ACCforum: Thomas v ACC [2015] NZHC 3252 (16 December 2015) - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Thomas v ACC [2015] NZHC 3252 (16 December 2015) why was it pursued as a matter of public interest?

#41 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10602
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 06 January 2016 - 10:42 AM

View PostDavid Butler, on 06 January 2016 - 08:45 AM, said:

Nothing different re Thomas and the Bomb Plot either
All implausible / contrasting Really mostly Evasiveness via is cunningly contrived wordsmithging
something all the Judges appear to have picked up as a Thomas factor

David


Okay so we have the medical profession in their entirety an agreement that I suffer from gross injuries and our incapacitated to return to my preinjury occupation, facts that are supported by review hearing decisions together with further review hearing decisions in my favour directing the Corporation to get on with the assessment process for purposes of determining the degree of my disabilities.

On the other hand we have unqualified hostile members of the public, such as yourself, that the ACC would prefer to rely on in disagreement with the medical profession. As the day draws closer to my disclosing the ACC bungling/dishonesty a search warrant is orchestrated based on the tagteam's allegations that I was planning to do harm to the ACC, again unqualified hostile members of the public who do not know me with one of them even offering himself to provide the ACC with "high-value information" who was very closely associated to yourself.
1

#42 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10602
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 06 January 2016 - 10:44 AM

View Postnot their victim, on 06 January 2016 - 09:01 AM, said:

it states quite clearly under ALL ACTS....

that if you rip off the acc and are convicted of doing so...then entitlements are discretionary...

Thomas will NEVER be a mutli millionaire off the back of acc...EVER...

twice convicted for 2 different issues....no third chance there....


quite simply, the acc, the judiciary and all claimants are OVER his "versions of the truth and the law"....


pays to check what one has written in the past, (advice for all liars)...

so that one does not keep contradicting oneself to create new lies.....



I have asked you this question before but you did not answer. Practically have another try.

Whereabouts in legislation doesn't say that the ACC may exercise some form of discretion when determining the degree of incapacity for the purposes of determining entitlements?

Moreover could you please explain why you think the ACC may make any decisions concerning degree of incapacity other than the medical information provided by independent medical professionals?

I do agree with you that this seems to be happening to me but I cannot find any legal basis for. Please direct me to the foundation relied upon.
1

#43 User is offline   greg 

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

Posted 06 January 2016 - 07:28 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 06 January 2016 - 10:44 AM, said:

I have asked you this question before but you did not answer. Practically have another try.

Whereabouts in legislation doesn't say that the ACC may exercise some form of discretion when determining the degree of incapacity for the purposes of determining entitlements?

Moreover could you please explain why you think the ACC may make any decisions concerning degree of incapacity other than the medical information provided by independent medical professionals?

I do agree with you that this seems to be happening to me but I cannot find any legal basis for. Please direct me to the foundation relied upon.

Your problem is your actions have proved these 'now claimed injury' never existed as you were working/creating an income without ACC approved knowledge.
2

#44 User is offline   murraytheworry 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 15-June 15

Posted 11 January 2016 - 08:13 AM

Hi Allan and everyone who reads this forum. Surely enough is enough and we should all just get on with the cards we have been dealt. It serves no purpose other than to wind people up
and open yourself up for lible legal cases. Try the be thankful for what we have a live life to the fullness while we can
3

#45 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10602
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 January 2016 - 09:49 AM

View Postgreg, on 06 January 2016 - 07:28 PM, said:

Your problem is your actions have proved these 'now claimed injury' never existed as you were working/creating an income without ACC approved knowledge.


I simply do not understand your logic???

How is it possible that the medical profession all agree that structural elements of my body have been broken yet it be claimed that I was never injured because somebody claims is carrying out some unknown work activity for unspecified periods of time?

While the ACC legislation requires the declaration of working for the purposes of earning it is absolutely none of their business whether or not someone generates an income from their business interests and as such how do you think investment income could be relevant? Moreover as I did not generate any income from investment powers unsupported speculation an assumption relevant?

How I might provide ACC with "knowledge" of information when there is no information to report in as much as I did not work or earn and had neither generated and investment income either? Obviously there is no information to support their imagination.

