ACCforum: Southern Cross v ACC - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Southern Cross v ACC

#21 User is offline   Huggy 

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

Posted 06 June 2017 - 04:22 PM

Good luck to you Magnacarte. Keep us in the loop if you can :-)
0

#22 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 06 June 2017 - 04:43 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 05 June 2017 - 01:14 PM, said:

Mini you are making false statements about me. There has never been a letter of any sort describing the engaging in any kind of work task activity especially for any earnings. You might be referring to a letter dated the very early stages around the time I was waiting for my first surgery of which the ACC were required to fund. It is perfectly acceptable to be making arrangements with former and existing customers for work to be carried out at a time when I expect to be recovered from my surgery. I don't know of any other letter that you could be referring to.. In any event my medical certificates described a limited capacity of two hours per day and it would be quite acceptable for me to be promoting that availability for profit in accordance with section 18 of the legislation that even makes it a requirement for me to make use of my residual capacity in this fashion. In fact two fail to utilise my residual capacity would be a form fraud and as such the nature of the thoughts that you are having based on the thoughts that others seem to have expressed are wrong in law. However the fact of the matter is no work took place and more importantly no earnings capacity was achieved and no earnings were generated.

No workerWorked alongside me as I did not work. However I did go to China with my girlfriend who also was an employee of the company, after my former girlfriend who was a partner and manager of the company. My girlfriend was working on who normal company duties while I was working on my rehabilitation plans in accordance with the case manager's requirements. The word work is not a word described in legislation and as such it has no authority in the way that you are attempting to portray it. Legislation focuses its attention on a capacity to earn and actual earnings. Working on a vocational rehabilitation plan may appear to be work in the eyes of the ACC and even in your eyes but not in the eyes of the legislator as to follow that line of reasoning would be a contradiction within the legislation. Even so I still have two hours capacity per day of which it would be quite acceptable for me to be utilising. If it turned out that I was in the opinion of the ACC working outside of the parameters of my rehabilitation plan well that would be entirely irrelevant anyway as the only rrelevancy is whether or not I have a capacity to return to the preinjury occupation. As the ACC presented no information describing a single work task activity of any sort it is impossible for me to address the empty accusation

. It appears to me that the ACC is making accusations by way of appearances and assumptions rather than matters of substance. This might be persuasive to those who have either no knowledge of the legislation or are not obedient to the legislation.

The ACC seized all financial records from many different sources as a result of obtaining 12 or more search warrants. With all of the information that they gathered they did not find any earnings of any sort so how on earth are you are accusing me of not declaring earnings.. The ACC have never accuse me of not declaring earnings so why would you? Are you perhaps being influenced by the ACC and are extrapolating their argument even further than they dear. I notice that the ACC media release claimed $1.3 million income out of thin air. Are you falling victim to an ACC media release perhaps?

With regards to informing ACC of my working activities in order to promote my rehabilitation, ACC were fully informed. They received a significant number of letters,, reports and 4 business plans. The ACC even complained that have provided them with too much such information. What the ACC did do is ask various people whether or not they thought I was working. Of course there would have been people who have the opportunity to see me doing something but they did not know what I was doing even though I was working on ACC business plans and suchlike. After all what I was doing was absolutely none of their business. Do you think the ACC might have asked people who don't know in the hope that they would get information more to their liking rather than rely upon the expertise of the entire medical profession who were screaming blue murder that I was not receiving the ACC funding for the much needed surgery?

Mini what I cannot understand is how anybody with an astute mind could possibly succumb to ACC propaganda and manipulation. Why is it that some join that particular bandwagon? Is it because they are confused and think they are boarding the gravy train and don't want to upset the apple cart? (Sorry to mix metaphors but I could not resist)


Mini you are not telling the truth but rather simply repeating the lie is that the ACC have told. I remind you that the ACC have acknowledged in court via their legal counsel that they have never had any information describing a single work task activity in the material time. Further the ACC breached a court order to make such disclosure. So Mini why are you making such great efforts to perpetuate the ACC Lie? As the ACC's foundation to their cancellation of claim and fraud Conviction was achieved based on the claim of information and now that they have confessed that they never had such information it can only mean that there cancellation and conviction was achieved based on a lie. So mini why are you accusing me of lying when the ACC have confessed to the lie that they have told? Why would you give support to such monstrous behaviour that causes so much destruction and people's lives. Don't forget that I am not the only one but there are very significant numbers that are in their hundreds per year suffering from the same technique used by the ACC.


