ACCforum: Deemed your injuries - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 10 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Deemed your injuries revoke cover on the claim for these injuries

#41 User is offline   INTER 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: 19-August 14

Posted 20 May 2017 - 10:12 AM

And another week go's by, with out an answer :

had 2x will get back to you later on today, and oh no they didn't.

There reply with in a timely manner is starting to Stretch out into another we don't give a shyte :
0

#42 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 20 May 2017 - 11:08 AM

View PostINTER, on 20 May 2017 - 10:12 AM, said:

And another week go's by, with out an answer :

had 2x will get back to you later on today, and oh no they didn't.

There reply with in a timely manner is starting to Stretch out into another we don't give a shyte :


That is how ACC work INTER.

They not only use dodgy doctors, dodgy lawyers and dodgy resolution processes but they will try to beat you through "starvation" on many counts.

That is how they have amassed $30 billion in 'profits' over the years.

The biggest WHITE COLLAR robbery this country has ever seen.
0

#43 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 24 May 2017 - 01:30 PM

View PostINTER, on 03 May 2017 - 05:51 PM, said:

as we are passed the 21 days, We have deemed your injuries as covered.

BUT
this still needs to be investigated and so I have passed on your medical notes and the additional diagnosis requests to our Branch medical advisor to comment on whether we add cover permanently to this claim. If he agrees then yes we can look at what your entitlements would be....Home support, transport support etc. Or if he says that no it should not be added to your claim then we will have to revoke cover on the claim for these two injuries CORRECT OR NOT ??????


I have a question for INTER please.

What progress have you made with ACC since coming onto this site?
0

#44 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 24 May 2017 - 02:06 PM

View PostINTER, on 03 May 2017 - 07:41 PM, said:

Cover is granted. Correct , its the But part that has me worried :: as i was under the impression when you have cover granted by deemed :

I thought It meant I win acc lose this time . no interference to be brought into the acquisition


The other thing that INTER should be well aware of is that sometimes ACC BRANCH MEDICAL ADVISORS go on to work in the socalled "private sector" but are like wolves dressed up in sheeps clothing by offering their assessment services back to ACC and their agents at lucrative rates designed to cheat legitimate injury victims out of their due entitlements.

In other words, beware.
0

#45 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 24 May 2017 - 03:56 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 24 May 2017 - 02:06 PM, said:

The other thing that INTER should be well aware of is that sometimes ACC BRANCH MEDICAL ADVISORS go on to work in the socalled "private sector" but are like wolves dressed up in sheeps clothing by offering their assessment services back to ACC and their agents at lucrative rates designed to cheat legitimate injury victims out of their due entitlements.

In other words, beware.


In my case, the dodgy ASSESSOR I was sent to by an ACC accredited agent tried to tell me he was independent of ACC [I therefore allowed him to proceed] to then find out afterwards that the little rat was lying and that he had previously worked as a BRANCH MEDICAL ADVISOR for ACC.

That's how crooked the system is.
0

#46 User is offline   Battleaxe 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8096
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 24 May 2017 - 04:10 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 24 May 2017 - 03:56 PM, said:

In my case, the dodgy ASSESSOR I was sent to by an ACC accredited agent tried to tell me he was independent of ACC [I therefore allowed him to proceed] to then find out afterwards that the little rat was lying and that he had previously worked as a BRANCH MEDICAL ADVISOR for ACC.

That's how crooked the system is.



Its the same line that most of them offer up at assessments. And it is the case in many instances that these people drift around like a bad smell from organisation to organisation affiliated in one way or another with the ACC, e.g. Fairway reviewers who previously worked for the ACC, Fairway reviewers who previously worked for the Privacy Commissioner, and - as you have pointed out He who Pays the Piper - those who have worked for the ACC in a capacity of BMA, and who have obviously seen the inflated payments made to "accredited agents", and who then decide to strike out on their own and set up dodgy assessment businesses so they can get in on the action too. All of the aforementioned - in my honest and genuine opinion - could not possibly be considered "independent" of influence from that person's prior close working relationship with the ACC, its executive, management and staff.
0

#47 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1965
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 24 May 2017 - 05:36 PM

good to see the forum has not had closure ,. as in all is well as in whom as posters has a tale or woe to post
0

