[Kiwichick]

I have not been in Auckland long and am having to go for an initial psychiatric assessment here, for ACC. It is for mental impairment caused by physical injury, and how PTSD has affected myself and my life, following a violent and traumatic home invasion and assault. This was some years ago now and a claim for physical injury was accepted for cover at the hospital, at the time it happened. No claim for mental injury has been lodged until now as I was hoping my condition was not going to be permanent. Now it's obvious that it is, so I have started the claim process. I am somewhat experienced with ACC and their 'processes' due to having been supported on and off by them for years now, for my physical injuries and have had to fight them for my entitlements most of the way.
My case manager is far from forthcoming and has it in for me, as I have just had one of her decisions overturned in my favour.
She informed me she had booked me in for this initial assessment with Dr Jan Reeves and after reading horrific reviews on this dr, and about other people's horrible experiences with her, I have asked for a list of suitable assessment providers so I can choose one myself. She gave me three to choose from and said that was all she was required to give me. Dr Jan Reeves was at the top even though I'd said I would not see this dr. The other two are Dr Neena Joseph and Dr Dipti Pereira. Unfortunately I just don't trust ACC to send me to someone who will give me a fair and unbiased assessment, and do not know where to start except here. I cannot find much info about the other two or any reviews.

[Lupine]

Kiwichick, on 28 June 2017 - 10:02 PM, said:

I have not been in Auckland long and am having to go for an initial psychiatric assessment here, for ACC. It is for mental impairment caused by physical injury, and how PTSD has affected myself and my life, following a violent and traumatic home invasion and assault. This was some years ago now and a claim for physical injury was accepted for cover at the hospital, at the time it happened. No claim for mental injury has been lodged until now as I was hoping my condition was not going to be permanent. Now it's obvious that it is, so I have started the claim process. I am somewhat experienced with ACC and their 'processes' due to having been supported on and off by them for years now, for my physical injuries and have had to fight them for my entitlements most of the way.
My case manager is far from forthcoming and has it in for me, as I have just had one of her decisions overturned in my favour.
She informed me she had booked me in for this initial assessment with Dr Jan Reeves and after reading horrific reviews on this dr, and about other people's horrible experiences with her, I have asked for a list of suitable assessment providers so I can choose one myself. She gave me three to choose from and said that was all she was required to give me. Dr Jan Reeves was at the top even though I'd said I would not see this dr. The other two are Dr Neena Joseph and Dr Dipti Pereira. Unfortunately I just don't trust ACC to send me to someone who will give me a fair and unbiased assessment, and do not know where to start except here. I cannot find much info about the other two or any reviews.

I see the Corporation is picking up old habits again.

This is a Cover assessment for mental injury which is a delicate matter. Additionally diagnosis is a treatment provider matter tied in with the clinical process. So once you have found a specialist who you feel comfortable with then get your GP to write a referral letter to said specialist and put that in with your claim for Cover. The CM cannot override the GP's clinical process anywhere near as easily as she can deny you at an ACC process level. ACC have to have reasonable grounds to force you into their choice of assessor. If for example you were delaying on an IMA or VIMA then they would have grounds but they have no reason to deny you your choice when it comes to Cover.

[Kiwichick]

Thanks. How do I find a good and impartial one? Can you recommend anyone?

[doppelganger]

If this is a mental injury due to a covered injury it should be covered automatically and therefore the case manager should be looking at supplying entitlements as the purpose of Act is to prevent ant injury or further injury.
The above post is correct and get a provider through your GP.

[Kiwichick]

They say I have to be diagnosed by a specialist who wi then decide if it was caused by the event, My GP is helpful and supportive but didn't know any psychiatrists personally when I asked him. My physiotherapist mentioned John collier and was embarrassed and apologetic as, when I went back to him with what I read when I googled that dr's name. I'm hoping for some recommendations on here or I guess I will just start ringing around, asking if they are ACC contractors, and googling them

[Kiwichick]

Also have I put this post in the right place on this site please? I really need some recommendations and help getting pointed in the right direction.

[Brucey]

It might be worth noting that you are not confined to Auckland for your choice of Assessor, You can consider any suitably qualified person any where in the country.

I live in the South Island ,and recently had an assessment done by an assessor from Tauranga.

You are up against it as regards finding an impartial assessor, at the end of the day how can anyone be confident of finding such a person.

I think that regardless of who you end up with, you should treat that person with suspicion, and take appropriate precautions.

I am in the same position as you, I too am looking for an impartial assessor, in my case a neuropsychologist, as the last one attempted to stitch me up.

[Lupine]

Kiwichick, on 28 June 2017 - 11:57 PM, said:

Also have I put this post in the right place on this site please? I really need some recommendations and help getting pointed in the right direction.