Please do your best to answer these questions as it would be most helpful.
1

#46 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10602
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 January 2016 - 09:59 AM

View Postmurraytheworry, on 11 January 2016 - 08:13 AM, said:

Hi Allan and everyone who reads this forum. Surely enough is enough and we should all just get on with the cards we have been dealt. It serves no purpose other than to wind people up
and open yourself up for lible legal cases. Try the be thankful for what we have a live life to the fullness while we can


I do not understand your rationale.

The ACC acknowledge that I am injured by way of accident after a period of earnings and have submitted themselves to the authority of the review hearing decision requiring that they fund reconstructive surgery so as I might return to my preinjury occupation. After accusing me of working the ACC now acknowledge that they never had any information that was working at all which in effect form is no basis for the original decision to cancel my claim and prosecuted for fraud. So why then are you advocating that I should surrender?

The cards I have been dealt is that I am required to pay insurance premiums (ACC levies) with the expectation that in the event that an injury causes a physical incapacity to earn that the insurance would make good on their liability. I was injured so surely I have the legitimate expectation on the maintenance of 80% of my preinjury earnings which of course is the maximum payable under the ACC scheme.

You seem to be suggesting that it is okay for ACC to commit crimes against the citizens the legislation requires them to serve in order to commit insurance fraud. Why would you promote such horrendous crime. against the injured. Why is it that you would you consider such heinous people should be allowed to perpetrate such crimes and why would you promote surrendering against such monsters.

Is there any reason why you believe that those committing crimes, including those who collude with the principle perpetrators, not be punished in accordance with the crimes act when actively engaging in the defamation of character design for the purposes of discouraging me from obtaining my insurance claims?

In the event that I should surrender as you suggest and as the State has created this compulsory insurance scheme of which the State has then attacked me so as to discourage me from acquiring my insurance is there any reason that you could imagine why I would not qualify for refugee status?
1

#47 User is offline   REX 

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

Posted 11 January 2016 - 07:20 PM

View Postmurraytheworry, on 11 January 2016 - 08:13 AM, said:

Hi Allan and everyone who reads this forum. Surely enough is enough and we should all just get on with the cards we have been dealt. It serves no purpose other than to wind people up
and open yourself up for lible legal cases. Try the be thankful for what we have a live life to the fullness while we can


We are getting on with what we were dealt with.
Yes you will see that accusations from members go around and around because they can't show support/justify their statements they post like;

View Postgreg, on 06 January 2016 - 07:28 PM, said:

Your problem is your actions have proved these 'now claimed injury' never existed as you were working/creating an income without ACC approved knowledge.


The acc has never been able to show evidence of any actual job, (just a job title that has never been proved to derived an income to abate),
The acc has not shown evidence of any payment for a job title as an income (just accusations/slander which the judge sided with )

The acc judges are paid by the acc which is the way legislation is written for the system to play and we are supposed to believe the Acc are "working in good faith", Until we get an independent review and court process, doctors, specialists, we will have decisions that take away our entitlement by the acc and SOMEHOW slip though, which to me proves the judges have an agenda caused by the acc systems conflicts of interest.
1

#48 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10602
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 January 2016 - 09:17 PM

View PostREX, on 11 January 2016 - 07:20 PM, said:

We are getting on with what we were dealt with.
Yes you will see that accusations from members go around and around because they can't justify their statements they post like;



The acc has never been able to show evidence of any actual job, (just a job title that has never been proved to derived an income to abeit),
The acc has not shown evidence of any payment for a job title as an income (just accusations/slander which the judge sided with )

The acc judges are paid by the acc which is the way legislation is written for the system to play and we are supposed to believe the Acc are "working in good faith", Until we get an independent review and court process, doctors, specialists, we will have decisions that take away our entitlement by the acc SOMEHOW slip it though, which to me proves the judges have an agender caused by the acc systems conflicts of interest.


Rex the ACC initially accused me of being an immigration consultant while also managing and immigration consultancy. They asked the reviewer to adjourn which he did bbecause the ACC had no information to support the allegatio. The reviewer adjourned but did not reconvene with the decision not to disturb the ACC's decision without any form of review hearing to address any work of any sort. There was no review hearing. Over the years the ACC acknowledged that they had no information to describe anything remotely connected to immigration consultancy which is particularly interesting since that the ACC shared the same floor of the same building as New Zealand immigration services who would have all information from every single immigration consultant in the country. This is an occupation you simply cannot be engaged in without leaving evidence with immigration services.

