ACCforum: ACC Fails to Implement the Will of Parliament - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 12 Pages +
  • « First
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

ACC Fails to Implement the Will of Parliament

#221 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1494
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 26 August 2017 - 02:40 PM

View PostMINI, on 26 August 2017 - 08:47 AM, said:

Lupine

Interesting playing the devils advocate, haven't done that for a long time. Not without aggression being involved. would have better having a bit more information to begin with, but you were not to know that unless I asked you. Maybe getting rusty I am!!!

Your last paragraph above is the most interesting bit of information I can see you taking into consideration. Before making a decision to take any move a lot of thought needs to go into the information you have on hand and what more you need to have. Doing the same myself at the moment. Very important time for me as well.

Good luck with your case whatever you decide to do, it is up to the claimant which way they want it to go, after all your head work.

Mini


Yes well, I am still not sure whether to laugh or cry really. I can see now that a whole range of factors came together in 2005 to create a very subtle but highly damaging anomaly.

This part of the Legislation is like that byproduct of Satan we know as the chain store flat pack. It takes hours to do the first one and then about twenty minutes to do the next one.

Editing this bit: Further examination shows it a pretty much as bad as I thought it was. My bad.
1

#222 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7733
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 04 October 2017 - 11:14 AM

View PostGrant-Mac, on 17 August 2017 - 09:00 PM, said:

Which is not the issue. The issue [that you provided] was:



Which is fraud.

Grant


Grant there is a rule about tampering with a previous posting that your quoting from. I appreciate that you may not be deliberately trying to misrepresent the posting that you are quoting but in some cases you may inadvertently cause this to occur as the case above as you have removed the possibility that anyone may read context of what was written when you assert fraud. Perhaps you should ensure in future that you include the access back to the original information.
0

#223 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2160
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 04 October 2017 - 11:40 AM

Quote

Quote

View PostAlan Thomas, on 04 October 2017 - 11:14 AM, said:

Grant there is a rule about tampering with a previous posting that your quoting from. I appreciate that you may not be deliberately trying to misrepresent the posting that you are quoting but in some cases you may inadvertently cause this to occur as the case above as you have removed the possibility that anyone may read context of what was written when you assert fraud. Perhaps you should ensure in future that you include the access back to the original information.


Alan

Grant has not tampered with this or any other posting Alan

You are blaming Grant for the inadequacy of the software platform used by the editing and quoting bots ...

You are the person who has demonstrated incompetence in bringing forward the context which Grant responded to ...

If it helps *tampering* is frequently demonstrated by many of your comments where you will chronically interfere with material postings & specific quotations from other authors ...

However for many years, I agree that you always try to minimise or excuse your deliberate tampering excesses by erratic claims of using different colour fonts for your contamination of another members post ...

Years ago you were notified such colourcoding of your tampering was specifically dangerous because any future thread discussions &or real life copying by ACC to court was escalating the high risks of major identity and extreme interpretation errors ... plus needlessly escalating real life costs for members Alan ...

....

Also ... you may recall due to some of the extreme threats and grossly corrupted material exploited by predators in this forum ... I would have placed my entire posting within software quote bots to prevent you or other trolls from tampering with my material ...

I have done this again with this posting in order to help with your memory problem & inappropriate offtopic hijack again Alan ...

HTH

ps there is NO RULE in this forum on this issue and never has been Alan

2

#224 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1334
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 04 October 2017 - 11:50 AM

View PostGrant-Mac, on 17 August 2017 - 09:00 PM, said:

Which is not the issue. The issue [that you provided] was:



Which is fraud.

Grant

thats how it is thomas.
UNTAMPERED
its your forum thomas and works how you want it to
change it so the requotes come in as well if you want that
otherwise bugger off and stop playing bully boy
2

#225 User is offline   Kewl 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 334
  • Joined: 02-August 15

Posted 12 November 2017 - 10:25 AM

Is the Will of Parliament as expressed in the treatment of claimants at odds with the wording of the legislation?

How can it change?

heres an example of what can be done when there is a will to do it:

Quote

The Trump Administration has enforced strict accountability standards for VA personnel, with over 1163 employees fired, 387 suspended, and 61 demoted as of November 7, 2017.

o 15 senior VA officials have been disciplined for failing to provide our veterans with an adequate standard of care.

• The President’s Executive Order on Improving Accountability and Whistleblower Protection has initiated critical transparency reforms, including establishment of a VA Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection.

• President Trump signed the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act, further establishing additional safeguards to protect whistleblowers, and enabling the VA to fire failing employees.


read full article here:
https://www.whitehou..._20171110_vets4

replace the wording " veterans" with acc claimants...what could change and why has it not done so for decades...? there must be a reason
0

Share this topic:


  • 12 Pages +
  • « First
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 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