ACCforum: Williams v ACC [2017 - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Williams v ACC [2017 Out of the Human Rights Tribunal

#1 User is offline   Grant-Mac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 487
  • Joined: 14-November 12
  • LocationAuckland

Posted 12 November 2017 - 05:15 AM

Chaps,

An interesting and useful case which was in the NZHRRT. Concerns 'information'. You may not be aware of it as it is from the HRRT.

Grant

Attached File(s)


0

#2 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7056
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 12 November 2017 - 04:17 PM

View PostGrant-Mac, on 12 November 2017 - 05:15 AM, said:

Chaps,

An interesting and useful case which was in the NZHRRT. Concerns 'information'. You may not be aware of it as it is from the HRRT.

Grant


Thanks Grant. Good evening read.

I have been bleating for a couple of years now that I lost a part of acclaims material that was a News item re: the present UN and otago Acclaims, university production of 'assistance to Justice.

the News article was Pm Key answering the UN's questions, where, for one of them, which hinged on the claimants being tied up in a tassle when attempting to get administrative information heard in any of ACC's Review or the Court system.

Key said along the lines of 'there is the possibility to have those issues heard at the DC under the human rights.' It was in the Wellington News I believe, but not 100%.

What you have just given us may be a cause of that statement, in which case it should be available on line. As we pass thru the years the breaks we get should be recorded for historic cases, where essential and obtainable. My theory is that we will all be treated better as soon as a few cases go thru Human Rights in our favour.

Cheers

Mini
0

#3 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7056
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 13 November 2017 - 01:02 PM

View PostGrant-Mac, on 12 November 2017 - 05:15 AM, said:

Chaps,

An interesting and useful case which was in the NZHRRT. Concerns 'information'. You may not be aware of it as it is from the HRRT.

Grant


Already found where ACC has done this to me. Was going to go Breach of claimants rights but this one is more straigt forward and easier to fathom.

Cheers Grant

Mini
0

#4 User is offline   INTER 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 214
  • Joined: 19-August 14

Posted 14 November 2017 - 07:30 AM

Same i have requested that many times to use all my medical information not cherry pick facts.

Now i can put it back onto them As In Fault :

without taking reasonable steps to ensure that,
having regard to the purpose for which the information was proposed to be used,
the information was accurate, up to date, complete, relevant and not misleading
0

#5 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 453
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 14 November 2017 - 08:48 AM

There are numerous instances where ACC cherry-picks the facts and circumstances.

In fact, in his paper "The Changing Approach to Statutory Interpretation" Professor John Burrows makes the point that litigants "have to be alive to the dangers of a Minister or an official "planting" statements with the intention that they should influence interpretation."

He goes on to say "there is also a danger that the information presented may be partial or even inaccurate".

If you have a problem of this kind firstly talk to the Human Rights Commission for guidance.
2

#6 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7056
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 November 2017 - 09:37 AM

View Postmagnacarta, on 14 November 2017 - 08:48 AM, said:

There are numerous instances where ACC cherry-picks the facts and circumstances.

In fact, in his paper "The Changing Approach to Statutory Interpretation" Professor John Burrows makes the point that litigants "have to be alive to the dangers of a Minister or an official "planting" statements with the intention that they should influence interpretation."

He goes on to say "there is also a danger that the information presented may be partial or even inaccurate".

If you have a problem of this kind firstly talk to the Human Rights Commission for guidance.


Thanks magnacarta, will do. Mine is on inaccurate and partial documentation being used
Can we please have a copy of The changing approach to Statutory Interpretation.

Mini
0

#7 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1029
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 14 November 2017 - 01:03 PM

View Postmagnacarta, on 14 November 2017 - 08:48 AM, said:

There are numerous instances where ACC cherry-picks the facts and circumstances.

In fact, in his paper "The Changing Approach to Statutory Interpretation" Professor John Burrows makes the point that litigants "have to be alive to the dangers of a Minister or an official "planting" statements with the intention that they should influence interpretation."

He goes on to say "there is also a danger that the information presented may be partial or even inaccurate".

If you have a problem of this kind firstly talk to the Human Rights Commission for guidance.


For those who have lost Houses due to ACC actions ,and then won at review or in Courts
is there some hope for claimant who can show ACC choose not to include all covered
injuries in these Assessments.?
0

#8 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 453
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 14 November 2017 - 02:22 PM

Hi Greg,

That's a difficult question that I really can't answer, particularly when you say people have won at review or in the Courts.

However, Clause 20 of Schedule 5 of the Act requires ACC to ensure that all employees maintain proper standards of integrity and conduct.

It could be ACC's Code of Conduct that you could invoke direct to the ACC Chief Executive in the circumstances of losing a house because of ACC's actions.

Why not also speak to a community law office or seek assistance from the Ombudsmen or wherever else you think.
1

#9 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1029
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 14 November 2017 - 02:53 PM

View Postmagnacarta, on 14 November 2017 - 02:22 PM, said:

Hi Greg,

That's a difficult question that I really can't answer, particularly when you say people have won at review or in the Courts.

However, Clause 20 of Schedule 5 of the Act requires ACC to ensure that all employees maintain proper standards of integrity and conduct.

It could be ACC's Code of Conduct that you could invoke direct to the ACC Chief Executive in the circumstances of losing a house because of ACC's actions.

Why not also speak to a community law office or seek assistance from the Ombudsmen or wherever else you think.


Thanz for the reply , I don't believe I am alone with the losing of a House due to ACC Staff and BMA. not following the then ACC Act..

Will just watch and follow any good advice .
0

#10 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7056
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 15 November 2017 - 12:48 PM

Hi folks

I do not see that it matters if you lose your case or win it. It comes to a time when the only way forward is Abuse of Clairmants Rights.

Seeing as it is run by ACC I do not see a good outcome, hence my interest in this Human Rights Section.

It is some time ago when I mentioned John Key and his words in the Wellington N/P. No one has come forward with it yet, but it is so important as it says basically that the Human Rights Legislation can be used by the District Court to cover any administrative problems with the ACC. Now it is making more sense than ever.

The DC do not seem to be doing this, in fact could go so far as they turn the other way. I will approach HR and see what they have to say, but I have already got the documentation ready for Abuse of Claimants Rights.

At least the HR don't muck about with the mess up in the documents or the extent of the damages which can be awarded etc.

It will be interesting if they will go into the courts and the documents they are given by ACC and our being handed the Bundle of documents by ACC the day we walk into the court room. We have no time to read them before having our hearing.

Mini
0

#11 User is offline   Brucey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8023
  • Joined: 26-January 07
  • LocationEarth

Posted 16 November 2017 - 07:45 AM

View Postgreg, on 14 November 2017 - 01:03 PM, said:

For those who have lost Houses due to ACC actions ,and then won at review or in Courts
is there some hope for claimant who can show ACC choose not to include all covered
injuries in these Assessments.?


It certainly is possible, one of our members is going through the process at the moment, and things are progressing very well, I am sure she could assist you , but unfortunately she no longer participates within this forum due to recent abuse.
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