10 years later I managed to get a court order requiring the ACC to disclose the individual work task activities alleged at the material time of which the ACC fail to comply with that order. As there was no information to describe a single work task activity the judge decided to instead make a new decision for the ACC based on whether or not the judge thought that I was incapacitated or not by way of the medical evidence. As I had completely maintained the absolute position that I was injured and had not worked with people like Douglas wheel accusing me of playing to blow out the ACC the judge decided that I must be some kind of crazed liar and therefore must have falsified my injuries to the medical profession despite the ACC's own funded reports confirming my injuries were absolute and that I could not returned my preinjury occupation. Of course the ACC did not argue with the judge as the ACC stood to financially benefit from the judges ridiculous mistake when he put his own medical assumptions which were based upon his rather mystical powers over and above the men of science.

Rex in addition to the ACC claimant I was working they told the newspaper that I had an income of $1.3 million of which the ACC quite coldly and calculatedly lied about as they had obtained by way of search warrant all the companies commercial information, all financial information regarding myself and bank records of numerous others having nothing to do with me except for the fact that ACC assumed that they must have had something to do with me. In other words the ACC invaded numerous other citizens privacy fishing for information that simply did not exist.

There was not only no job title but there was no work task activity for me to have ever reported to the ACC. All of the search warrants confirmed this to be a fact.

This is a classical case whereby the judge totally disregarded the information put before him and instead inventors own information by way of his imagination and extraordinary mystical powers of lie detection which you put above the entire medical professions integrity and expertise.

if this has happened to me, how many others as it also happened to but how many is yet to happen to. as the ACC staff are either threatened with murder or actually murdered how was it happens that they accused me of planning mass murder of ACC staff that did not even have any relationship with me. I am perfectly well aware of each and every individual employed by the ACC who have either deliberately lied or simply failed to do the job properly. The law provides proper mechanisms to punish these individuals in a manner that will remove these individuals from society in order to keep society safe.
2

#49 User is offline   REX 

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

Posted 11 January 2016 - 09:30 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 11 January 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

Rex the ACC initially accused me of being an immigration consultant while also managing and immigration consultancy. They asked the reviewer to adjourn which he did bbecause the ACC had no information to support the allegatio. The reviewer adjourned but did not reconvene with the decision not to disturb the ACC's decision without any form of review hearing to address any work of any sort. There was no review hearing. Over the years the ACC acknowledged that they had no information to describe anything remotely connected to immigration consultancy which is particularly interesting since that the ACC shared the same floor of the same building as New Zealand immigration services who would have all information from every single immigration consultant in the country. This is an occupation you simply cannot be engaged in without leaving evidence with immigration services.

10 years later I managed to get a court order requiring the ACC to disclose the individual work task activities alleged at the material time of which the ACC fail to comply with that order. As there was no information to describe a single work task activity the judge decided to instead make a new decision for the ACC based on whether or not the judge thought that I was incapacitated or not by way of the medical evidence. As I had completely maintained the absolute position that I was injured and had not worked with people like Douglas wheel accusing me of playing to blow out the ACC the judge decided that I must be some kind of crazed liar and therefore must have falsified my injuries to the medical profession despite the ACC's own funded reports confirming my injuries were absolute and that I could not returned my preinjury occupation. Of course the ACC did not argue with the judge as the ACC stood to financially benefit from the judges ridiculous mistake when he put his own medical assumptions which were based upon his rather mystical powers over and above the men of science.

Rex in addition to the ACC claimant I was working they told the newspaper that I had an income of $1.3 million of which the ACC quite coldly and calculatedly lied about as they had obtained by way of search warrant all the companies commercial information, all financial information regarding myself and bank records of numerous others having nothing to do with me except for the fact that ACC assumed that they must have had something to do with me. In other words the ACC invaded numerous other citizens privacy fishing for information that simply did not exist.

There was not only no job title but there was no work task activity for me to have ever reported to the ACC. All of the search warrants confirmed this to be a fact.

This is a classical case whereby the judge totally disregarded the information put before him and instead inventors own information by way of his imagination and extraordinary mystical powers of lie detection which you put above the entire medical professions integrity and expertise.

if this has happened to me, how many others as it also happened to but how many is yet to happen to. as the ACC staff are either threatened with murder or actually murdered how was it happens that they accused me of planning mass murder of ACC staff that did not even have any relationship with me. I am perfectly well aware of each and every individual employed by the ACC who have either deliberately lied or simply failed to do the job properly. The law provides proper mechanisms to punish these individuals in a manner that will remove these individuals from society in order to keep society safe.


