ACCforum: vocationalindependance assessment process - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

vocationalindependance assessment process

#1 User is offline   BARON VON OIL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 23-December 12

Posted 23 December 2014 - 11:20 AM

well 2 1/2 years later and acc r going to put me thru the vocational independence process.i was given only medial branch blocks for nerve damage in my neck
which has not done anything to stop the constant pain everyday I was told I had a neck sprain with nerve damage.my doctor has now told me I suffer from chronic pain syndrome. acc have told me theres no other help they can give me so I have asked for a review of the pain which they seem to be dragging their feet and im going no where.
can someone please explain what they do in this process.i cant get anything from my cm as shes on holiday already.

many thanx and merry Christmas
0

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 23 December 2014 - 12:10 PM

The reason why you are developing a chronic pain syndrome is that your pain treatment has been inadequate. What happens is that when you are experiencing signals along your nerves not only does your brain become more in tune and expecting those signals but the actual physical structures of your nerve tissue actually increases just like a muscle might increase through increased activity. It is critical that the pain is shutdown so that the damaged nerves will then atrophy through lack of use. This is what they have tried to do with the nerve block but of course the problem is extremely complex.

The reason why we have ACC compensation is that sometimes treatment does not restore a person. If your condition is permanent then of course the compensation must likewise the permanent.
0

#3 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 23 December 2014 - 01:52 PM

What Mr Thomas is saying is that you need a IA assessment.

If more people got these and you can only get them when injury in stable and permanent, at the soonest after injury, you would then have a actual % of WPI that can be used to prove anything you need to get from them to assist you in your independence, whether it be vocational or social.

If the pain has arisen because of your nerves damaged in your neck, it maybe a Mental pain covered by Physical.

You need to talk to an advocate or lawyer asap, as they are preparing you for vocational before you are ready by the sounds of things.

What does you GP say about your pain? Do you need to take a lot of pain killers, does the pain come when you over extend yourself or is it there all the time. All these things are relevant.

Without knowing more of your condition and how it came about I am sorry I cannot answer any more of your questions as each person has different circumstance.

To get Mental caused by Physical, there has to be a link between the pain and the injury.

You need to see a phsychiatrist.

mini
0

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 23 December 2014 - 03:40 PM

Mini I am not trying to say that an AI assessment is needed. That would be ACC generated information which looks at calculating matters after the information I have talked about should have been gathered. If we were so silly as to go straight to an AI assessment without being armed with the treatment providers diagnosis and treatment plan there it would be a little bit like going to a gunfight without a gun. What I am saying is that the primary treatment provider, the general practitioner should arrange for specialist assessment diagnosis and treatment To be worked out first with the general practitioner making an application to the ACC in order that the ACC funded this preliminary information.

I followed the Process I have described which resulted in a 60% disability calculation by my treatment provider in opposition to the ACCs assessor who calculated only 14.5% as the ACC withheld very considerable quantities of information from their own assessor to guarantee a lower figure. By the time it went to review the reviewer was able to look at what my treatment provider had based the calculation on which included the information available while the ACC assessment was only based on a tiny portion of information rendering a guaranteed lower figure. As far as the reviewer was concerned the ACC were being dishonest, which appears to be the custom until the present.

When these diagnostic procedures are carried out the purposes of treatment right at the beginning then that same information is available for comparison later on in life such as in my own case. For example some decades ago I had nerve conduction tests which give actual numbers from the machine. My doctor is arranging a reassessment of that nerve conduction test so as to compare those same numbers in order to determine whether or not the ACC assertion that I was no longer incapacitated was based on a phantasm when objective information that the legislation requires was readily available, which of course establishes further a dishonest omission on the ACCs part when making their claims to the court.

With regards to minis advice there is a difference between chronic pain syndromes or pain windup as it is sometimes called and a mentally disorganised mind caused by the pain. It is a common ploy for the ACC to change gears like this to first get a long-term claimant is difficult to get rid of into accepting a mental injury as a result of chronic pain. What the ACC is doing is transferring as many people as they can to mental caused by physical so then they can more easily attack the mental injury by way of pre-existing condition which is of course the case with Mini because she has numerous preinjury disorders unrelated to ACC liability that would make her more prone to the mental condition to which the ACC will then be unable to pull the rug from under the likes of mini. I find it very sad that Mini isn't aware that she has been corralled into this ambush as if she was stock (cattle).