Why are you not being supportive of those who have fallen victim to such lies.. Remember I am not the only one and although others have come onto the site seeking help they have not got it from you. Perhaps they have been scared away by your attacks.


Thomas

Put you case decision criminal action of using documents for a pecuniary advantage. ( I am unsure of the actual charge they made against you, so forgive me if I am not 100% correct) I just know the documents given for you to stay on erc were at the centre of the charge.

This is not a court so of course I am not expected to get every thing one hundred percent correct.

Anyhow the charge is not what we are discussing. What we are discussing is if ACC had evidence with which to convict you, as the Judge found in his decision.

I will show you the relevant statement and documents that showed the Judge you were a liar. ACC had that documentation and in that documentation was a letter that showed you had received money for a business proposition.

Please don't look on this as if my words are correct, when the meaning is clear. I am not your age and never will be again. As you get older you may too have the problems I have with finding the right words and even how to spell them. Thank god it is not there all the time, but it is a nuisance as I know it and I can see it, but my point is correct, and that is all you should take not of. As an injured person with PTSD or whatever and having been through the rough time that you have you of all people should understand what I am trying to say.

So pop the case up here and I will show you what I am talking about. ACC did have documentation that proved you were lying and could not be trusted to tell the truth. The evidence supplied proved this. I would not say this to hurt you, but you have asked for help many a time and I would like you to see what the Judge saw, and was part of the reason he made his decision the way he did.

Mini
0

#23 User is offline   Huggy 

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

Posted 06 June 2017 - 04:50 PM

Alan no disrespect, but this is going off topic. I for one want to see this forum ticking along again to help where we can but at a least please do this in a topic you either create for this, or in topic you may already have. We all need to work together to keep things running smoothly.

Mini also no disrespect intended and I agree you want to help or at least get an understanding of matters.

You are both valuable contributors so lets see if we can all get the forum back on track to do what it can do to be able to help and get an understanding of matters.

Clearly admin has come in and started the process to get things back on track and i am sure we can all work to assist with the process.

Too many valuable topics and information was lost in the last 6 months and now its coming back to life hopefully.
0

#24 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 06 June 2017 - 04:52 PM

View Postmagnacarta, on 06 June 2017 - 03:49 PM, said:

Lupine thanks for your kind wishes - The formal investigation towards the HRT started this morning.


We trust that you will keep us all informed so we will may learn from the way in which you are approaching the situation.
1

#25 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 06 June 2017 - 04:56 PM

View PostMINI, on 06 June 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

Thomas

Put you case decision criminal action of using documents for a pecuniary advantage. ( I am unsure of the actual charge they made against you, so forgive me if I am not 100% correct) I just know the documents given for you to stay on erc were at the centre of the charge.

This is not a court so of course I am not expected to get every thing one hundred percent correct.

Anyhow the charge is not what we are discussing. What we are discussing is if ACC had evidence with which to convict you, as the Judge found in his decision.

I will show you the relevant statement and documents that showed the Judge you were a liar. ACC had that documentation and in that documentation was a letter that showed you had received money for a business proposition.

Please don't look on this as if my words are correct, when the meaning is clear. I am not your age and never will be again. As you get older you may too have the problems I have with finding the right words and even how to spell them. Thank god it is not there all the time, but it is a nuisance as I know it and I can see it, but my point is correct, and that is all you should take not of. As an injured person with PTSD or whatever and having been through the rough time that you have you of all people should understand what I am trying to say.

So pop the case up here and I will show you what I am talking about. ACC did have documentation that proved you were lying and could not be trusted to tell the truth. The evidence supplied proved this. I would not say this to hurt you, but you have asked for help many a time and I would like you to see what the Judge saw, and was part of the reason he made his decision the way he did.

