ACCforum: No Rehabilitation - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

No Rehabilitation No Rehabilitation

#1 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 30 June 2005 - 05:14 PM

There is evidence that ACC appears to be rationing rehabilitation until you become one of the 500 who have been selected for "exiting" under the service agreement between the Minister and ACC.

Remember, it used to be that 1500 claimants had to be exited each year under the service agreement - but now it is 500.

Many claimants have tried for years to get rehabilitation - but without any rehabilitation needs assessments whatsoever - while presenting 13-weekly unfit for work certificates.

Then, out of the blue, ACC selects particular claimants and starts the IOA and IMA process, while still giving nothing to other long-term claimants.

There is a strong inference to be drawn that those selected for IOA and IMA have had their "number" drawn to be "exited" in the process which ultimately leads to vocational indpendence after all rehabilitation has been completed.

Others, in the same position, and also trying to get rehabilitation, remain completely ignored.

That, IMHO, is rationing rehabilitation.

Moreover, despite the IPRC Act coming into force on 1 April 2002 (3 years ago) no attempt is made by ACC under s.77 to arrange social and vocational rehabilitation needs assessments for some people before they reach aged 65.

Having failed to provide any rehabilitation assistance whatsoever, (for years) ACC then has the gall to then write stating that now the claimant has reached aged 65 they are no longer entitled to vocational rehabilitation.

I believe that conduct is either illegal, abuse of public office, fraud, causing loss by deception, or all four of them.

ACC collects $2.5 billion annually from the public to carry out its functions, powers and duties and is not properly doing so -

and fuel costs go-up again tomorrow because of an ACC levy increase.
0

#2 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 30 June 2005 - 06:18 PM

Mangancata,

Reading the Act in which Vocational rehabilitation is meant to be a part of you will find the so Vocational Rehabilitation is completed when the Assessments and work Trails have been completed. they are only completed when the claimant is exited. If there is any Re-Trianing required the claimant has to fund it them selves or fight the ACC for the funding (Reason why no Vocational Rehabilitation is successful).

The Act is written to give a selected perfered blites on society are given an increase in there bank account.

At a recent court hearing it was heard a certain ACC staff member, was telling the judge that Vocational Rehabilitation entitlements are assessments and work-trial. the claimant had completed theres and therefore rehabilitated in the corporations view.

Remove the sponges and convert the money spent on assessors and work-trials to real Vocational Rehabilitation then there will be a real cost saving to the comunity.

Just a little note; check the figures and you will see that Gary and his team only decreased the numberof claimants by just over 500. there are a few long trem claimants returning when it has been found thatthe injury has been agveraged due to wrong information is assessments.
0

#3 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 01 July 2005 - 03:42 PM

:D Whoa does this mean we have to be ALL BLACKS so appropiate timeframes for treatment can apply...

:wacko: Does ACC have anything to do with the ALL BLACKS and TREATMENT providers ... or :blink: are they told to ... RUCK OFF.

:wub: I have been medically diagionised with permanent muscle and tendon damage and to recieve acknowledgement,treatment end up being ...RUCKED OFF.

:P OOOOOOOOH silly me ...I didn't paint myself black,like the add on T.V. ,maybe being an ALL BLACK supporter I will get some where...
0

#4 User is offline   Temporary1 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 30-March 05

Posted 01 July 2005 - 11:53 PM

Greetings,
In 27 years the only rehab I have had, is what I have done for myself...
at my own expense...
Lots of BULLSHIT assessments, costing heaps, Judge waived them and went with an accurate $160 report.
But I do get treatment paid for, for injury, that they(ACC) say is Arthritis... ???
One must wonder whats in their coffee Perc ...
0

#5 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 02 July 2005 - 11:21 AM

Same here.
And The records stands denial denial denial and I can show what I have done without their rotten non-help. Dirty lying thieving pack of bastards.
0

#6 User is offline   freefallnz 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 29-June 04

Posted 03 July 2005 - 09:46 PM

17 years in the system and the only "REHABILITATION" I've received I've paid for myself.

OK Back in the good old days (1995) when ACC was compelled by law too support ones own initiatives they did "reluctantly" provide a farm bike. To enable me to take up Contract milking..

