[mortiis32]

I had my impairment assessment done by this so-called "Doctor" Jan Reeves on Wednesday 12th March at 7AM OVER THE PHONE (I am residing in Australia now, due to sexual abuse issues with my family members living back in NZ).

The "feel" I got from her was that she was completely non sympathetic, with not a lot of understanding of either PTSD or severe sexual abuse issues.

I was made to explain to her how the abuse was affecting my life now (which it greatly is), and that is her job (I understand that), but I also know
that A.C.C. pay her very well to come back with the lowest impairment level imaginable.

This IS a re-evaluation, last time I only acquired 18% impairment, but I am much worse off now, so hopefully I get higher.

What is other experiences with this dr? ACC tell me it can take up to 15 WEEKS to get her report back!!

[netcoachnz]

You should fill out information about this Dr on ratemds website

http://www.ratemds.c...uckland-NZ.html

and
check out Official Information that has be gathered about this Dr.

https://www.fyi.org....itive_claims_ps

[mortiis32]

I note that Reeves and Collier did not provide their response "for safety" reasons. I know that these fuckers are employed by ACC to dish out low impairment ratings, and are paid exceptionally well for doing so.

X

[so ovr sensitiveclaimsunit]

 mortiis32, on 24 March 2014 - 03:27 PM, said:

I note that Reeves and Collier did not provide their response "for safety" reasons. I know that these fuckers are employed by ACC to dish out low impairment ratings, and are paid exceptionally well for doing so.

X

In previous postings you made about another Psychiatrist that you were not happy with, it was also suggested to you that you investigate further concerning Dr Jan Reeves and make informed choices from that. It looks to me that you did not do that...I recall I even posted that if you have an assessment with Dr Jan Reeves, that you do so at your own peril.If you are screaming now about this new assessor and the one previous to that, wait until you get Reeves report; I am sure that you will then really have something to scream about when you view her report. As for the time frame in her providing the report, what a crock of shite. This kind of delay in my opinion would be a breach under the Code of Claimants' Rights

On another note,given that you are seemingly unhappy with these assessors, would it not be prudent for you to either undertake another assessment at your own cost or, return to NZ for an assessment in person. It is difficult to conceive of how any such assessment can be done over the 'phone, however I take it that you have agreed to have a 'phone assessment with Dr Reeves at 7.00am? More fool you in my opinion and it is likely that you have done yourself a great disservice by undertaking an assessment in this way.

However from what I have read of your postings, you will only do what you want to do.

All the best then, especially when you get Dr Reeves report, you may well be really "reeving" up then

[mortiis32]

so ovr sensitiveclaimsunit ,

Yeah I had a problem with Dr. Peter Deans, his report was very strange indeed, he managed to give me a brand new diagnosis of "generalized anxiety", over the phone, how this was done, I have no fucking idea!

Dr. Reeves I know full well about, but it was my only choice, ACC gave me a choice of either her or Dr. Peter Deans again!!!

She did say at the end of the conversation "I truly hope that I am able to make this year much better than last year for you, with this report". Kind of promising, but could also be a tactic used.

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[unit1of2]

 Fair Go, on 29 March 2014 - 08:13 PM, said:

First of all my experience with this woman was exceedingly unhappy. Must have been mutual as I received a defamation letter from her lawyers She was going to write the retraction statements to the HDC, Medical Council, Privacy Officer and I was to sign them - very ethical!! And surely not any hint of bullying here!!

ACC are not telling you the truth - https://www.fyi.org....111013.pdf.html this link shows you the turn-a-round that ACC expect from their assessors - from memory 10 working days or they have to advise ACC why it is going to be late. SCU from experience push everything out as far a possible and tell all adults of csa that any decision to be made on their claim will take 4 months. That is how they keep their number so low! How this is timely I cannot tell you. SCU make their own laws you will discover! Four months to make a decision and then over three months till any Review can be heard and hey presto - most clients simply give up!! Sneaky does not begin to describe the staff in this unit!