I would advise that you simply work with your doctor who will work with the specialists to document the full nature of the injury which includes the ongoing chronic pain syndrome directly tied to the structural damage caused by the injury. Mental caused by injury is simply a subcategory of chronic pain syndrome and as such it should be kept as simply a subcategory which cannot be converted into anything else. Don't let ACC or mini persuade you that you need to be a whack job just because you have been injured. You will note by many is postings that you simply trying to suck up to the ACC by discrediting others such as myself as much as she possibly can.
0

#5 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 24 December 2014 - 01:29 PM

anonymousey
You acknowledged not having the information so why then have you set about trying to form an opinion. Are you trying to be as crafty as the ACC.




The legislation sets down criteria and you need to be qualified to understand that criteria and carry out the calculations. Clearly you are not.

One of the complex issues to deal with in my case is that far from there being a restricted movement there is what is called hyper fixation which means I could touch top of my upper arm and the underparts of my upper arm so there is no measurements in the AMA to account for this necessitating another part of the AMA to be brought into play. You should just leave these technical things to the technical people.
0

#6 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1964
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 24 December 2014 - 03:55 PM

the fact still remains as allans case .as in when he regains outstanding entitlements as in compesations owing , if it does
0

#7 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1964
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 24 December 2014 - 03:59 PM

if it does as in compensatories , watch the space as in allans case
0

#8 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 24 December 2014 - 04:34 PM


anonymousey
This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with your compulsive obsessive disorder about me.




This thread is about a fellow claimants concerns regarding vocational independence assessment. It is to do with real medical matters which will be used In the assessment of residual capacity for new work



0

#9 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1964
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 24 December 2014 - 05:46 PM

the residual capacities for work is a now understanding of how i think allan also and how it should be implemented as in if possiblemany ways
0

#10 User is offline   BARON VON OIL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 23-December 12

Posted 02 January 2015 - 09:58 AM

I was assessed as only 5% for lump sum pay out which is just pitiful even tho I have tremors as well. I have no lawyer or advocate. today I have received
the acc 191, acc 193, acc 691.
I think they acc 193 is a joke as its a questionnaire I have to fill in.
I was denied lumpsum, denied wen ambo put in a claim wen chiro stuffed me up even more. you just cant win.
my doctor laughs wen I tell him I cant take anymore, he just dishes out codeine and tramadol like its candy.
and tells me there's nothing else to take as I have had a lot now, all I want is a pain free day but I aint been pain free since the injections of anaesthetic the spec gave me.
the recommended jobs on the statement are very funny considering I used to drive a 40 ton Doosan moxy 6 wheeler which after the accident I couldn't drive anymore. and they recommend a roller job which is worse than the truck, nxt is performing arts technician cause I helped with a stage show in grey. security officer lol, truck driver word processor cause I can use a laptop, data entry operator me with tremors my god these recommendations are so bloody funny and whats more half of them are not available here unless I moved to Auckland.
also they said theres lots of jobs in chch why not go there, um high rents,power,heating,food
no wonder people on acc commit suicide shit ive thought about it quite a few times.
I take swags of codeine and tramadol everyday which make me drowsy as and wasted.
acc doent not live in the real world just a fantasy 1
0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 02 January 2015 - 11:03 AM

Baron von oil

What you have described is undoubtedly typical of most whereby the ACC have employed a third party to provide them with information in their favour. In order to do this they obtain reports from occupational assessors who have no particular training or knowledge regarding the relevant components necessary to describe transferable education skills and experience into a new occupation type. The medical assessors are entitled to rely upon the occupational assessors information to determine whether or not it is safe to carry out those tasks and more often than not the medical assessors do not even have possession of the information that described the degree of incapacity and likewise produce a report that has little relationship to either legislation or the facts concerning yourself.

To end earnings compensation entitlements there is a three stage approach. The first stage is medical rehabilitation. All opportunities must be exhausted to rehabilitate medically before even starting to assess for re-education into a new occupation. Once suitable targets have been identified then the vocational rehabilitation starts. Then after a period of rehabilitation that has included ACC funding various interventions it is only then that the ACC can assess the capacity to earn in a new occupation.

As the ACC progress your files through these sequences. If not then you would need to make a legal challenge to drag them back to the legislated pathway to a more meaningful rehabilitation.

If There is no medical repair and you have no particular educational qualification and skills and experience that took less than three months to acquire then it is feasible for the ACC to rehabilitate you into any occupation at all. However if you have education skill and experience above this level then the rehabilitation has to utilise that background. The Australian New Zealand standard classification of occupations has a skill rating 1-5 which is determined based on education skill and experience. As the ACC are required to use this classification it follows that they also must follow the skill rating. What was your skill rating and what is the skill rating of the proposed occupations and what further rehabilitation is necessary for you to achieve a realistic expectation of being employed in that occupation?