However since my second Big Accident in 1997 they have provided SFA...

In fact my Rehab plan in 98 identified as retraining my doing a part time degree in computer services. (Oddly enough the assessor agreed that my previous in depth computer work experiences ie 15 yrs as a systems analyst etc.. was a good grounding)

Since that date ACC have been in a quandry... trying to prove I'm incapable of undertaking a part time Poly Tech Degree course.. and proving I'm fit enough to work full time....

Rehabilitation since 1998 = Zero, Zip, Nuffink, SFA.....

And If I maight say so myself I could make a very reasonable living as a Part Time Computer Contractor...but of course being Self Employed is not a desireble outcame for the Absolutely Corrupt Corporation.
0

#7 User is offline   kiwiwine 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 16-July 04

Posted 04 July 2005 - 07:16 AM

;)

We need to bombard them in a managed way somehow...
Surely if we all get together we can fight this monster ACC have created...
I'm not sure how, but has any one any ideas how we can all get together effectively and get our point across... ;)
Theres so many great minds here on the board.......
I'm not so great with ideas but I'm good at collation - I bet between us our skills are just amazing...

Kiwiwine ;)
0

#8 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 04 July 2005 - 07:40 AM

Kiwiwine & others, perhaps every claimant who is not receiving rehabilitation or even assessments of their rehabilitation needs should write individually to the Auditor-General in Wellington.

After all, he did a report into ACC in 2004 which, although it was a whitewash, showed that he will exercise his jursidiction over ACC.

The way $2.5 billion of public money is being collected but not used for the purposes it was intended should cause him to again investigate given that he stated in his report that there were no systemic failures by ACC.

I think the evidence throughout this forum shows that the failures are systemic.

The A-G is an officer of Parliament not the Government.

And don't forget to include ACC General Manager Mr McGreevey's statement on TV One News (July 2) "Our job is to administer the law as it was given to us by parliament....."

If only
0

#9 User is offline   accvictim 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 04-November 03

Posted 14 September 2005 - 05:09 PM

[SIZE=7][B][COLOR=red]The Gloves are off now you ACC SICKOS!

Your Gonna Pay For What Youve Done To Me And My Families Lives!!!

Attached File(s)


0

#10 User is offline   The River 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 25-December 05

Posted 25 December 2005 - 09:18 PM

Ah yes! The delays ACC instigates. Since 1974 when I was run over by a truck I have not received any compensation even though I am now classed as an invalid because of my injuries. Acc has never assessed my rehabilitation requirements and deny that the accident even happened. I have always had to pay all my health expenses totaling over $360 a month with additional expenses for mobility devises. The last time I spoke with a representative of ACC, she requested any photos of the injury that had been taken. This is despite the fact that ACC has declined my claim unconditionally. ACC is seriously schizophrenic and perhaps the Auditor General can alleviate this problem but I think a good dose of medication is in order. Hmm! How to administer the medication.
0

#11 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 26 December 2005 - 07:36 AM

Rectally?

Attached File(s)


0

#12 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 26 December 2005 - 07:08 PM

:wub: Luv it Flowers ...

:wacko: What about some people that may have a case of verbal diarreaha ... does the water come out through the mouth?

:D Splish splash ...
0

#13 User is offline   Karney 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 11-March 05

Posted 26 December 2005 - 10:59 PM

Mmmm, one would think that a truck would be a big enough chunk of metal that no-one could deny its existance and the impact it could have on a persons life . . .

Another thing that ACC rarely take into consideration when arranging or failing to arrange vocational rehab is that delaying rehab makes it harder for the claimant to get a job at the end of it. As if it isn't hard enough to find a job when you have on-going injury related problems, employers really are biased against ACC claimants and against anyone who has been out of the workforce for a while. Doing a re-training course of some kind creates a good impression with prospective employers and should be considered worth the money, if only for that reason.
0

#14 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 27 December 2005 - 05:45 PM

Doing a retraining course may be of benefit but often all the case manager wants to do is teach you to drink tea via the nose.

Work hardening is not Vocational Rehabilitation. It is only paying a provider because they cant get other jobs.
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