Brucey makes a good point. You can search wider.

You are correct when you say you will have to attend an assessment to get Cover for mental injury. Mental injury is confirmed through a similar process to confirming physical injury. It is not as clear cut as it may seem when recommending assessors. It can open up all kinds of canned worms for all parties involved. For example your Physio. He advised you to see someone and no doubt thought it would be fine. You have gone on to read otherwise and now your Physio has been put in a bit of a spot. Neither your fault nor his but its an example of the unintended but natural consequence of advising people on what assessor to choose.

The rule of thumb is this: If you are reading lots of negative comments about a certain provider then clearly you would be well advised to stay well clear of that provider. If a provider is not being complained about online then there is a better chance that provider is not an issue at the bias level. Look for what is not being said may be very helpful to you. Then when you have an idea about who then search their name in the ACC appeals site and see how their findings are presented for claimants and or the Corporation.

[Kiwichick]

Thanks, that is good advice. I don't blame my physio guy, he is really supportive and helpful to me. He was actually grateful for the heads up re Collier as it's not only here on the forum where there are bad things to say about him. I completely get what you mean but was hoping for some positive feedback of experiences, from people on here. Should I have posted this in the 'lounge' rather than in 'personal stories' to get maximum exposure?

[greg]

Kiwichick, on 29 June 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

Thanks, that is good advice. I don't blame my physio guy, he is really supportive and helpful to me. He was actually grateful for the heads up re Collier as it's not only here on the forum where there are bad things to say about him. I completely get what you mean but was hoping for some positive feedback of experiences, from people on here. Should I have posted this in the 'lounge' rather than in 'personal stories' to get maximum exposure?

Try Dr Newburn , ACC. will say he has no contract but if you ask , then review

If you can get your GP to refer you to him , you may still need to pay for his report
but then claim the costs back.

"Posted 28 October 2016 - 12:59 PM
Otherwise, I am told, DR GIL NEWBURN of ROTORUA [referred to above] is also untainted.

I am now well advised that you can name your own assessor.

If you have any problems on that count come back to us.
0 +-

https://accforum.org...__1#entry222949

[Kiwichick]

Thank you, I have actually read some good things about dr newburn but wasn't sure if I could see him. Any more please?

[Alan Thomas]

If you are in Auckland I would suggest you ask your doctor to refer you to your hospital And asked the psychiatrist that the hospital to produce a report for you.

[Kiwichick]

Update: I have contacted Dr Newburn's office and have requested to see him with my new case manager. He came back to me this morning to say that Yes, Dr Newburn is on their list so he would try to get that cleared. Shortly after that I had another ACC person ring me saying 'why did I want to see him specifically?' And that he wasn't able to give the assessment I need. I will try and push it and see what happens. Surely as long as the provider is qualified and an expert, there shouldn't be a problem?!

[greg]

Kiwichick, on 06 July 2017 - 06:36 PM, said:

Update: I have contacted Dr Newburn's office and have requested to see him with my new case manager. He came back to me this morning to say that Yes, Dr Newburn is on their list so he would try to get that cleared. Shortly after that I had another ACC person ring me saying 'why did I want to see him specifically?' And that he wasn't able to give the assessment I need. I will try and push it and see what happens. Surely as long as the provider is qualified and an expert, there shouldn't be a problem?!

This is a normal response from ACC.. I suggest you now request Email's contact only,
as this will create a paper trial [Email] with an ACC. ID., rather than being put
under pressure from a phone call which ACC. do record and use later if needed .

[Kiwichick]

Hi and many thanks for suggestions so far. Emails only from ACC from now on...

Here's what ACC have emailed me today regarding having my assessment done by Dr Newburn

"Gil Newburn – is contracted for treatment of clients, but not for completing Mental Injury Assessments. Although I’m sure he is very knowledgeable and experienced he does not currently hold the qualifications for these assessments. You will need to identify an alternative provider.
There are numerous assessors within Auckland who would be able to complete this assessment.
 Have you had opportunity to look into James Webb and John Joseph?"

I have tried to push them towards Dr Newburn by saying there's no stipulation in the Act which prevents me from choosing my own assessor, and that I choose him as he's specifically dealt with people who've experienced the same trauma as myself, which was a violent home invasion, but it's not working. I haven't been able to get back to my GP yet to ask him for a referral, but ill do so next week if this will help.

So far ACC have recommended Drs Jan Reeves, John Collier, Tina Page, David Stoner, (My wellington acc lawyer for my shoulder injury said to stay away from these first ones), and also Neena Joseph, Dipti Pereira, James Webb, John Joseph, Mike Louw, Rob Shieff, Alexander Srzich, Amanda Renfree, Scott Chambers, and Grant Galpin.Does anyone know if any of these drs are 'untainted', please?

