ACCforum: No one told me I had a choice - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

No one told me I had a choice

#1 User is offline   alicedee 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 16 June 2013 - 08:57 PM

So anyway, I have been TOLD that I am going to this particular assessor,

Where does it say that I have a choice, like I see so many people saying here.

Is it legislated?

Or an intangible right under the claimant code?

Same thing with specialists I would imagine?

I have been TOLD that I HAVE to see the one I was TOLD to see.

Can someone point me in the right direction please :)
0

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 16 June 2013 - 09:10 PM

"Is it legislated?"
No
0

#3 User is offline   alicedee 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 16 June 2013 - 09:29 PM

Then they do not have to give me a choice on who I see?
0

#4 User is offline   REX 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2653
  • Joined: 16-July 09

Posted 16 June 2013 - 09:51 PM

View Postalicedee, on 16 June 2013 - 09:29 PM, said:

Then they do not have to give me a choice on who I see?


KEY WORDS...
Responsibilities of claimant

72 Responsibilities of claimant who receives entitlement

(1) A claimant who receives any entitlement must, when reasonably required to do so by the Corporation,—

(a) give the Corporation a certificate by a registered health professional or treatment provider that deals with the matters and contains the information that the Corporation requires:

(b ) give the Corporation any other relevant information that the Corporation requires:

© authorise the Corporation to obtain medical and other records that are or may be relevant to the claim:

(d) undergo assessment by a registered health professional specified by the Corporation, at the Corporation's expense:

(e) undergo assessment, at the Corporation's expense:

(f) co-operate with the Corporation in the development and implementation of an individual rehabilitation plan:

(g) undergo assessment of present and likely capabilities for the purposes of rehabilitation, at the Corporation's expense:

(h) participate in rehabilitation.

(2) Every such claimant must give the Corporation a statement in writing about any matters relating to the claimant's entitlement, or continuing entitlement, to an entitlement that the Corporation specifies, and must do so whenever the Corporation requires such a statement.

(3) If the Corporation requires the claimant to do so, the claimant must make the statement referred to in subsection (2) as a statutory declaration or in a form supplied by the Corporation.

Compare: 1998 No 114 s 115


The only way you can really refuse to attend an appointment is by giving a reasonable excuse why you cant or wont see the certain assessor.IE; The assessor has to be suitably qualified/experienced so do your homework on the assessor. Even then if you refuse they can make it tough and have you labeled as "non compliant of s72"
http://www.legislati.../DLM101409.html which would have your entitlements suspended till the outcome of a review or you get an agreement.

Go to the assessment given and remember to take a support person.
The way that these assessments have been seen to be unfair at times by these Acc contracted assessors means that it is advisable to also take a video recording of the assessment. Its not advisable to advise the assessor or the Acc that you intend to make a recording and your within your right to proceed with a covertly recorded assessment for your record of.

Before you go,,
Ask the Acc to provide an inventory list and a copy of the relevant documentation that the assessor is to be given for the assessment, and see that it includes all known relevant assessments that will provide the assessor.
(If there is something in your file that you see as relevant take that to the assessment)
1

#5 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 16 June 2013 - 10:03 PM

Rex a top of the line post.
The spirit of the accforun.org lives.
0

#6 User is offline   alicedee 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 16 June 2013 - 10:14 PM

WTF Allan, Rex is quoting legislation, and gave some good advise at the same time.

I have been reading about people wanting a choice of assessors, it is by legislation, right in front of you, that this is not the case, so all the bullshit surrounding this is just that BS.

Black and white. Thanks Rex. I will not bother going down that path anymore, because I thought there was something there, obviously there is not.
1

#7 User is offline   jocko 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 17 June 2013 - 11:00 AM

Bullshit. You have every right to be treated by an assessor of your choice. It is a basic simple and fundamental human right. The law doesn't matter jack shit if you have the balls to make it your own choice. Make ACC force you to attend their choice of assessor by quietly insisting on your own preferred choice.
I am only talking from my own experience. I insisted on my own assessor and ACC sent me a letter telling me that if I did not choose an Assessor from a list they had given me within 14 days they would pick one for me. I still insisted on my own assessor and I never heard from them again over it. It was many years ago. You may not have ACC legal rights but any man has the right to exercise courage and stand up to the faggot pieces of shit at ACC and say get fucked; I'll pick my own.
Besides Martin vs ACC seems to prove ACC assessments bullshit. If your own specialist and doctor support you.
1

#8 User is offline   jaffa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1792
  • Joined: 14-August 11
  • LocationWellington City

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:47 PM

Yes so if a previous toadie actually wrote a fair report the next "updated IOA" is with another, under some flaky excuse or other, why you shouldn't see the previous. A nastier Akld CM renown to readers of this site favours this doctor shopping excuse. Not that updated IOA's are required following the Farquhar case.


