ACCforum: Integrity Services - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Integrity Services Threat

#1 User is offline   Rathmort 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 26-June 18

Posted 09 August 2018 - 03:29 PM

Anyone know anything about ACC Integrity Services, their legal and investigation boundaries etc ???
0

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 August 2018 - 04:18 PM


Integrity Support Services Panel

Details
Tender Closed RFx ID : 18368086 Tender Name : Integrity Support Services Panel Reference # :
Open Date : Wednesday, 8 February 2017 4:00 PM (Pacific/Auckland UTC+13:00) Close Date : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 2:00 PM (Pacific/Auckland UTC+13:00) Tender Type : Request for Proposals (RFP) Tender Coverage : Sole Agency [?] Categories :
  • 46171600 - Surveillance and detection equipment
  • 92101800 - Court system
  • 92121500 - Guard services
  • 92121600 - Detective services
Regions:
  • New Zealand
Required Pre-qualifications : None Contact : Procurement Team
[email protected]
Alternate Physical Delivery Address :
Alternate Physical Fax Number :
Overview The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) is seeking to engage a panel of suppliers who have the capability and experience to provide Integrity Support Services for ACC both nationally and internationally.

The purpose of these Services is to support ACC's Integrity Services with targeted prevention, detection and response activity when needed. The need for these Services will be on an as-need basis.

Please direct any enquiries to ACC's Procurement Team at [email protected]


0

#3 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1584
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 10 August 2018 - 09:28 AM

View PostRathmort, on 09 August 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

Anyone know anything about ACC Integrity Services, their legal and investigation boundaries etc ???


The first thing to recognize is that this Unit like many others in ACC, is not particularly concerned with what is "legal".

If Integrity is sniffing around I suggest you get some advice quickly.
0

#4 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7530
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:00 PM

View PostLupine, on 10 August 2018 - 09:28 AM, said:

The first thing to recognize is that this Unit like many others in ACC, is not particularly concerned with what is "legal".

If Integrity is sniffing around I suggest you get some advice quickly.


Lupine

Nothing to fear if ones integrity and honesty is in tact.

Never heard of it before. there are a lot of new little shoot offs now. Like Hamilton and Dunedin for lump sum or I/A. Another crew for treatment injury and so it goes on. The local office just works as an inbetween you never have a direct line to case manager at Dunedin for lump sum or treatment injury people. They are 0800.

Mini
0

#5 User is offline   Lupine 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1584
  • Joined: 28-June 08

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:14 PM

I would agree with you Mini if not for what my recent experiences with that Unit have been. Showing you have done nothing wrong as opposed to their twisted take on a situation is also necessary.
0

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:28 PM

View PostRathmort, on 09 August 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

Anyone know anything about ACC Integrity Services, their legal and investigation boundaries etc ???


ACC Integrity Services is a euphemism for fraud investigation. What they are referring to is the integrity of the information on your files relied upon for access to entitlements. They are not interested in the integrity of information coming from your medical professionals that rather checking up on whether or not you are working and then relying upon various court judges who mistakenly think that it is okay to cancel someone's claim on the basis. Typically the ACC will hand over the management of the files to this unit who will then ignore all the information on your files in favour of what information they think they have discovered. Whether or not they check the integrity of the information they have discovered is another matter. For example a friend neighbour or family member might tell the ACC that you are working when in fact you are not for no other reason than they don't like you or a jealous or something. The reason is not important. The ACC1 rely upon this third party as the information provider to make decisions on their own financial advantage with the thoughts that the information provider carries the Canon for the integrity of the information rather than the ACC themselves and therefore the ACC cannot come to grief by making any decisions from that information.
As the process legal? Of course it is not legal but one of the most serious frauds committed against a population of a country to the extent that it breaches international proportions regarding notable crimes by government agencies against those they serve, the citizenry.

What is the strategy to deal with this problem? You'll find that lawyers are completely out of their depth and would be of no help whatsoever in these circumstances. The ACC specialist has no understanding of the crimes act and the trouble specialist has no understanding of the ACC act and even if you do get these two specialist legal professionals together it is unlikely that they will work their way through the problem.
If you ask ACC for a copy of the information that they are collecting they are not going to provided to you on the basis that it is not part of the public interest and excluded under the privacy act. This will prevent you from charging the alleged information.
Probably the most effective way of addressing these people is to initiate criminal proceedings against the individuals providing the ACC with the alleged information along with the ACC who plan to use that information or have years that information with the intent of committing crimes against you. If you wait until after you are prosecuted it is almost too late as your find that an impossible task to challenge the multibillion-dollar Corporation who are going to enter into a battle with you that will also include depleting your finances if you attempt any kind of legal defence. Historically we have multimillionaires who have gone to jail despite using the best legal minds in the land based on information derived from this ACC integrity unit.

