ACCforum: Nz Herald On Trapski - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Nz Herald On Trapski NZ Herald on Trapski

#1 User is offline   magnacarta 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 06:47 AM

NZ Herald - Saturday 15 October 2005

Su Nicholson had two operations on her back which left her with a 'flat-back' or no curve in her lower spine. Picture / Brett Phibbs
(see accforum archive of articles)


ACC accused of return to bad old days

15.10.05


A retired judge who investigated the Accident Compensation Corporation more than a decade ago wants a new inquiry.

ACC claimant Su Nicholson wrote to former Chief District Court Judge Peter Trapski seeking an inquiry.

Mr Trapski's reply this month says: "I have heard of a number of similar cases and it distresses me that the corporation has - long ago - reverted to its old practices."

Ms Nicholson and her claimants' group should petition ACC Minister Ruth Dyson for an inquiry and possibly Prime Minister Helen Clark or "Parliament itself".

"That could be particularly powerful within the close political climate that now exists in this country,"said Mr Trapski.

"I wish you well as I believe that some action is well overdue."


ACC lawyer Gerard McGreevy said Mr Trapski's comments were surprising, sad and uninformed.

The Weekend Herald approached Mr Trapski, of Tauranga, to expand on them, but he declined.

His 1994 report said Auckland psychiatrist Dr Laurie Gluckman was used as the corporation's "hitman" by staff fed up with clients "ripping off the system".

ACC commissioned the inquiry in 1990 after the Medical Council found Dr Gluckman guilty of professional misconduct and suggested some corporation procedures for handling and obtaining sensitive medical reports were inappropriate.

Mr Trapski's recommendations included ensuring medical opinions were independent.

Ms Nicholson, a former real estate agent who has shifted to Queensland's Gold Coast, said yesterday that she suffered serious back pain, could not work and received earnings-related compensation from ACC.

"I have trouble standing up," she said. "On bad days I have to use a walking stick."

Now aged 54, she was injured in a sailing accident in 1985 and while playing tennis in 1989.

She had two back operations in 1991 that left her with "flat-back syndrome" - virtually no curve in her lower spine.

ACC later found this was caused by medical misadventure.

She said ACC investigated allegations of fraud made against her and she was tailed by private investigators with a video camera.

A specialist who had previously supported her ACC claim re-assessed her for the corporation and, after seeing the video, changed his mind and ACC stopped her payments.

But they resumed this year after she sought a review.

"If they want to film me they can, but they need to give honesty, not just selective stuff."

She said the video showed her washing her car, but not going to her physiotherapist half an hour earlier, despite the investigators' report indicating that she was under surveillance then.

It also showed her getting into her car, but not getting out, which was more difficult and took her much longer than someone without an injured back.

Mr McGreevy said the video was comprehensive, honest and straightforward.

It showed a woman of considerable capacity, and it convinced the specialist and ACC that she was capable of some light work.

The review of her case found that ACC was premature in deciding she could do 40 hours' work a week.

Mr McGreevy said Ms Nicholson had complained to an ombudsman, who found ACC had acted properly, but he was yet to rule on the handling of the fraud allegations.

ACC Minister Ruth Dyson said she was "interested to know" the reason for Mr Trapski's views. She had asked her staff to contact him to see if he was "willing to share his concerns".

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm...2CE83027AF1010F



____________________________________________________________________

Does McGreevey and Dyson think that we don't know that they consistently and daily read this forum - as might Judge Trapski to keep himself informed

"ACC lawyer Gerard McGreevey said Mr Trapski's comments were surprising, sad and uniformed" - Oh Really!!!!

That's exactly the kind of dismissive "ACC can do no wrong" culture that everyone is complaining about - that comment from McGreevey is most telling.

And working 40 hours a week WAS NOT the legal criteria in the legislation - so that shows ACC was acting illegally throughout.

There are here grounds for a civil case against ACC for bad faith and misfeasance in public office - reckless indifference - intentional infliction of physical and emotional harm.

Attached File(s)


0

#2 User is offline   watcha 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 15-November 03

Posted 15 October 2005 - 10:35 AM

I see the Herald "consulted" Snake McGreevey who said: "Mr Trapski's comments were surprising, sad and uninformed." Note the attempt to diminish His Honour by reducing him to a mere Mr!!!

What a spin on the truth!!!

No-one knows better than Judge Trapski, an honourable man of unquestionable integrity - which is more that we can say for the Snake, the levels ACC stoops to to avoid its responsibilities and defraud claimants.

McGreevy said the video was "comprehensive, honest and straightforward." Bloody hell!!

The video was forensically proven to be comprehensively edited to reflect ACC's purpose, which was to lie and defraud the claimant of her entitlements, and it succeeded, until overturned at review. ACC guilty of fraud again, I wonder how the Drizzle reviewer managed to overlook that commission of fraud by ACC, perhaps he/she chose to ignore it, as they usually do when a situation reflects badly on ACC.

Snake McGreevy wouldn't know the truth even if it jumped up and bit him on the arse, well, let's hope the truth bites off more than his arse this time for he has been caught out lying to the public - again!!

See how ACC always attempts to put the blame right back on the claimant?

