ACCforum: ACC REFORM ??? - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

ACC REFORM ??? NZ FIRST recognise serious problems with ACC

#1 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

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

Posted 11 May 2017 - 12:06 PM

For those of us who have had an horrific experience dealing with ACC and/or their AEP accredited employers and accredited agents, the question remains as to what a political party with the power can do to somehow re-establish ACC as a credible PUBLIC INJURY INSURANCE scheme that it was originally set up to be.

We now know that prior GOVERNMENTS have in effect scammed or skimmed $33 billion in funding away from the PUBLIC insurance pool which is invested in their ownership and paid by you & me, those who work, of course.

We also know that the CORPORATION has a very incestuous relationship with FAIRWAY RESOLUTIONS through the once secreted SERVICE AGREEMENT which now exposes the fact that FAIRWAY reviewers are under extreme pressure to find in favour of ACC which is highly illegal and contrary to legislation [its intent] and to many other HUMAN statutes.

In other words, it's a "jack-up".

We also know that ACC have heavily invested in immigrant doctors to make assessments that are quite literally dishonest and seriously dangerous to anyone who was to rely on them. These doctors are earning massive incomes from ACC to file such corrupted documents that might reduce ACC's exposure to legitimate claims.

Again, another rort.

We won't need to comment on lawyers who often represent ACC other than to say in my case they with-held critical evidence which made them out to be the skunks that many lawyers are.

As for the COURTS, I find it deplorable that JUDGES chosen to do the "road show" cases have a history fairly showing them to be apologists for ACC and the way they do their business, speaking from first hand experience here.

I was even horrified to find that perfectly legitimate claimants [one being a friend of mine] have been transferred to ACC's "remotes unit" because ACC or their agents had tried that many dodgy tricks on him that they couldn't even face up to him anymore, that's how weak they are.

But to treat someone like that and to make false allegations against them fairly shows that ACC have the ability to play bully-boy tactics which, from my own experiences, has been very much part of their culture.

So how can WINSTON PETERS "reform" a GOVERNMENT owned CORPORATION like this when there are so many shocking aspects to the way it is run????????????
0

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7181
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 May 2017 - 05:16 PM

View PostBattleaxe, on 11 May 2017 - 05:09 PM, said:



Where did the workhouses go and why did they go I wonder when clearly there is a place for them still in society today.


How are workhouses relevant to those who cannot work?
0

#3 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6838
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 11 May 2017 - 09:10 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 11 May 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

And the other obvious element to reform is how can GOVERNMENT legislate to close loopholes in the present claim system where these ACC CAREER PROFESSIONALS known to us on here are sent back to work?

If say there were 2,000 of these "scab-bags", that is at least 2,000 legitimate claimants who might otherwise be denied cover each year, persons worthy of a claim.

So what can NZ FIRST do about them?


Tell me How would NZ First recognise these people? If they are not prepared to stand up for their rights no matter what, they are not likely to seek help from anyone. In other words they believe what ACC have told them.

They don't know any different, because they don't know the law.

Mini
0

#4 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

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

Posted 12 May 2017 - 11:55 AM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 11 May 2017 - 12:06 PM, said:

For those of us who have had an horrific experience dealing with ACC and/or their AEP accredited employers and accredited agents, the question remains as to what a political party with the power can do to somehow re-establish ACC as a credible PUBLIC INJURY INSURANCE scheme that it was originally set up to be.

We now know that prior GOVERNMENTS have in effect scammed or skimmed $33 billion in funding away from the PUBLIC insurance pool which is invested in their ownership and paid by you & me, those who work, of course.

We also know that the CORPORATION has a very incestuous relationship with FAIRWAY RESOLUTIONS through the once secreted SERVICE AGREEMENT which now exposes the fact that FAIRWAY reviewers are under extreme pressure to find in favour of ACC which is highly illegal and contrary to legislation [its intent] and to many other HUMAN statutes.

In other words, it's a "jack-up".

We also know that ACC have heavily invested in immigrant doctors to make assessments that are quite literally dishonest and seriously dangerous to anyone who was to rely on them. These doctors are earning massive incomes from ACC to file such corrupted documents that might reduce ACC's exposure to legitimate claims.

Again, another rort.

We won't need to comment on lawyers who often represent ACC other than to say in my case they with-held critical evidence which made them out to be the skunks that many lawyers are.

As for the COURTS, I find it deplorable that JUDGES chosen to do the "road show" cases have a history fairly showing them to be apologists for ACC and the way they do their business, speaking from first hand experience here.