[tommy]

regardless of correct procedures , as in best procedures , dealing with acc and assessors , , to comply is an essential as in the corporation are following legislation as in their duties , whom performs the assesment , and derives the report , is also another matter, as in how a claimant then goes to the next step which is where many claimants have no support , expertise etc

[Alan Thomas]

What the ACC is trying to say is that they have a list of contractors assessors of which they have determined to be suitable for ACC assessments.

However I would Challenge the ACCs assertion that Dr Gill Newburn is not qualified for these assessments when in fact he is far more qualified than virtually all of the ACC assessors in this category.

What this means is ACC claimants cannot obtain an assessment from even the most qualified psychiatrist Or psychologist, or any other medical assessor, in New Zealand If they are not one of the number the ACC have on their registry. You need to choose from one of the assessors that the ACC have registered.

The next depot is to ask ACC to provide a complete list of all of their assessors in this category and then choose one.

Keep in mind that the legislation does not in any way obliged the ACC to allow you to choose an assessor even though the ACC have conceded to this work of many claimants.

[doppelganger]

you have a set of responsibilities just like the ACC
Responsibilities of claimant
72 Responsibilities of claimant who receives entitlement
(1) A claimant who receives any entitlement must, when reasonably required to do
so by the Corporation,—
(a) give the Corporation a certificate by a registered health professional or
treatment provider that deals with the matters and contains the information
that the Corporation requires:
(B)/> give the Corporation any other relevant information that the Corporation
requires:
© authorise the Corporation to obtain medical and other records that are or
may be relevant to the claim:
(d) undergo assessment by a registered health professional specified by the Corporation, at the Corporation’s expense:
(e) undergo assessment, at the Corporation’s expense:
(f) co-operate with the Corporation in the development and implementation of an individual rehabilitation plan:
(g) undergo assessment of present and likely capabilities for the purposes of rehabilitation, at the Corporation’s expense:
(h) participate in rehabilitation.
(2) Every such claimant must give the Corporation a statement in writing about
any matters relating to the claimant’s entitlement, or continuing entitlement, to
an entitlement that the Corporation specifies, and must do so whenever the
Corporation requires such a statement.
(3) If the Corporation requires the claimant to do so, the claimant must make the
statement referred to in subsection (2) as a statutory declaration or in a form
supplied by the Corporation.
Compare: 1998 No 114 s 115

Now there is two sections that you are looking at that is (D) ans (E)

Your Lawyer will advise that you should choose the own assessor first and if ACC don't like the assessment then they can get there assessor to find error in that assessor.

My Suggestion is see Dr Newburn, and advise ACC that you are seeing him first. If they dont like that assessment then ACC can appoint any assessor for an assessment but section240 of the crimes Act applies to assessment.
240 Obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception
(1) Every one is guilty of obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception who,
by any deception and without claim of right,—
(a) obtains ownership or possession of, or control over, any property, or any
privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration,
directly or indirectly; or
(b) in incurring any debt or liability, obtains credit; or
© induces or causes any other person to deliver over, execute, make, accept,
endorse, destroy, or alter any document or thing capable of being
used to derive a pecuniary advantage; or
(d) causes loss to any other person.
(1A) Every person is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years who,
without reasonable excuse, sells, transfers, or otherwise makes available any
document or thing capable of being used to derive a pecuniary advantage
knowing that, by deception and without claim of right, the document or thing
was, or was caused to be, delivered, executed, made, accepted, endorsed, or altered.
(2) In this section, deception means—
(a) a false representation, whether oral, documentary, or by conduct, where
the person making the representation intends to deceive any other person
and—
(i) knows that it is false in a material particular; or
(ii) is reckless as to whether it is false in a material particular; or
(b) an omission to disclose a material particular, with intent to deceive any
person, in circumstances where there is a duty to disclose it; or
© a fraudulent device, trick, or stratagem used with intent to deceive any
person.

[tommy]

be in for the ride," Kiwi Chick ", not easy , the more your claim matures

[Kiwichick]

Yep, dealing with ACC is no picnic, but as I cant work atm, I certainly have time. I find the 2001 Act and the Fairway Benchbook to be great bedtime reading /> And there's no deceit, I've been through a lot but everything I say is the truth. I've learnt that there is govt-funded support available to me, and I need that support. The sad fact is that I have to fight tooth and nail for it. Another sad fact is that most people give up on fighting for their entitlements because it's hard or it takes so long, and just go away....but I wont. I'll just keep on at them like that damn squeaky wheel, til my family and I get the help we need.