Mini


Mini neither your words nor feelings about the whole case have any relevance to what actually happened.
In summary the ACC claim to possess information that I was working and have since confessed that they never had any information. In the meantime the ACC were able to secure a criminal fraud conviction on the basis that they had information of which now they acknowledge than did not have. The district court directed the ACC to disclose the information they claimed to have but the ACC did not so the judge acknowledged the absence of information and instead made an entirely different decision that was not based on any information that the ACC claim to possess. In other words the decision had absolutely no relationship whatsoever to the decision letter cancelling my claim and as such the decision was entirely defective.. Mini you need to get behind these types of cases and provide much-needed support rather than attacking everybody and anybody that you take a dislike to. tthis is not a competition but rather an environment where we are all seeking help and all doing what we can to help one another. It is not ever going to be allowed to descend to the level's of debauchery that it has been taken to in recent times.

Upwards and onwards.
0

#26 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 06 June 2017 - 05:03 PM

View PostHuggy, on 06 June 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

Alan no disrespect, but this is going off topic. I for one want to see this forum ticking along again to help where we can but at a least please do this in a topic you either create for this, or in topic you may already have. We all need to work together to keep things running smoothly.

Mini also no disrespect intended and I agree you want to help or at least get an understanding of matters.

You are both valuable contributors so lets see if we can all get the forum back on track to do what it can do to be able to help and get an understanding of matters.

Clearly admin has come in and started the process to get things back on track and i am sure we can all work to assist with the process.

Too many valuable topics and information was lost in the last 6 months and now its coming back to life hopefully.


Huggy my comments were in relation to the "stuff" article regarding how the ACC is disregarding the required processes and have become a wayward. The circumstances that were cited in the article run parallel to my own experiences and such cases it is appropriate that individual experiences supporting the content of the discussion are provided. wwhat you must do is follow admin by censoring those who use this site to attack one another as is the case with mini who has a period of time out for the bad behaviour from time to time.
What we are seeing here is a couple of people associated with one another that have made a direct attack based on their prejudiced thinking without regard to the facts of the matter. When I clarify the facts of the matter in relation to the article then they should be respecting that rather than making empty wild allegations that are based on any particular facts of any description of all. Should they have had actual fact it would have been a different story but even so they need to have their discussions in the right context rather than try to establish a different branch in regards to their pet peeves which seems to be me. Just because I am a variety of peoples whipping boy that does not make me a person that does not have full and complete entitlements to have full and complete discussion on the site regarding the threads as they pertain to my experiences.
When commenting on articles or postings in regards to a particular thread it is very useful for each of us to post our experiences in relation to that particular situation so as to clarify and even expand upon what is actually going on in the real world.
0

#27 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 07 June 2017 - 11:09 AM

View PostLupine, on 05 June 2017 - 05:47 PM, said:

I do not share the view that my description of past events would cause confusion. I do agree very much with your final paragraph.

What I would say is that there is not one way to deal with ACC, there is only the correct way and what is correct is purely dictated by circumstance. A claimant receiving extreme ACC process will have different requirements than other claimants.

To my mind activism is the political wing and advocacy the legal. There is a small handful of advocates who fight for claimants rights as well as advocate on claims. Pursuing a just outcome against a hostile Corporation is a fraught business.

What we need is a wide range of tools available to respond to the multiple issues we face. There is more than one way and we need to excel in all to compensate for the power imbalance.


This sounds OK to me. I see that the above post is re: fighting ACC. If the claimants and advocates on here can keep to that theme. I for one am happy with that. However, we must be able to nicely ask for necessary public documents when requested, to prove a point. This is where the discord started each time it has flared up. It is the inability of the poster to take the time to work out how their statement, are correct and therefore not defamatory. We must have a right to talk of cases being cited and newley published. To be done as a helpful contribution, not a stab in the back to the recipient.

This is my dream for the forum. I personally have a request, but I will start a new thread for it.