#48 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 25 May 2017 - 08:20 AM

View PostBattleaxe, on 24 May 2017 - 04:10 PM, said:


Its the same line that most of them offer up at assessments. And it is the case in many instances that these people drift around like a bad smell from organisation to organisation affiliated in one way or another with the ACC, e.g. Fairway reviewers who previously worked for the ACC, Fairway reviewers who previously worked for the Privacy Commissioner, and - as you have pointed out He who Pays the Piper - those who have worked for the ACC in a capacity of BMA, and who have obviously seen the inflated payments made to "accredited agents", and who then decide to strike out on their own and set up dodgy assessment businesses so they can get in on the action too. All of the aforementioned - in my honest and genuine opinion - could not possibly be considered "independent" of influence from that person's prior close working relationship with the ACC, its executive, management and staff.


Indeed.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST within the ACC claiming structure are criminal at best.

The influence of ACC's cheque book over many medical professionals almost defies belief.

For many doctors and assessors, their future livelihood depends on the mood of ACC.

A true example of .. HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER.

Where there's money you will often find corruption.
0

#49 User is offline   Battleaxe 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8096
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 25 May 2017 - 11:22 AM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 25 May 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

Indeed.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST within the ACC claiming structure are criminal at best.

The influence of ACC's cheque book over many medical professionals almost defies belief.

For many doctors and assessors, their future livelihood depends on the mood of ACC.

A true example of .. HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER.

Where there's money you will often find corruption.





Just reading some of the many comments at the ACC story published earlier this week - http://www.stuff.co....-research-finds - confirms what you and I have been saying at this forum insofar as there are very serious problems within this organisation, and to the extent that public confidence in the ACC system as a whole - including the review process - is extremely low.
0

#50 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10802
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 25 May 2017 - 12:14 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 25 May 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

Indeed.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST within the ACC claiming structure are criminal at best.

The influence of ACC's cheque book over many medical professionals almost defies belief.

For many doctors and assessors, their future livelihood depends on the mood of ACC.

A true example of .. HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER.

Where there's money you will often find corruption.


It seems that you don't understand the true nature of the problem.

Although ACC do have a very large cheque-book that does not mean that the medical professionals dealing with the ACC received more than they otherwise might in a real world situation.

The problem is that we are not living in a real world situation where there are market forces involved but rather we are living with a monopoly situation whereby the currency is not money but rather power. A medical professional that you arrives the majority of their income from that monopoly will find that their income in fact over the long term will progressively go down suffered by the fact that there is no other customer. That monopoly then boasts that it is able to secure medical treatment for example cheaper than other countries. This is true.

So here we have a situation where the medical professional progressively earns less and less while succumbing to more and more control by the monopoly.. The result is that the very best medical professionals go overseas and are replaced with imported medical professionals who have not been able to succeed in their own country.

The only situations whereby a monopoly exists in these circumstances is in Communist countries. Without exception all Communist countries have failed. Such monopolies do not exist in the real world.

The solution is to remove the monopoly entirely. This is achieved by privatising the whole process of medical treatment and other associated accident recovery support systems.
0

#51 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 25 May 2017 - 01:30 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 25 May 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

Indeed.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST within the ACC claiming structure are criminal at best.

The influence of ACC's cheque book over many medical professionals almost defies belief.

For many doctors and assessors, their future livelihood depends on the mood of ACC.

A true example of .. HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER.

Where there's money you will often find corruption.


Even worse that the MEDICAL COUNCIL turns a blind eye to these crooked doctors that they license every year, and as for the HEALTH & DISABILITY COMMISSIONER who is suppose to be the watch dog, well that has to be the laugh of the century.

A waste of taxpayers money.
0

#52 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 25 May 2017 - 01:31 PM

View PostBattleaxe, on 25 May 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:


Just reading some of the many comments at the ACC story published earlier this week - http://www.stuff.co....-research-finds - confirms what you and I have been saying at this forum insofar as there are very serious problems within this organisation, and to the extent that public confidence in the ACC system as a whole - including the review process - is extremely low.


More importantly, 35% of our population [was 39% last year] know that ACC is dodgy.

They have no confidence in them.
0

#53 User is offline   Battleaxe 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8096
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 25 May 2017 - 01:45 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 25 May 2017 - 01:31 PM, said:

More importantly, 35% of our population [was 39% last year] know that ACC is dodgy.