0

#7 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:33 PM

View PostMINI, on 10 August 2018 - 01:00 PM, said:

Lupine

Nothing to fear if ones integrity and honesty is in tact.

Never heard of it before. there are a lot of new little shoot offs now. Like Hamilton and Dunedin for lump sum or I/A. Another crew for treatment injury and so it goes on. The local office just works as an inbetween you never have a direct line to case manager at Dunedin for lump sum or treatment injury people. They are 0800.

Mini


Mini you are being completely naive. The unit described in this thread is not concerned about your personal integrity but rather that they have a viable allegation against him based on the information they are gathering. They are not even interested in the integrity of the information a gathering but rather whether or not they can defend the information they are gathering.
When looking at the tendering documents concerning this unit the ACC are seeking tenders from individuals experience as private investigators. In other words ACC does not carry out any fraud investigation itself with its own people but rely upon the parties so as to have a firewall preventing any accusation against them personally. That means that the private investigators gather this information from the various sources of individuals making allegations against the claimant. These tender documents have nothing to do with such units is the lump sum or independence allowance claim management units etc.

Mini it would be better for you to research authenticated information prior to forming any opinions and therefore you will be able to more easily resist the temptation to give your uninformed opinion such as above.

-2

#8 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:35 PM

View PostLupine, on 10 August 2018 - 01:14 PM, said:

I would agree with you Mini if not for what my recent experiences with that Unit have been. Showing you have done nothing wrong as opposed to their twisted take on a situation is also necessary.


How do you propose convincing the ACC investigation unit that you have integrity when they will not communicate with you and likewise have no interest about what is even on your file?the first time you will ever see even a portion of the information they are gathering by this team is when they are required to make disclosure immediately prior to a court case. Up until that time every think they collect will be considered top-secret. How then would you propose to challenge this top-secret information prior to a court case?

0

#9 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7530
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:39 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 09 August 2018 - 04:18 PM, said:

Integrity Support Services Panel

Details
Tender Closed RFx ID : 18368086 Tender Name : Integrity Support Services Panel Reference # :
Open Date : Wednesday, 8 February 2017 4:00 PM (Pacific/Auckland UTC+13:00) Close Date : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 2:00 PM (Pacific/Auckland UTC+13:00) Tender Type : Request for Proposals (RFP) Tender Coverage : Sole Agency [?] Categories :
  • 46171600 - Surveillance and detection equipment
  • 92101800 - Court system
  • 92121500 - Guard services
  • 92121600 - Detective services
Regions:
  • New Zealand
Required Pre-qualifications : None Contact : Procurement Team
[email protected]
Alternate Physical Delivery Address :
Alternate Physical Fax Number :
Overview The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) is seeking to engage a panel of suppliers who have the capability and experience to provide Integrity Support Services for ACC both nationally and internationally.

The purpose of these Services is to support ACC's Integrity Services with targeted prevention, detection and response activity when needed. The need for these Services will be on an as-need basis.

Please direct any enquiries to ACC's Procurement Team at [email protected]


David butler

Did you try out for Mr Snoopy big dectective, who loves to shaft other members of this formum to criminals etc.

Mini
0

#10 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7530
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:43 PM

View PostLupine, on 10 August 2018 - 01:14 PM, said:

I would agree with you Mini if not for what my recent experiences with that Unit have been. Showing you have done nothing wrong as opposed to their twisted take on a situation is also necessary.


Lupine

That is the fun part of investigation..................prove them wrong.

I hope this person in here is going to get his Start date proved wrong. He probably have documentation already available, but doesn't recognise its importance.

Mini
0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:53 PM

View PostMINI, on 10 August 2018 - 01:43 PM, said:

Lupine

That is the fun part of investigation..................prove them wrong.

I hope this person in here is going to get his Start date proved wrong. He probably have documentation already available, but doesn't recognise its importance.

Mini


Real investigators approach their work in an impartial fashion.When approaching something an impartial fashion is impossible to be having any fun and as for the concept of "proving them wrong" this is evidence that you are not being dispassionate but rather have a bias. If you have a bias the investigation cannot possibly be honest.


