ACCforum: ... - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

...

#1 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2354
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 08 May 2016 - 11:14 PM

.
0

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 31 July 2016 - 01:12 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 08 May 2016 - 11:14 PM, said:

The following extracts have been gleaned from variety of contemporary legal sources...

Whilst some material & precedents are still being developed within British caselaw - please remember that the environment may also include personal injury compensation claims and studies within the European Union and United Nations &or possibly correlate to Human Rights legislation and other facets which might be addressed by NZ courts etc

At the moment I am aware that costs are already being awarded against some members of this forum sadly. Unfortunately I have also found numerous difficulties holding meaningful dialogue on threads of mine which are chronically being hijacked by spurious issues or contradictory opinions &or deceitful manipulations but I will try my best to keep the thread updated appropriately etc However the lack of proper forum oversight means I could once again be banned and forbidden from reply because of these attacks endured from eejits! Any hostile strategy is likely being deliberately used because this specifically results in this thread being trolled and various other members also being abused or threatened sadly PLUS worse the entire thread ends being deleted from ALL viewings without notice or reason

Some of my concern or reason for starting this thread and bringing this information forward as best able is that I feel the official signals are already here downunder from the courts when managing any irrational behaviour which also tests the courts time & resources! I am referring mostly to those claims that have any risks of more adverse precedents being achieved by ACC with regards to any of the related features [dishonesty, exaggeration symptoms, malingering etc] when casemanagers are managing fraudsters and other chancers or bolshybags nowadays etc IMHO these behind the scenes developments which are also evolving for security of staff and public accountability ...could quickly also see nearly all claimants being significantly disadvantaged due to the few felons once again &or of course ACC levies raising &or rehabilitation supports for ACC claimants reducing etc



Next are some ILLUSTRATIONS OF DOCUMENTS being used by lawyers which I found FYI etc These contracts are being modified to ensure that claimants appreciate that costs can be awarded AGAINST them. Likewise aside from any criminal convictions which might be sought - there is also some online coverage of the fact that claimants might also face 'contempt of court' sanctions if found fundamentally dishonest with their litigation etc




NB this is the parallel system with ACC beneficiaries who may be on NZ benefits from WINZ while waiting for their claim to be accepted etc The way I am reading this is that the new law could mean in worse case scenarious that a dishonest injured person might possibly be expected to refund any compensation payments PLUS pay costs for ACC and themselves PLUS pay WINZ for any related expenses if their injury claim is struck out eg Disability Allowance PLUS of course potential risks of any criminal convictions for their dishonesty also remains


The ACC process described in legislation answers your question.
It is the medical professional that makes the claim, not the claimant. The claimant merely goes to a doctor and holds out their injured portion of the body for the doctor to examine and when the doctors finds that it has been broken by way of an accident event the doctor is required by law to lodge the claim. It is not more complicated than that.
In the event that someone has no injury but tells the doctor that they are injured it is still the doctor who makes a diagnosis, not the individual.

Likewise with the ACC is presented with a claim for cover by the doctor the ACC may only challenge that claim by way of independent superior medical assessment.

The ACC is merely an administrator of the independent qualified information being provided. The ACC has no business attempting to comprehend whether someone is injured or not
0

#3 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 August 2016 - 12:40 AM

It is impossible for a claim to be struck out when the exists an accident and injury, no matter what.
0

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 August 2016 - 01:24 AM

You are mixing up the pieces from different jigsaws again.
The ACC is totaly different to all other insurance. You need to restrict you self to NZ ACC law only on this point. ACC have already tried this on with me and lost. Look at Barnett by Bettie J
0

#5 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 August 2016 - 04:21 PM

The ACC have no business involving themselves with the latest medical technology. That job is that of the medical professional submitting the claim for cover and submitting applications for entitlements. The medical professionals in this country are the ones that carry out medical activities so as rehabilitation takes place. The ACCs only involvement with this aspect is to pay for those things the medical profession deems necessary. The medical professionals don't look at the UK as such for any leadership as they have their own leadership. They don't look to the UK for technology either but rather look at the whole world in as much as they have absolutely no bias as you clearly do. Have you ever thought of going back to the UK, I'm sure you would be much happier.

With regards to making submissions to court you seem to be under some misunderstanding in regards to what and how I make my submissions. Perhaps you don't know. When I present case law of course it is always New Zealand caselaw. When I want to expand a concept of justice of course I will go to the four corners of the globe and even quote historical concepts of justice to go back even thousands of years. The UK does not actually hold anything special. We have even lost our connection to the privy Council except cases like mine that are in a holding pattern which is probably no more than a handful of cases which we would describe as residual. Even then the privy Council would be interested in how New Zealand law works and would not be imposing UK law or understanding as there are some differences for very good reasons such as the unique character of the ACC legislation that flies in the face of UK judicial procedure and comprehension of the right to self-determination and justice. After all anyone injured and under the ACC scheme is by law a second class citizen which is an abomination to UK law.
1

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 August 2016 - 07:15 PM

Anon am I correct to understand that you are take it upon yourself to forewarn new members about myself with regards to points of view you do not agree with
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