They have no confidence in them.


In all honesty He who Pays the Piper, the only person I have ever come across in N.Z. who has not had negative things to say about the ACC, is an ACC "toady" specialist in Rotorua. My beauty therapist, hairdresser, nurses at our local hospital, doctors, specialists, past colleagues, past and current neighbours, etc. have all expressed their dissatisfaction at how the ACC behaves, and, it seems that everyone has their own story or knows of at least one family member, friend, neighbour, etc. who have had claims and entitlements declined for unfair and illegitimate reasons.


I strongly advocate the right to choose whether I want to 'opt out' of the ACC scheme or not, and to not pay any levies towards it as a consequence, with me instead having those funds directed by me to a private health insurer, or, being prepared to settle for public health system care. The fact that New Zealanders are given no choice but to give up their right to sue in exchange for what is clearly a less than acceptable level of service, is also ludicrous in my honest and genuine opinion, and especially knowing that this is a 1st world, democratic - not communist - country.
0

#54 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 25 May 2017 - 04:03 PM

View PostINTER, on 04 May 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

To avoid any confusion regarding my Question's

Acc legislative time frame of 21 days for making a cover decision were Exceeded

and as a result acc have Provided Cover for your updated acc18's.

BUT will continue to investigate your claim. now we have Received your recent medical notes , we will send them to OUR medical Advisor for Comment.

TO SEE if cover is COVER is confirmed - Or to Revoke cover.


Any update from INTEL yet?
0

#55 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5633
  • Joined: 20-June 16

Posted 26 May 2017 - 07:27 AM

Could you please refrain from such language GREG.

You otherwise present yourself as a nutter.
0

#56 User is offline   INTER 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: 19-August 14

Posted 26 May 2017 - 06:58 PM

Guess What another week gone bye, and no Reply.

good news is by ignoring the situation _ Dam 21 days have passed : s

so will have to wait and see if shyte hits there fan n Monday :

seen i politely pointed out HEY u stuffed up again : 21+ days to late today :.
0

#57 User is offline   Huggy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1219
  • Joined: 18-October 05

Posted 26 May 2017 - 07:06 PM

Hi Inter, not quite sure what you are referring to, but I take it ACC have not issued a decision within the legal time frame requirement. Please correct me if I am wrong.
0

#58 User is offline   INTER 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: 19-August 14

Posted 26 May 2017 - 07:22 PM

View PostHuggy, on 26 May 2017 - 07:06 PM, said:

Hi Inter, not quite sure what you are referring to, but I take it ACC have not issued a decision within the legal time frame requirement. Please correct me if I am wrong.


Correct :
0

#59 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10802
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 26 May 2017 - 07:30 PM

View PostINTER, on 03 May 2017 - 05:51 PM, said:

as we are passed the 21 days, We have deemed your injuries as covered.

BUT
this still needs to be investigated and so I have passed on your medical notes and the additional diagnosis requests to our Branch medical advisor to comment on whether we add cover permanently to this claim. If he agrees then yes we can look at what your entitlements would be....Home support, transport support etc. Or if he says that no it should not be added to your claim then we will have to revoke cover on the claim for these two injuries CORRECT OR NOT ??????


The above posting was posted
Posted 03 May 2017 - 06:51 PM

Since then of course another 21 days has passed without the ACC addressing the matter thus opening the door for progress in this matter on through the judiciary. When ACC receive a challenge as in this case it is quite common that they simply ignore the claimant and pursue the matter in the manner they most like thus creating a litigious situation whereby the ACC are fully aware that they have a better than 70% chance of maintaining the status quo at review hearing and another 70% of that outcomethrough the district court to be in favour. It is certainly profitable for the ACC to simply ignore tthe claimant And legislation.

0

#60 User is offline   Huggy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1219
  • Joined: 18-October 05

Posted 26 May 2017 - 07:55 PM

But depending on what it is, like i had done in the past i lodged a review application on acc failing to issue a decision in a timely manner and that got them moving along a bit quicker. It costs ACC money when you lodge a review application if that application is required to be sent onto Fairway so quite often, ACC will issue their decision whether positive or negative quickly to save the matter from having to be referred to Fairway
0

Share this topic:


  • 10 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 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