at the accident and medical centre.

The accident and medical centre will replace Kenepuru's accident and emergency department and probably the after-hours medical centre.

The department has provided free emergency treatment from 9am to 4.30pm on weekdays. The new centre will provide a 24-hour, seven-day service.

Porirua Mayor Jenny Brash said plans to charge patients for treatment of minor conditions were "way over the top" and unfair.

She could not understand why the board had singled out Kenepuru and not included Wellington Hospital's emergency department, where treatment is free.

"You can't have one rule for one centre and a different one for another."

The question of what fees to charge should be left to GPs running the service rather than board members, she said.

The board has said it could consider similar charges at Wellington's A&E, to ensure consistency across the district.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/dominionpost/...21a6479,00.html

0

#2 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 464
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 03 November 2004 - 02:37 PM

Good One IDB - but just as important is this. If ACC collects $2.3 billion each year from the public to exercise its functions, powers and duties, and then doesn't do that - is that not an attempt to defraud, conspiracy to defraud or fraud to both the public and the claimant?

If someone collects public, or any, money on a promise and a statutory duty to do something - and then doesn't do it, then what is that called in NZ?

Acclaim made the allegation of ACC fraud and correpution to the Select-Committee which has gone answered - Parliament is supposedly the highest Court in the land. Yeah Right!!!
0

#3 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 03 November 2004 - 04:51 PM

Very good question IDB. I suspect we all know the answer...... back into govt coffers and paying for all the 'hangers on' IOA Assessors, IMA Assessors etc etc etc.
0

#4 User is offline   ernie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 03 November 2004 - 09:13 PM

Yep, $7129.33 for one medical assesment to further ACCs ends of disentitlement - that is where it goes.

Re interest on delayed payments - we are hamstrung by a change in the law - it used to say under the 1992 Act that ACC needed only the information to calculate the weekly compensation entitlement before interest started to accrue. Now they have to have the information necessary to pay it as well. Where there is a Work & Income offset, they say that they do not have the information to pay it until they get the details of the benefit that has been paid in the interim, thereby minimising their liability for interest.

So, if you have a pending claim and you are on a benefit, tell ACC this at the earliest opportunity when you apply for weekly compensation and authorise them in writing to obtain the details - that way they can not blame Work & Income for delays and minimise their interest obligations.
0

#5 User is offline   Tomcat 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2158
  • Joined: 14-September 03

Posted 04 November 2004 - 06:38 AM

GREETINGS,
Interest payable re WINZ info.
ACC has done this in my case... Dispite the fact I wrote to CM. shortly after court decision for re instatement and backpay to Sept 1978... $1350.interest, and a miserly 5 figure backpay, for 25 years... ???
Letter sent was not in files, recieved last year. Another, "Conveniently Lost or not recieved" letter....I still have the hard copy... They have been informed in writing several times of what they MUST do, and of court precidents etc and have ignored it...
Used the last payment in Sept 1978, (80% after tax) as their starting figure for calculating ERC and the payout...(taking another 20% off and taxing it again) reducing the true amount by 1/2...
Ignored an instruction from WINZ (2) stating that no re embursement prior to OCT 1978 was required or asked for. All this is recorded in Pathways...

I was warned by an ACC "WhistleBlower" (annonymously...Bugger!) in June/July last year that all this was discussed and planned, at "The Head" office,
Because of my involvement in the MSN and the Forum sites and because I "Intruded"
(Crashed) on the first COGs meeting.
Have communicated all this direct to Wilson and he sends it off to "Complaints"... He should put this right himself... Thats what he is supposedly paid for, isnt it????
I aint ganna "go away" !!!
Round 3 coming up !!!!
GRRRRRRR !
Tomcat
0

#6 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 04 November 2004 - 09:37 AM

You all know how long it took for me to be backpaid so I won't go into that... but the interest only ended up being paid for approx 3 months as ACC continually said they didn't have all the info needed to make the calculations on backdated ERC. The situation became so farcical that in the end I had to provide a 'daily' breakdown of hours I did as ACC claimed weekly or fortnightly amounts weren't 'accurate' enough. That's how they got out of paying me the rightful interest IMHO
0

#7 User is offline   Tomcat 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2158
  • Joined: 14-September 03

Posted 04 November 2004 - 08:01 PM

Greetings,

Recieved the "expected White/Brown Wash Letter" today, from Auckland Complaints office.
Seems like "the long drop overflow" from ShamRot house, extends the length and breadth of NZ.
Tomcat //
0

#8 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3328
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 24 April 2012 - 01:29 PM

Refresh
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • 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