Mini
0

#28 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 07 June 2017 - 11:18 AM

View PostHuggy, on 06 June 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

Alan no disrespect, but this is going off topic. I for one want to see this forum ticking along again to help where we can but at a least please do this in a topic you either create for this, or in topic you may already have. We all need to work together to keep things running smoothly.

Mini also no disrespect intended and I agree you want to help or at least get an understanding of matters.

You are both valuable contributors so lets see if we can all get the forum back on track to do what it can do to be able to help and get an understanding of matters.

Clearly admin has come in and started the process to get things back on track and i am sure we can all work to assist with the process.

Too many valuable topics and information was lost in the last 6 months and now its coming back to life hopefully.


Huggy

Yes I am trying. But I do not think that I have gone outside the lines of trying to assist. I leave my struggle to get justice off this forum. It is going against all the principles of what this forum is set up for: that is to help the members. It is OK though I think I can do it from now on on my own, or maybe a little help off some off line.

I understand your worry that to many valuable topics and information were lost. I will do what I can to help the forum come back to life. Where are all the newbies??

I have nothing against you reminding me that we don't want to get into a mess again.

Cheers
Mini
0

#29 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 07 June 2017 - 11:35 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 06 June 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:

Huggy my comments were in relation to the "stuff" article regarding how the ACC is disregarding the required processes and have become a wayward. The circumstances that were cited in the article run parallel to my own experiences and such cases it is appropriate that individual experiences supporting the content of the discussion are provided. wwhat you must do is follow admin by censoring those who use this site to attack one another as is the case with mini who has a period of time out for the bad behaviour from time to time.
What we are seeing here is a couple of people associated with one another that have made a direct attack based on their prejudiced thinking without regard to the facts of the matter. When I clarify the facts of the matter in relation to the article then they should be respecting that rather than making empty wild allegations that are based on any particular facts of any description of all. Should they have had actual fact it would have been a different story but even so they need to have their discussions in the right context rather than try to establish a different branch in regards to their pet peeves which seems to be me. Just because I am a variety of peoples whipping boy that does not make me a person that does not have full and complete entitlements to have full and complete discussion on the site regarding the threads as they pertain to my experiences.

When commenting on articles or postings in regards to a particular thread it is very useful for each of us to post our experiences in relation to that particular situation so as to clarify and even expand upon what is actually going on in the real world.


Mr Thomas

You, you, you, You have your own thread for your own cases and thoughts that may relate to ongoing problems. These up to date items from advocates and persons who collect data for all, not only for themselves, should not be interrupted by you cases. Do you see mine up there. No I am going to build a new thread for them. Please read and help if you can.

PS And please do not regard me as being badly behaved, re: time out. You break my private existance in here by giving out information to all other readers by doing that and therefore breach my privacy.

This is not the way to make a new forum. You are overstepping your mark as an ordinary member of this thread. I am going to ask for your post to be taken off.

mini

Thank you Mini
0

#30 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 07 June 2017 - 11:50 AM

View PostMINI, on 07 June 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

Mr Thomas

You, you, you, You have your own thread for your own cases and thoughts that may relate to ongoing problems. These up to date items from advocates and persons who collect data for all, not only for themselves, should not be interrupted by you cases. Do you see mine up there. No I am going to build a new thread for them. Please read and help if you can.

PS And please do not regard me as being badly behaved, re: time out. You break my private existance in here by giving out information to all other readers by doing that and therefore breach my privacy.

This is not the way to make a new forum. You are overstepping your mark as an ordinary member of this thread. I am going to ask for your post to be taken off.

mini

Thank you Mini


To look at the problems of today we first must look at the history and how we got there.

Please stop making personal attacks but rather if you have any complaint case an individual address them privately in the personal message facility and if not satisfied with that report the matter to admin. I thought you would have learnt the lesson that you may not use this site to address personal matters..
0

#31 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1610
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 07 June 2017 - 12:57 PM

View PostMINI, on 07 June 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

This sounds OK to me. I see that the above post is re: fighting ACC. If the claimants and advocates on here can keep to that theme. I for one am happy with that. However, we must be able to nicely ask for necessary public documents when requested, to prove a point. This is where the discord started each time it has flared up. It is the inability of the poster to take the time to work out how their statement, are correct and therefore not defamatory. We must have a right to talk of cases being cited and newley published. To be done as a helpful contribution, not a stab in the back to the recipient.

