ACCforum: Thanks again Warren Forster - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Thanks again Warren Forster

#1 User is offline   silvertuatara 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: 16-April 14

Posted 01 March 2018 - 04:50 PM

It was great to see the awesome efforts of Warren Forster reward his client as noted in Stuff, and set a precedent for costs in complex cases.
https://www.stuff.co...stice--advocate

And thank you to Judge Powell for seeing the merits in Warren and his client's case.

Thanks for championing for ACC claimants in need Warren.

Kia Kaha,

S.T.
2

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 March 2018 - 05:05 PM

This is the second time Warren has breached the $3000 top limit. The first time was before he was a barrister while doing the preparation work for another lawyer in my case whereby the ACC had created such a convoluted case entirely dependent upon inference yet devoid of any information, case law and actual legislation by which it should have based its decision and case on. The lawyer wanted in excess of $100,000 to address the ACCs submissions but the ACC had asked legal aid not to fund anything and reminded the court that it would not reimburse such a significant amounts in the event that it lost anyway thus creating a financial no win situation for myself as the claimant.

What the ACC are doing is making cases financially unaffordable for not only a physically impoverished claimant but one that has also become financially impoverished because of their injuries.

The judge ended up offering my lawyer and infect Warren as well only $10,000 from the court's own funds to overcome the obstacles created by the ACC. This was refused.

The judge then suggested to the ACC that they settle the matter for $50,000 in my favour rather than face the situation whereby it has through legal complexities making it financially impossible to proceed.
As the debt owed to me exceeded $2 million this was refused.

The result was that although $10,000 was available there was still no effective way in which I was able to receive legal counsel as an invalid and was forced to press on with the case by myself.

ACC recognising that my case was very strong decided to bring on to additional lawyers having a total of three lawyers in the court room against myself as both physically and financially disabled claimant not even able to physically take notes during the case while also require the court to have short court days to accommodate my disabilities.

Obviously a claimant who is disabled is not likely to succeed on their own without financial assistance and suchlike to challenge three of the ACCs best lawyers.


Why aren't others beside Warren standing up strongly for claimants in order to break through these artificially created financial obstacles set by ACC as an impossible labyrinth?
0

#3 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1521
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 01 March 2018 - 05:21 PM

Well done Warren.
0

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 March 2018 - 05:41 PM

View PostHemi, on 01 March 2018 - 05:21 PM, said:

Another thread taken over by Alan Thomas with CRAP
Can’t you leave the well done work of Warren alone Thomas
Your a pest.


REPORTED
Off topic
0

#5 User is offline   Brucey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8145
  • Joined: 26-January 07
  • LocationEarth

Posted 01 March 2018 - 05:54 PM

Warren is a winner Thomas, you are a loser.
You are not qualified to judge him, he does good work, you just fuck it up for everyone.
2

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 March 2018 - 08:04 PM

View PostBrucey, on 01 March 2018 - 05:54 PM, said:

Warren is a winner Thomas, you are a loser.
You are not qualified to judge him, he does good work, you just fuck it up for everyone.


REPORTED
0

#7 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1521
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 02 March 2018 - 08:32 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 01 March 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

This is the second time Warren has breached the $3000 top limit. The first time was before he was a barrister while doing the preparation work for another lawyer in my case whereby the ACC had created such a convoluted case entirely dependent upon inference yet devoid of any information, case law and actual legislation by which it should have based its decision and case on. The lawyer wanted in excess of $100,000 to address the ACCs submissions but the ACC had asked legal aid not to fund anything and reminded the court that it would not reimburse such a significant amounts in the event that it lost anyway thus creating a financial no win situation for myself as the claimant.

What the ACC are doing is making cases financially unaffordable for not only a physically impoverished claimant but one that has also become financially impoverished because of their injuries.

The judge ended up offering my lawyer and infect Warren as well only $10,000 from the court's own funds to overcome the obstacles created by the ACC. This was refused.

The judge then suggested to the ACC that they settle the matter for $50,000 in my favour rather than face the situation whereby it has through legal complexities making it financially impossible to proceed.
As the debt owed to me exceeded $2 million this was refused.

The result was that although $10,000 was available there was still no effective way in which I was able to receive legal counsel as an invalid and was forced to press on with the case by myself.

ACC recognising that my case was very strong decided to bring on to additional lawyers having a total of three lawyers in the court room against myself as both physically and financially disabled claimant not even able to physically take notes during the case while also require the court to have short court days to accommodate my disabilities.

Obviously a claimant who is disabled is not likely to succeed on their own without financial assistance and suchlike to challenge three of the ACCs best lawyers.


Why aren't others beside Warren standing up strongly for claimants in order to break through these artificially created financial obstacles set by ACC as an impossible labyrinth?