0

#12 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7530
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:55 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 10 August 2018 - 01:33 PM, said:

Mini you are being completely naive. The unit described in this thread is not concerned about your personal integrity but rather that they have a viable allegation against him based on the information they are gathering. They are not even interested in the integrity of the information a gathering but rather whether or not they can defend the information they are gathering.
When looking at the tendering documents concerning this unit the ACC are seeking tenders from individuals experience as private investigators. In other words ACC does not carry out any fraud investigation itself with its own people but rely upon the parties so as to have a firewall preventing any accusation against them personally. That means that the private investigators gather this information from the various sources of individuals making allegations against the claimant. These tender documents have nothing to do with such units is the lump sum or independence allowance claim management units etc.

Mini it would be better for you to research authenticated information prior to forming any opinions and therefore you will be able to more easily resist the temptation to give your uninformed opinion such as above.


Thomas

You know it all. what did I do for a job. I bet they would take me for my integrity before they take you, even though they consider you 'fit for work' a long time ago, at the same time they found you were working. You got done for fraud of that. My opinions are my own and if I know you are a fraudulent person and it has been proved and printed in a court, then I am not telling lies and neither did I start this 'poke me in the ribs' tete e' tete.

If you cannot see that these investigators will be able to do anything they like be it any entitlement, or cover as they wish. The do not have to have all of the entitlements you or I have had, but may do so it it appears that is the only place there is a discrepancy.

If these new people on here listen to you they will chasing their own shadows.

Mini
3

#13 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:05 PM

View PostMINI, on 10 August 2018 - 01:55 PM, said:

Thomas

You know it all. what did I do for a job. I bet they would take me for my integrity before they take you, even though they consider you 'fit for work' a long time ago, at the same time they found you were working. You got done for fraud of that. My opinions are my own and if I know you are a fraudulent person and it has been proved and printed in a court, then I am not telling lies and neither did I start this 'poke me in the ribs' tete e' tete.

If you cannot see that these investigators will be able to do anything they like be it any entitlement, or cover as they wish. The do not have to have all of the entitlements you or I have had, but may do so it it appears that is the only place there is a discrepancy.

If these new people on here listen to you they will chasing their own shadows.

Mini


ACC have never considered me to be fit for work. What on earth are you talking about?
In addition while the ACC informed the courts that they possessed information that I was working they have never at any stage ever made any kind of disclosure. That being the case how is it possible for you to imagine even that I was working? Obviously as someone who claims to be an investigator you would not be persuaded that I was working without any actual information so what has caused you to make the statement that I was working?
Is no good you trying to say I've been prosecuted for fraud based on working because that is simply profoundly untrue. The fraud prosecution had absolutely nothing to do with whether I worked or not. The fraud prosecution was entirely and totally based on the integrity of the medical certificates of which the medical profession describe my injuries and lack of capacity to earn. It did described that I could work for up to 2 hours per day fragmented throughout the day so long as I did not use my hand. It did not describe a capacity to earn and as such there has been no connection between the ACC legislation criteria and the prosecuted for fraud or the information that supported the fraud allegation is ACC did not challenge the integrity of the medical profession. So as someone who claims to investigate what information form the basis of a prosecution from fraud. Was there any information ever presented to the court to support a connection between medical certificates and the conviction?
Mini if you have no information to form the basis of an opinion you have no right to have an opinion. It is that simple.If you portray yourself as having an opinion without any information that is exactly the same thing as making a statement about someone and something without knowing it to be true. That forms the basis of a criminal prosecution for defamation of character. You are not protected by other people's wrong opinion and for this reason everybody involved in gossiping making false allegations and suchlike are all equally liable to such a prosecution from the beginning instigator right through to the last person.

0

#14 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1700
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 10 August 2018 - 06:54 PM

You might want to look at ACC own review of there previous Fraud unit.

Review of ACC Fraud Unit July 2007 Do a google search

Also you may want to look Bruce Van Essen IPCA complaint and his human rights court decision to give you an idea how ACC and its management team work.
0

#15 User is offline   Brucey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8264
  • Joined: 26-January 07
  • LocationEarth

Posted 11 August 2018 - 08:54 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 10 August 2018 - 05:37 PM, said:

Off topic personal attack reported


Your a control freak Thomas.
1

#16 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7530
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 11 August 2018 - 11:25 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 10 August 2018 - 01:53 PM, said:

Real investigators approach their work in an impartial fashion.When approaching something an impartial fashion is impossible to be having any fun and as for the concept of "proving them wrong" this is evidence that you are not being dispassionate but rather have a bias. If you have a bias the investigation cannot possibly be honest.


Thomas

so you reakon 'real investigators', got the information that allowed the judge to put you in jail. I think you are right, they did prove that the paperwork was there to show you had been accepting money from another and then turned around and told the ACC you were not working.

You stupid meathead, honestly, a decision has to be made and it makes very little difference who the investigator votes for, they still have to prove they are right in the approach they have taken to come to that decision.