This is my dream for the forum. I personally have a request, but I will start a new thread for it.

Mini


Hi Mini,

I hold the view that there are wider considerations at stake and I also hold the view that it is necessary that this Forum starts achieving its stated goals for the good of all claimants.

There are various personalities that come to this Forum and many of us do not get on at all. There has been a lot of history that has been a massive liability. The fact is that we simply must put our differences to one side and get on with the job.

I know that you and some others, who by the way I am proud to call my friends, have an ongoing dispute with Alan Thomas. I am not saying that peoples grievances are not valid. What I am saying is that as human beings we have the option to put aside our grievances to work for the greater good. Claimants out there are struggling and suffering and those people must be our foremost consideration.

It is fact and I believe Huggy will support me in this view, that Alan Thomas has the right to proclaim his innocence. It is up to each individual to decide whether they support Alan in that matter. It is also true that Alan is also providing some very useful analysis and his general message is actually fact. If newbies reading his writings conclude that ACC is not to be trusted then that serves the greater good.

Before the arrival of more recent issues this Forum was dominated by pro and anti Alan Thomas factions. Then there is another faction, the faction that actually does not give a rodent's back passage about the TBP etc.

We do not care. Really we do not care. The last thing we need is for this Forum to descend into another war over Alan Thomas' claim. It's counter productive, tedious, pointless and truth be known an embarrassment. How the Corporation must laugh and hold this Forum in contempt while people flail at each other like animals. New people coming here would simply turn around and leave and have done.

Everyone of us has to make a choice. Contribute in a constructive and helpful manner and focus on ACC or not. I support banning any Member who chooses option two. Enough is enough.
0

#32 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 07 June 2017 - 01:38 PM

View PostLupine, on 07 June 2017 - 12:57 PM, said:

Hi Mini,

I hold the view that there are wider considerations at stake and I also hold the view that it is necessary that this Forum starts achieving its stated goals for the good of all claimants.

There are various personalities that come to this Forum and many of us do not get on at all. There has been a lot of history that has been a massive liability. The fact is that we simply must put our differences to one side and get on with the job.

I know that you and some others, who by the way I am proud to call my friends, have an ongoing dispute with Alan Thomas. I am not saying that peoples grievances are not valid. What I am saying is that as human beings we have the option to put aside our grievances to work for the greater good. Claimants out there are struggling and suffering and those people must be our foremost consideration.

It is fact and I believe Huggy will support me in this view, that Alan Thomas has the right to proclaim his innocence. It is up to each individual to decide whether they support Alan in that matter. It is also true that Alan is also providing some very useful analysis and his general message is actually fact. If newbies reading his writings conclude that ACC is not to be trusted then that serves the greater good.

Before the arrival of more recent issues this Forum was dominated by pro and anti Alan Thomas factions. Then there is another faction, the faction that actually does not give a rodent's back passage about the TBP etc.

We do not care. Really we do not care. The last thing we need is for this Forum to descend into another war over Alan Thomas' claim. It's counter productive, tedious, pointless and truth be known an embarrassment. How the Corporation must laugh and hold this Forum in contempt while people flail at each other like animals. New people coming here would simply turn around and leave and have done.

Everyone of us has to make a choice. Contribute in a constructive and helpful manner and focus on ACC or not. I support banning any Member who chooses option two. Enough is enough.


Lupine

I will not go into any of the writing as above except to say that when one is obviously publicly had information as to where they have been, as in "being bad and timed out", when in actual fact it is nobodies business other than my own, I think the writer of such sensitive information , must themselves be banned and/ or and apology for personal harassment, (because that is what it is.) and the post be deleted.