I was even horrified to find that perfectly legitimate claimants [one being a friend of mine] have been transferred to ACC's "remotes unit" because ACC or their agents had tried that many dodgy tricks on him that they couldn't even face up to him anymore, that's how weak they are.

But to treat someone like that and to make false allegations against them fairly shows that ACC have the ability to play bully-boy tactics which, from my own experiences, has been very much part of their culture.

So how can WINSTON PETERS "reform" a GOVERNMENT owned CORPORATION like this when there are so many shocking aspects to the way it is run????????????


The problem being of course that the 8,000 plus victims of ACC each year who are cheated out of their entitlements often remain as "damaged goods" where rather than be operated on many must line up for SICKNESS BENEFITS and such like at an additional burden to this country.

In my case, if ACC and their agents had acted in GOOD FAITH [something that appears foreign to them], I could've probably returned to full work capacity within 8 or 9 months.

Instead, ACC, their dodgy AEP clients and equally dodgy agents have costed themselves considerably more in creating any number of delays that have not only been a drag on their resources, but also on mine.

Is that good for a supposed civilised country?

I think not.
0

#5 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1012
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 12 May 2017 - 06:03 PM

View PostHe who pays the piper, on 12 May 2017 - 01:41 PM, said:

In response to the suggestion of work-houses, it probably wouldn't be a bad idea for those who have become long term dependent on ACC where at least even on light duties those persons might be giving back something to society instead of sitting on these forums all day stalking those who 'are' more disposed to working for an honest living.

In saying that though, ACC must also be incentivised to "fix you up" in a reasonable period of time rather than following the usual line of trying to cheat up to 23% of injury claimants out of their due entitlements.

For starters, denying them surgery.


Why should ACC offer any support to claimants with pre-existing damage or conditions not related
to their claimed injury. ?.
0

#6 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

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

Posted 13 May 2017 - 01:10 PM

View Postgreg, on 12 May 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

Why should ACC offer any support to claimants with pre-existing damage or conditions not related
to their claimed injury. ?.


Pre-existing damage is still a liability to ACC.

If they didn't fix the injury properly in the first place, they should when it re-presents itself.

But instead they will get one of their dodgy immigrant doctors to concoct some story that it wasn't related.

That's how it works.
0

#7 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6838
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 May 2017 - 03:01 PM

Talking about immigrants.

I just been having lovely Mothers Days from my families overseas. I love mothers day. Getting to talk to all my lovelies.

Even my Grandkids tell me Happy mothers Day. I love you sloppy kisses and all that stuff.

Mini
0

#8 User is offline   He who pays the piper 

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

Posted 20 May 2017 - 08:45 AM

View PostBattleaxe, on 19 May 2017 - 10:19 PM, said:


Its not called a "Corporation" for nothing He who Pays the Piper.



The authors of the book "Essentials - Essays for the Minimalist" - Joshua Fields Millburn & Ryan Nicodemus - wrote;




I don’t think corporations are innately bad or evil. Corporations—large ones in particular—are inherently problematic, though, because their primary objective is, by definition, to make money.

There’s nothing wrong with bringing in revenue—I’m certainly not allergic to earning an income —but when it’s the central focus, which it has to be for a large corporation, then the wrong lines tend to get real blurry real quick as the bosses’ collective feet are held to the fire.

I’ve seen it too many times—an upstanding, respectable person ignoring his values, bending his ethics, and exhausting his moral gas tank just to aid the bottom line. (I know, because I did it myself in my corporate days of yesteryear: that’s why I left).

Bending one’s principles in the name of profit or capitalism is not celebrating the true nature of capitalism at all.

A small business or individual, however, can earn money while their main focus is on something more rewarding—be it creating, innovating, growing, or cultivating a passion. So, yes, I’m wary of corporations—but I’m heartily supportive of the people who work for them to feed their families."




As I've stated previously at this forum, the ACC and Fairway are employment schemes of sorts. Take them away and unemployment will soar in this country with its already relatively high unemployment rate. And people with human needs will pretty much do anything to earn an income, which is why, I honestly and genuinely believe, basically good people inside the ACC knowingly and intentionally make bad decisions every day. Simply put - and again I honestly and genuinely believe this to be the case - they likely know that they have a choice ... make the bad decision or find another job. (By the way, the abovementioned book is available from Amazon.com in case you're interested, or, maybe you can request it through your local library. A worthy read in my humble opinion).


Very well written.

ACC have profited 33 billion out of KIWI's over this last 42 years.

The biggest TRAIN ROBBERY in town.
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