View PostAlan Thomas, on 11 January 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:


There was not only no job title but there was no work task activity for me to have ever reported to the ACC. All of the search warrants confirmed this to be a fact.


Ok sorry I think I was led to believe you had a position as a director (?) (even though you didn't take an income from that business)

I run a business/Ltd company as the only director but more than just me as a shareholder, and the money/income I draw as personal drawings is my paid income, the business pays its own taxes and is its own entity.
The position of being a director becomes paid employment of the company by drawing an income.
I see it as any director of a ltd company can remain in that directorship position when rehabilitating and not drawing unabated income from that company.
I think it comes down to the continual activity that one puts into keeping the business operating.
If the business has other employees that can take up the slack or it is set up without tending to, then the position of director is dormant but suppose it remains as an investment.
1

#50 User is offline   Rosey 

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

Posted 12 March 2016 - 09:49 PM

This tale gets more and more strange as Mr Thomas persists. How does any body believe him?

View Postanonymousey, on 02 January 2016 - 01:15 PM, said:

Sorry I am not sure how the costs are worked out Darrell but I am guessing the monetary quantum of the repayment which Alan has to make is much more than any alleged reimbursement figures for taxi and homehelp sadly

I am also not certain how there was any public interest or help to claimants involved here Darrell - but this is mainly because I believe these types of entitlements and many more are already accessible to claimants once they follow proper procedures basically eg provide verification & receipts etc

Unfortunately I do realise there are many barriers & struggles for claimants when seeking justice ...so it saddens me when I see some cases like this clogging up the courtrooms etc I also do not see any financial costs as being a meaningful deterrent to any bankrupt [qv Alans history ] so it will be other claimants who may have to face this problem or risk more often now Now too after seeing this case reported & the fact that it appears the operation was funded by the taxpayer this also reminds me that many felons it seems will gain access to services that are often being denied to more needy people &or their victims unfortunately ie I actually thought the 2012 surgery was performed in private hospitals and funded by some foreign benefactor etc

2

#51 User is offline   REX 

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

Posted 13 March 2016 - 09:57 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 13 March 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

I think being a dormant director with an insolvent company was possibly some of Alans difficulty with ACC ...but not sure which were before his yachting misadventures etc

Also you are saying here that you are rehabilitated Rex... but Alan is usually saying the complete opposite ie he is not rehabilitated etc





Where does it say I am rehabilitated troll ?
The acc are not in control of all rehab for people injured..
I live with my injries and will be rehabilitating for life.
I simply don''t let what happened in my accident stop me from progressing my life.
1

#52 User is offline   REX 

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

Posted 13 March 2016 - 10:34 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 13 March 2016 - 10:17 PM, said:

okeydokey Rex ... I am using different definition and proividing feedback on your comments about running a business with personal drawings perhaps?

I am reading your comments as related to your company as being established pre injury and your directorship continued on post injury etc Even your comment about having shareholders would be a positive for many ACC claimants imho

So my posting was in regards to company roles and income ... & in the past fyi I have previously commented that I consider all injured claimants will be likely rehabilitating their injury for life ie its likely impossible to turn clock back and be a pristine 100% teacup once again etc

Can you explain your comment further as to when drawing unabated or abated income from that company? I refer to companies operating both before and after injury in case there is different responsibilities with ACC matters etc

qv "I see it as any director of a ltd company can remain in that directorship position when rehabilitating and not drawing unabated income from that company."

You also mentioned an issue of a director investment - but I saw this concept more as a role or job description & that it may not apply if it was linked to an insolvent company or bankrupt?

qv "..position of director is dormant but suppose it remains as an investment."



None of what I posted was refering to me as I was talking about what I assumed was Alan thomas' situation.

Can't you read or does your troll intent to disrupt help in your stretching whats in text..Posted Image

What I stated doesn't reveal my business incorperation period :wacko:/>
1

#53 User is offline   REX 

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

Posted 13 March 2016 - 11:08 PM

View PostAlans stalker TROLL, on 13 March 2016 - 10:57 PM, said:


1

#54 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10602
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 14 March 2016 - 02:16 PM

"...reckless behaviour with undertaking dangerous sporting activity whilst waiting hernia surgery..."

What reckless behaviour?
2

#55 User is offline   REX 

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

Posted 14 March 2016 - 08:14 PM

Don't go outside as that would be reckless..:rolleyes:/>
1

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