''REPORTED''Posted Image/>
Completely irrelevant thus off the original intention of the 1st post to advise of / congratulate Warren on his success,and is as shows just another one of the many Blogging posts by Thomas's promotional posts as to his own personal issues of which would have to be info of some ten years old.
2

#8 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 02 March 2018 - 10:26 AM

Pointing out that Warren has been a longtime advocate of ensuring that other ACC advocates are paid in accordance with the costs when a claimant wins in their favour combined with being part of another successful story more than 10 years ago where the judge took it upon himself to offer the lawyer involved together with his assistant Warren $10,000 robustly confirms Warren success in these matters together with his endurance to bring about more long-term changes on a permanent basis rather than these one-off cases such as was achieved for me through his efforts.
0

#9 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1521
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 02 March 2018 - 10:44 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 02 March 2018 - 10:26 AM, said:

Pointing out that warrant has been a longtime advocate of ensuring that other ACC advocates are paid in accordance with the costs when a claimant wins in their favour combined with being part of another successful story more than 10 years ago where the judge took it upon himself to offer the lawyer involved together with his assistant Warren $10,000 robustly confirms Warren success in these matters together with his endurance to bring about more long-term changes on a permanent basis rather than these one-off cases such as was achieved for me through his efforts.


stop blogging and start your own thread for your OWN issues Thomas

REPORTED AGAIN ;)/>
0

#10 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7372
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 03 March 2018 - 11:58 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 01 March 2018 - 05:05 PM, said:

This is the second time Warren has breached the $3000 top limit. The first time was before he was a barrister while doing the preparation work for another lawyer in my case whereby the ACC had created such a convoluted case entirely dependent upon inference yet devoid of any information, case law and actual legislation by which it should have based its decision and case on. The lawyer wanted in excess of $100,000 to address the ACCs submissions but the ACC had asked legal aid not to fund anything and reminded the court that it would not reimburse such a significant amounts in the event that it lost anyway thus creating a financial no win situation for myself as the claimant.

What the ACC are doing is making cases financially unaffordable for not only a physically impoverished claimant but one that has also become financially impoverished because of their injuries.

The judge ended up offering my lawyer and infect Warren as well only $10,000 from the court's own funds to overcome the obstacles created by the ACC. This was refused.

The judge then suggested to the ACC that they settle the matter for $50,000 in my favour rather than face the situation whereby it has through legal complexities making it financially impossible to proceed.
As the debt owed to me exceeded $2 million this was refused.

The result was that although $10,000 was available there was still no effective way in which I was able to receive legal counsel as an invalid and was forced to press on with the case by myself.

ACC recognising that my case was very strong decided to bring on to additional lawyers having a total of three lawyers in the court room against myself as both physically and financially disabled claimant not even able to physically take notes during the case while also require the court to have short court days to accommodate my disabilities.

Obviously a claimant who is disabled is not likely to succeed on their own without financial assistance and suchlike to challenge three of the ACCs best lawyers.


Why aren't others beside Warren standing up strongly for claimants in order to break through these artificially created financial obstacles set by ACC as an impossible labyrinth?


It might be because others don't get paid mega bucks to do project work which gets paid for by the legal institute (??), therefore not having to rely on the easier cases to live on.

AND most other claimants other than you can probably get legal aid.

Mini
0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 March 2018 - 10:34 AM

View PostMINI, on 03 March 2018 - 11:58 AM, said:

It might be because others don't get paid mega bucks to do project work which gets paid for by the legal institute (??), therefore not having to rely on the easier cases to live on.

AND most other claimants other than you can probably get legal aid.

Mini


Reported

Off topic

Transferred to my own pages
0

#12 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 March 2018 - 10:42 AM

View PostMINI, on 03 March 2018 - 11:58 AM, said:

It might be because others don't get paid mega bucks to do project work which gets paid for by the legal institute (??), therefore not having to rely on the easier cases to live on.

AND most other claimants other than you can probably get legal aid.

Mini


Mini I have transferred your posting above as you had disregarded the posting I had made and simply invented some entirely new nonsense that absolutely nothing to do with the thread resulting in your being reported for being off topic.

What on earth causes you to imagine some nonsense about "paid megabucks"? Are you trying to establish will promote a new lie?
0

#13 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7372
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 15 March 2018 - 03:26 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 09 March 2018 - 10:42 AM, said:

Mini I have transferred your posting above as you had disregarded the posting I had made and simply invented some entirely new nonsense that absolutely nothing to do with the thread resulting in your being reported for being off topic.

What on earth causes you to imagine some nonsense about "paid megabucks"? Are you trying to establish will promote a new lie?


Its a fact that people who get paid an actual amount to do a job, actually do it faster and better because the bulk money wont be forthcoming again if they don't.

So where is the lie??

Mini
0

#14 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8566
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 15 March 2018 - 04:43 PM

View PostMINI, on 15 March 2018 - 03:26 PM, said:

Its a fact that people who get paid an actual amount to do a job, actually do it faster and better because the bulk money wont be forthcoming again if they don't.

So where is the lie??

Mini


What on earth causes you to imagine some nonsense about "paid megabucks"? Are you trying to establish will promote a new lie?
-1

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