Mini
1

#17 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9123
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 August 2018 - 12:00 PM

View PostMINI, on 11 August 2018 - 11:25 AM, said:

Thomas

so you reakon 'real investigators', got the information that allowed the judge to put you in jail. I think you are right, they did prove that the paperwork was there to show you had been accepting money from another and then turned around and told the ACC you were not working.

You stupid meathead, honestly, a decision has to be made and it makes very little difference who the investigator votes for, they still have to prove they are right in the approach they have taken to come to that decision.

Mini


The ACC fraud unit staff and their investigators were Subpoenaed to court to answer questions regarding this very issue in my civil appeal to the ACC decision to cancel my entire claim based on the information they claimed to have required subsequent to their so-called investigation. It turned out that the ACC had not provided the investigators any definition as to what type of information was sought with the result that the investigators had no actual direction as to what type of information was needed in accordance with the legislated criteria. This resulted in the investigators producing for the ACC a report based on the assumptions of the informants who are concluded I was working because they have seen me complying with the ACC case managers directions to work on rehabilitation plans including producing business plans.
No information of any sort described a single work task activity of any material time and above all there was no indication of any kind that would connect me with any kind of income or earnings from anything.

The ACC private investigators produced absolutely no information of any sort demonstrating they are not action carried out any kind of investigation at all.
Both the ACC staff and the private investigators confirmed that they received no training to provide any guidance whatsoever regarding the information criteria necessary for the ACC to make decisions. The result is that it was impossible to carry out any kind of investigation. So even if relevant information was discovered they would never have determined the informations relevance Thus confirming total incompetence to the whole investigation process
During the court hearing the judge found himself having to put everything that the ACC submitted to one side, in other words ignore it and start again. The judge then carried out his own investigation as to whether or not I was entitled to ACC claims and entitlements. The judge told the ACC to find out what type of work I was doing before I was injured so we can make a comparison with the medical information produced after I was injured to see if I can return to that work. The ACC private investigators gathered information describing what I was doing after I was injured thus rendering any decision of the judge erroneous.

Repeated instances of perjury by the ACC fraud investigation unit and their private investigations is a very serious criminal offence which is very easily recognised by anyone who has any experience of any sort even remotely connected to the investigation and discovery of information. Mini I am surprised that you claim that you have been investigating as part of your employment work yet don't recognise what has actually happened in my case.

0

#18 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7530
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 11 August 2018 - 01:31 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 11 August 2018 - 12:00 PM, said:

The ACC fraud unit staff and their investigators were Subpoenaed to court to answer questions regarding this very issue in my civil appeal to the ACC decision to cancel my entire claim based on the information they claimed to have required subsequent to their so-called investigation. It turned out that the ACC had not provided the investigators any definition as to what type of information was sought with the result that the investigators had no actual direction as to what type of information was needed in accordance with the legislated criteria. This resulted in the investigators producing for the ACC a report based on the assumptions of the informants who are concluded I was working because they have seen me complying with the ACC case managers directions to work on rehabilitation plans including producing business plans.
No information of any sort described a single work task activity of any material time and above all there was no indication of any kind that would connect me with any kind of income or earnings from anything.

The ACC private investigators produced absolutely no information of any sort demonstrating they are not action carried out any kind of investigation at all.
Both the ACC staff and the private investigators confirmed that they received no training to provide any guidance whatsoever regarding the information criteria necessary for the ACC to make decisions. The result is that it was impossible to carry out any kind of investigation. So even if relevant information was discovered they would never have determined the informations relevance Thus confirming total incompetence to the whole investigation process
During the court hearing the judge found himself having to put everything that the ACC submitted to one side, in other words ignore it and start again. The judge then carried out his own investigation as to whether or not I was entitled to ACC claims and entitlements. The judge told the ACC to find out what type of work I was doing before I was injured so we can make a comparison with the medical information produced after I was injured to see if I can return to that work. The ACC private investigators gathered information describing what I was doing after I was injured thus rendering any decision of the judge erroneous.

Repeated instances of perjury by the ACC fraud investigation unit and their private investigations is a very serious criminal offence which is very easily recognised by anyone who has any experience of any sort even remotely connected to the investigation and discovery of information. Mini I am surprised that you claim that you have been investigating as part of your employment work yet don't recognise what has actually happened in my case.


Thomas

The trouble with you is you like to confuse by using two different cases, where one is criminal and the other is civil.

You cant even keep them straight but you want to make everyone else believe you know what you are talking about.

Only one of those cases got you a three year prison sentence and of course that is the one to which I speak.

Not to be confused with the ACC case, Thomas took against them.

Mini
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