ACC has been my focus for years, and you are aware of that I am sure. I have spent years on the problem of 'overtaxing' I call it because that is what I think it is . The fact that a very large group of us are in the same position as myself should be looked at as a group by the human rights commission. There are lots of things I have found wrong with the ACC and have used my working skills to dig deeply into the problems, to find all the relevant information that is obviously so out of wack to what this ACC system is all about that an ombudsman and a Chief Justice have been horrified at what is happening to us in the 'overtaxing case', let alone a lot of others. There are only two claimants who have the written evidence of the IRD Manager concerned with this issue, stating that they have an unwritten tri-departmental deal (Not the words used, but same meaning) with the ACC and WInz re the taxing of reimbursement to winz and backdating. so at long last we have the reasoning why it is done the way it is. This issue needs a simple push to become a subject of debut with the general election coming up.

have we anyone to do it. I am old, I am tired, I am totally sick of the lies and bickering that goes on here and the backstabbing of those still allow to post.

If we are going to have any triumps against ACC, I can see it is going to be in the ongoing support of the likes of Aclaim otago and ones that have made it known that they have the claimant back and are working to do more than advocate for them or steer them in the right direction etc. But then I expect those to work with us as well.

A Human rights Dr actually wrote a document which surrounded the case of the injuried people in the Christchurch earthquake. I asked the writer why this hadn't included the acc as these people injuried would all come under the ACC. OH very good we will send them one. it makes for good reading and should actually be included in any Reviews we are taking to the human right. My thinking being that if all the things she said are Ok for one group of persons ie chch earthquake victims..................why doesn't it cover the rest of us???? The document has been written so it should be used, yet I have never seen any one other than myself mention it.

Mini
0

#33 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 07 June 2017 - 01:50 PM

hello out there

Could someone please tell me what the HR Investigation is about.

Thanks

Mini
0

#34 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 08 June 2017 - 11:27 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 07 June 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

To look at the problems of today we first must look at the history and how we got there.

Please stop making personal attacks but rather if you have any complaint case an individual address them privately in the personal message facility and if not satisfied with that report the matter to admin. I thought you would have learnt the lesson that you may not use this site to address personal matters..


Thomas

"You may not use this site to address personal matters......"

But you are, is that what you are saying Mr Thomas?. At least what you look on as my personal matters.. are a lot less complicated than yours and can assist others get there lump sum or IA payments as determined. Or at least learn how to determine if the assessor is correct or not.

Obviously there are not many people who know how to do this, it is an interesting fact to note. But then someone may come along with the information needed to get the answer, that is all I am asking for. Hopefully, fingers crossed.

Not many claimant who come here are likely to be seen as criminals by the Judicuary. So perhaps my 'personal' matters, should not be regarded as such as they assist a lot of people who read them. They become impersonal, as not belonging only to me.

mini
0

#35 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 08 June 2017 - 11:37 AM

View PostMINI, on 08 June 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

Thomas

"You may not use this site to address personal matters......"

But you are, is that what you are saying Mr Thomas?. At least what you look on as my personal matters.. are a lot less complicated than yours and can assist others get there lump sum or IA payments as determined. Or at least learn how to determine if the assessor is correct or not.

Obviously there are not many people who know how to do this, it is an interesting fact to note. But then someone may come along with the information needed to get the answer, that is all I am asking for. Hopefully, fingers crossed.

Not many claimant who come here are likely to be seen as criminals by the Judicuary. So perhaps my 'personal' matters, should not be regarded as such as they assist a lot of people who read them. They become impersonal, as not belonging only to me.

mini


Mini I do not deal with my personal problems on this site as some others are prone to do.
Primarily my postings relate to helping others with the ACC matters
I also seek help regarding my own difficulties with the ACC.

Sadly a number of members have made personal attacks against me and with regards to the ACC issues I make response.
You will have noticed that quite a number of members have had their posting privileges adjusted,, suspended and suchlike for disobeying the forum rules in this regard.
0

#36 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 08 June 2017 - 12:09 PM

Alan Thomas

No one can say I have not written the truth when I reply to ay of your posts.

And if that is in actual fact what I am doing............replying to your posts to me. Then I am not breaking any rules at all. I don't come on here to fight with you. I come on to help or be helped by claimants or advocates.

As the forum members have something to learn from my postings I am posting within the bounds of the rules of this forum.

Politely and telling the truth as it is.

Mini
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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