With regards to the acquisition of reports the ACC leave themselves blameless as they are entitled to rely upon the integrity of the reports the assessors produce, as it is the reviewer and district court judge. There is very little point in trying to challenge the veracity of the ACC assessors during the judicial process. The challenge must come before the judicial process! there are two scenarios one of which is the presumption of incompetence if you feel the report is wrong. The other scenario is the report was deliberately fabricated and known to be wrong or at least not know to be true. The first scenario is a civil proceeding against the individual producing the report. The second scenario is a criminal prosecution for the fraud and production of a document designed for pecuniary advantage. Very few have addressed a direct challenge to the assessors separately from the ACC yet it does seem that this is the most sensible way to go given the historical difficulties in engaging in a judicial environment up against a multibillion dollar Corporation who claims complete innocence as regards to the integrity of those reports.
0

#12 User is offline   BLURB 

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

Posted 02 January 2015 - 11:04 AM

View PostBARON VON OIL, on 02 January 2015 - 09:58 AM, said:

I was assessed as only 5% for lump sum pay out which is just pitiful even tho I have tremors as well. I have no lawyer or advocate. today I have received
the acc 191, acc 193, acc 691.
I think they acc 193 is a joke as its a questionnaire I have to fill in.
I was denied lumpsum, denied wen ambo put in a claim wen chiro stuffed me up even more. you just cant win.
my doctor laughs wen I tell him I cant take anymore, he just dishes out codeine and tramadol like its candy.
and tells me there's nothing else to take as I have had a lot now, all I want is a pain free day but I aint been pain free since the injections of anaesthetic the spec gave me.
the recommended jobs on the statement are very funny considering I used to drive a 40 ton Doosan moxy 6 wheeler which after the accident I couldn't drive anymore. and they recommend a roller job which is worse than the truck, nxt is performing arts technician cause I helped with a stage show in grey. security officer lol, truck driver word processor cause I can use a laptop, data entry operator me with tremors my god these recommendations are so bloody funny and whats more half of them are not available here unless I moved to Auckland.
also they said theres lots of jobs in chch why not go there, um high rents,power,heating,food
no wonder people on acc commit suicide shit ive thought about it quite a few times.
I take swags of codeine and tramadol everyday which make me drowsy as and wasted.
acc doent not live in the real world just a fantasy 1


Re: "the recommended jobs on the statement are very funny considering I used to drive a 40 ton Doosan moxy 6 wheeler which after the accident I couldn't drive anymore. and they recommend a roller job which is worse than the truck,"

I have more or less the same work type back ground as you have Baron.

From a Moxy to a Roller ... LOL they're 100% idiots!

Did they refer you to Career Services in Manukau by any chance?


Have a great day.
0

#13 User is offline   BARON VON OIL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 23-December 12

Posted 03 January 2015 - 07:28 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 24 December 2014 - 12:15 PM, said:

I am not sure if you are looking for Vocational Independence information concerning your work ability and transferable skills and occupations Baron - but there may be a few extra links within this forum etc

Unfortunately with regards to the comments above concerning physical disability - I have not undergone an Independence Assessment which is what Mini is talking about in some of her comments and how ACC will consider the Whole Person Impairment etc

However I did go through a similar process to Alan way back under the 1982 Act regarding lump sums for Section 78 - however with various discussions I also disagreed with Alan concerning his *disability calculation* unfortunately. This is only because I have been unable to verify it with either the information Alan has on his file or where & how the doctor may have worked out the number etc :wacko:/>/>

AT the time of these assessments the 14.5% assessment Alan references was in relation to a possible payment of $2465 [from total of $K17 for 100%]. This previous payout would be deducted from any future payments which Mini was highlighting - but there should be more info on the ACC website which will help

I have linked a webpage which offers more detail on these very old impairment assessments for you...

http://legislation.k.../sc/181sc1.html

Loss of Part of Body
1. Total loss of an arm or the greater part of an
arm .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 80%
2. Total loss of a hand or of the lower part of an
arm .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 70%

NOTE: For the purposes of section 78 of this Act,
when applying the foregoing provisions of this Schedule for
the purpose of assessing permanent loss or impairment of
bodily function affecting the hand and its digits, if multiple
digits are involved assessment shall be made both by summating
the individual losses specified in the foregoing provisions of
this Schedule, and on the basis specified in subsection (3)
of that section in relation to the permanent loss or
impairment of bodily function affecting the hand or lower arm
as a whole as a gripping organ.
In relation to the last-mentioned method of
assessment, complete loss of finger/palm grip in all its
components shall be treated as constituting 60% loss of
function of the hand, and complete loss of opposition or
pincers grip shall be treated as constituting 40% loss of
function of the hand, these figures to be apportioned into
four equal parts for the individual digits