View Postjocko, on 17 June 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Bullshit. You have every right to be treated by an assessor of your choice. It is a basic simple and fundamental human right. The law doesn't matter jack shit if you have the balls to make it your own choice. Make ACC force you to attend their choice of assessor by quietly insisting on your own preferred choice.
I am only talking from my own experience. I insisted on my own assessor and ACC sent me a letter telling me that if I did not choose an Assessor from a list they had given me within 14 days they would pick one for me. I still insisted on my own assessor and I never heard from them again over it. It was many years ago. You may not have ACC legal rights but any man has the right to exercise courage and stand up to the faggot pieces of shit at ACC and say get fucked; I'll pick my own.
Besides Martin vs ACC seems to prove ACC assessments bullshit. If your own specialist and doctor support you.




1

#9 User is offline   alicedee 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:01 PM

Thanks for all your replies.

I must say jaffa, I have no idea what you are on about.........

But the effort is applauded :)
0

#10 User is offline   Sparrow 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 534
  • Joined: 22-March 07

Posted 17 June 2013 - 10:49 PM

You are learning fast Alice.

Ever heard of ACC POLICY???


0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 17 June 2013 - 10:57 PM

View PostSparrow, on 17 June 2013 - 10:49 PM, said:

You are learning fast Alice.

Ever heard of ACC POLICY???




ACC are not allowed policy. But must make regulations which the don't
0

#12 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1610
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:44 AM

Dealing with ACC over the choice of assessor is a dark art.

At a Review I won last year the Reviewer formed the view that the choice of assessor could be negotiated under the IRP. As the IRP has review rights then clearly the matter of assessor choice can be reviewed.

That is the time and pretty much the only time a claimant can argue over assessor choice.

The legislation states that the Corporation can reasonably ask you to see an assessor of their choice. The presence of the word reasonable clearly demonstrates that the Corporation does not have the carte blanch right they try to claim they have. However the onus will be on you to demonstrate the test of reasonable has not been met. You will have to show that the requirement being placed on you unduly prejudices your claim. This is quite easy to do if you are a Sensitive Claimant but a little harder for General Claimants. Its not impossible though.

You can find a lengthy submission I created on the subject attached below.

Good luck

Attached File(s)


1

#13 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 18 June 2013 - 11:50 AM

The choice of assessorIt is an administrative decision and not a decision capable of review.

Legislation does not provide any section indicating that the ACC is required to provide claimants a choice of assessor but the legislation does require the claimant to make themselves available to an assessor.

Quite simply the ACC is providing a choice of assessors for a reason. Is it their own reason for their own benefit or are they trying to benefit the claimant in some way?

Is the claimant qualified to choose an appropriate assessor. In the case of the medical assessor the persons using the assessor would need to have some form of medical knowledge to ensure the appropriate assessor is relevantly qualified to assess the particular type of injury. In the case of an occupational assessor that assessor would also need to have some form of qualification and experience to determine the individual work task activities necessary for the particular occupation being assessed, otherwise their assessment is completely and totally unqualified and meaningless. And unqualified occupational assessor cannot provide information necessary for the medical assessor to assess.

The appropriateness of occupational and medical assessors is a highly technical matter and one not within the grasp of the average claimant.

If the ACC have it in mind that the assessment process as part of the next that programme then that is akin to asking someone on a death sentence to choose their mode of execution, ie: lethal injection, hanging, electric chair and suchlike. Once of course a person on death Row makes the choice of their mode of death then they are giving some form of consent to being executed. The same goes for an ACC exit program. This is particularly important in circumstances whereby the claimant has been described as incapacitated to work in any occupation by their own medical assessor from which medical certificates have been produced. The argument at this point is whether or not they should even be an assessment.

The position I have taken is that the ACC should choose the assessor and provide the information they relied upon to choose that assessor, what they plan to assess and the reason why they think there is a necessity to assess.
0

#14 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1610
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 18 June 2013 - 01:25 PM

Clearly the Reviewer who found in my favour in the argument begs to differ. The Corporation did not succeed in sending to me to one of their chosen and nor did they succeed with Jocko if I read his contribution correctly.

I do agree that the claimant is not necessarily in the best position to choose which is why I argued that when circumstances required it the GP and treatment providers should choose the assessor. Who is better to choose the assessor? A qualified practitioner or some ACC hack?

You can argue assessor choice during IRP negotiations and you can review an IRP. Its all carefully argued in the submission I provided.
0

#15 User is offline   alicedee 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 18 June 2013 - 04:30 PM

Thanks Lupine, I found your post to be very helpful!
0

#16 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1610
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 18 June 2013 - 06:09 PM

View Postalicedee, on 18 June 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

Thanks Lupine, I found your post to be very helpful!


You are welcome. :-)
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