The truth - ACC will have Dr Reeves report within 10 days of her assessing you over the phone. Then the case manager takes a week or so to enter the formal diagnosis and make a request for a BAP to review it. The BAP looks for the myriad of ways they can disentitle you - these clinical psychologists have no interest in your health or well being I can assure you! Then the BAP after a month gives 10 lines of gobbly gook back to the TCM which in turn checks there is nothing the BAPs missed and then after another month it gets back to your case manager. The puppet of a case manager then issues letter 1-47 standard letter and 4 months later you may get a decision letter. This system is seriously utter rubbish!! And adults have to put up with it!

...and don't forget all the 'added on Addendums' that ACC seek from these Specialists over periods of time prior to receiving your decision letter or disentitlement notice. These Addendums can be an utter surprise and a half simply because you'l not be privy to them prior to anything..... Yes this goes on all the time. My time period for receiving 'promised draft ' copies for correction/s etc was .... months in the waiting, loads of requests and then 'nothing';. After a rediculous amount of time (months)... I finally get a copy.. In another instance it was approx 7 months before I saw a copy, and near on two years before ever seeing the addendums. These came about just a few weeks before disentitlement. Go figure. Are they all a load of contentious, incorrect facts, with evidence of a lot of breaches and similar crap.... YOU BET YAH! Oh don't forget all the BAP mythical and fanciful purpose written story-liners which factually is a load of garbage with no factual evidence. And to think NZrs are paying other NZrs to practice such damning, detrimental garbage that causes further harm to already injured people.

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[redsquare74ucys]

 mortiis32, on 25 March 2014 - 09:58 AM, said:

so ovr sensitiveclaimsunit ,

Dr. Reeves I know full well about, but it was my only choice, ACC gave me a choice of either her or Dr. Peter Deans again!!!

She did say at the end of the conversation "I truly hope that I am able to make this year much better than last year for you, with this report". Kind of promising, but could also be a tactic used.

Good grief! To be honest they assess so many of us over the course of a day that they mix up cases. It may work to your advantage that it was over the phone. Wishing you all the best for that report, fingers crossed hun.

[redsquare74ucys]

 Aurora, on 30 March 2014 - 12:50 PM, said:

The interesting thing about formally complaining to the New Zealand Psychologists Board is that the complaint first goes to the HDC so the clinical psychologists names are logged there.

It is a requirement that all associations report any complaints about their members to the HDC. The HDC only investigates around 3-4% of reports - that means they can't even find the time/resources in 97% of cases!!

[so ovr sensitiveclaimsunit]

 Awaken2Infinite, on 02 April 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

The gall. Pity they are not in new zealand then you could direct them personally as you have so done others. Are you taking responsibility for directing people to your acquaintance forensic psychiatrist dr peter dean of hamilton? I certainly hope you are not still encouraging others to pursue assessments with this individual without accepting being tarred by the same brush.

Get over it. Like the rest of us, we all suggest Assessors where there has been a good experience, or bad experience. In both the assessors you have referred to above, I have made postings on both - the good and the bad. I have also previously explained to others on Forum, that those Assessors that I have recommended or not recommended, that their experience may not be one and the same.Simple.

Stop the blame game. Everyone comes on here of their own free will, each and every one of us asks for input, it is given freely and with good faith and good intent; and it is up to the individual to pursue the recommendations further.

[mortiis32]

Who the hell is this so ovr sensitiveclaimsunit person???? I don't understand...

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[Aurora]

Content removed. Claim settled.

[not their victim]

If you were receiving 18% disability...

you will find post her "phone consultation" that the % will decrease so the amount you receive drops

a recent challenge on this saw the person lose their Independence allowance!...

and NEVER, EVER, breach another claimants identity...

you will be banned for life by doing so....

[Al9lifes]

My experience with this person (Jan] was extremely unhelpful.
Dishonest .
Double dipping
And the Lawyer (Gibson i think) that represrnts her was just as bad.

[Aurora]

Post removed. Claim settled.