AFAIK the 60% figure which Alan obtained from his private doctor may relate to a function loss or task loss of only one area [his wrist]. which looks to me like the doctor back then virtually places it in similar category as total amputation of one or even perhaps two hands etc

It may well also be that as a plastic surgeon Dr Rees also looked at different issues concerning disability for Alan when he calculated this 60% as it likely depends on definitions used perhaps? Also of course that this 14.5% or even 60% figure will likely be much less now that Alan has had surgery on his wrist and can use it again for his chosen occupations & work etc

Anyways from my past dialogue in threads here with Alan, it appears he rejected the S78 Permanent Disability payment as he was seeking an extra token money amount of $7,735. There was also some debate on whether or not it was temporary or permanent &or various other possible entitlements he believes he should hold :unsure:/>/>/>


To compare this POV and why I consider a 60% disability is a misinterpretation by Alan of what his doctor may have stated by using other foreign schedules - I have uploaded a few other injuries found in guides similar to the AMA rates etc

7.7 IMPAIRMENT OF FUNCTION, WRIST
Immobility of wrist joint in favorable position
(Approximately 30° dorsiflexion):21
7.711 Major.................................................. 20%
7.712 Minor.................................................. 17%
7.713 Both................................................... 50%
Immobility of wrist joint in an unfavorable
position (In palmar flexion, or strong dorsal,
radial, or ulnar flexion):
7.761 Major.................................................. 30%
7.762 Minor.................................................. 25%
-

BTW I think total blindness in one eye by ACC used to be 30% figure and while ACC was likely generous offering deafness of both ears at 100% for S78 payments - I have found that this is often calculated at 60% disability in many other Schedules around the world etc

0

#14 User is offline   BARON VON OIL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 23-December 12

Posted 03 January 2015 - 07:31 PM

so under the 82 act I would have been 10-25% but now im just 5%
0

#15 User is offline   Rosey 

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

Posted 04 January 2015 - 01:07 PM

That would be a big help for others too.

Thanks anony...

View Postanonymousey, on 03 January 2015 - 07:41 PM, said:

RE : I would have been 10 2 25% now im only 5%

There have been a few members describe similar results where their disability or incapacity was downgraded over time as well Baron.

I will see if I can find links to thread discussions if it is still here &or judgements on similar difficulties asap Posted Image




1

#16 User is offline   BARON VON OIL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 23-December 12

Posted 20 January 2015 - 08:27 AM

will be off to see alex marshall in chch for my medical assessment on monday
0

#17 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:06 AM

View PostBARON VON OIL, on 20 January 2015 - 08:27 AM, said:

will be off to see alex marshall in chch for my medical assessment on monday


Do you have a occupational report describing each of your pre-injury and individualisedwork task activities of which you collectively relied upon for your earnings?
Do you have an occupational report describing any individual work task activities that you are at the qualified, experienced and skilled to perform for the purposes of earning?

If the medical assessor does not have information of this sort before from a qualified occupational assessor be medical assessor is totally unable to carry out the medical assessment.

Remember it is not sufficient for the medical professional to deduce by way of his own knowledge base and perhaps commonsense as to what he thinks the individual work task activities are within any particular occupation that is assessing you for and without this information simply cannot produce a medical report as to the safety to perform those tasks.
0

#18 User is offline   greg 

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

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:27 AM

If you don't protect yourself with these answers as suggested by Alan and others , you
may find your assessment report might not be a true description of your skills and injuries.
0

#19 User is offline   RedFox 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 248
  • Joined: 11-March 13
  • LocationNorth of Christchurch

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:33 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 20 January 2015 - 11:06 AM, said:

Do you have a occupational report describing each of your pre-injury and individualisedwork task activities of which you collectively relied upon for your earnings?
Do you have an occupational report describing any individual work task activities that you are at the qualified, experienced and skilled to perform for the purposes of earning?

If the medical assessor does not have information of this sort before from a qualified occupational assessor be medical assessor is totally unable to carry out the medical assessment.

Remember it is not sufficient for the medical professional to deduce by way of his own knowledge base and perhaps commonsense as to what he thinks the individual work task activities are within any particular occupation that is assessing you for and without this information simply cannot produce a medical report as to the safety to perform those tasks.

Have you been through the VI process?
0

#20 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:50 AM

View PostRedFox, on 20 January 2015 - 11:33 AM, said:

Have you been through the VI process?


I have never had any assessments.
But I have asked for them and they know I am well armed.

Baron don't go to a gun fight with a knife
0

Share this topic:


  • 4 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • 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