Look - the simple fact is, and the Herald reporter obviously ignored the question, that if ACC had even a slight whiff of Su's committing fraud, they would have prosecuted her in a heartbeat - and the same goes for any claimant who finds him/herself in similar circumstances.

Wake up folks, these fraudsters will carry on doing what the do until we stop them; lets follow Judge Trapski's advice!!!
0

#3 User is offline   magnacarta 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 10:47 AM

Watcha, well said - And note that McGreevey is described as an ACC lawyer

Has he been demoted???????

He usually describes himself as General Manager Rehabilitation - or should that be General Manager No Rehabilitation??????????????

Rush on the next Parliament so the petition can be reinstated.

And shouldn't Dyson be asking McGreevey at ACC - How come a former Judge is making such claims and supporting an inquiry ????????????

Mr McGreevey, is there something going on at ACC that I don't know about?????? (Yeah, Right - Fat chance)

AND:

Why Mr MCGreevey have you been so publicly dismissive of a respected member of the Judiciary without providing your evidence that this Judge is "uninformed"

Perhaps these questions need to be asked of Ruth Dyson.
0

#4 User is offline   Easyrider 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 111
  • Joined: 16-September 03

Posted 15 October 2005 - 11:01 AM

Ok Ruth would like proof, mabey the door is open to pick the worst cases and present her with a nice little file. I am sure our Green Party connections can arrange the bundle to be delivered to her desk. Mabey a few claimants should also ask for a full disclousure of how much has been spent on trying to deney entitlements. And include that in the bundle. Amongst us all we have the proof of how ACC have operated. We need someone with the time to collate all the files and present in a good manner. Could also be used for the petition for a enquirey. The kitchen is getting hot, time to turn the heat up.
0

#5 User is offline   Limoges 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 25-November 04

Posted 15 October 2005 - 11:05 AM

So....there you have it. Mr McGreevy's comments were completely dismissive. How can he say that "the video was comprehensive, honest and straightforward." What absolute rot! Leaving out the physiotherapy treatment which I had had just before undertaking the cleaning of my car, was completely dishonest and we all know why it was left out! Even when my GP pointed this fact out to ACC very early on in the piece, it was never and has never been accepted as a fact by ACC because of course it is, and was pivotal to the case.

The Ombudsman is not looking into the fraud issues - the Police hopefully after my complaint to the Police Complaints Authority will be continuing that! The Ombudsman is looking into the last 2 complaints regarding the use of video surveillance by PI's in Australia (we are being discriminated against) and the fact that The Complaints Investigator's Office doesn't even have the courtesy of following up complaints made to that office. The irony here is that the Office doesn't follow up on a complaint of no reply from ACC! The Code of Claimants Rights is a joke! ACC continually breaks the Code and when a complaint is made the Code has either not been broken or a quick apology letter is written off to the claimant. In other words - a whack over the hand with a wet bus ticket for the Case Manager! It is because of The Ombudsman's decisions I wrote to Judge Trapski.

Furthermore, ACC's spin doctors couldn't and wouldn't even believe in the first instance that Judge Trapski's reply letter was bona fide!! Is it so unbelievable that a person like Judge Trapski could say that ACC and their Provider's actions are more than very questionable? Well ACC and Hon. Ruth Dyson, there you have it. He is not misinformed just because he believes there are serious problems in ACC which you don't of course! He has heard this from many. He is a very fair human being who has made up his own mind. He has said it, no doubt, because of the way you went about the investigation with me. I am but the tip of the iceberg. There are hundreds out there as you know - all long-term claimants who feel the same about you. I hope that he will expand on matters when you write to him as I believe you are.

ACC.......What on earth were you thinking when only in 2001 you had accepted my surgeries after 10 years as being a Medical Misadventure - Flatback being a very debilitating and progressive condition?
The Specialist YOU forced me into seeing lost his credibility with many when he did a complete turnaround in his support of my back problems - the very same Specialist who had not only supported me for the past 19 years but who deemed only in 2000 after looking at X-rays he had taken of my spine that the surgeries I had, had"...virtually obliterated my lumbar lordosis" and that "...this in itself was a cause for the ongoing pain", which now made me "...significantly disabled." If he had been experienced and had the expertise with Flatback (as I believe he did anyway!), he would have known how it affects its sufferers. Why were you sending me to a NZ doctor when you said yourselves in the letter to Prof. Kostuik in New York that there was little expertise in NZ regarding the condition? Perhaps that is why you wished me to see only N Z doctors! You would do yourselves a service if you attempted to understand Flatback and its ramifications with a sufferer. The whole way you went about the investigation stank - otherwise I suggest, I wouldn't have won my Review case! And we all know that the anon. calls came from a person who has a Protection Order against her for this very reason - telephone abuse - someone who couldn't even substantiate anything about me because I have had nothing to do with the person since 1991 when I was undergoing these surgeries. However, you chose to push ahead with a bogus fraud investigation and you lost! What a waste of taxpayers money. This is the issue which should be made public.

I will not lie down and take this continual rubbish from you, an Insurer. NZ took away our rights to sue - remember that, so we long-term claimants who suffer severe pain are entitled to our earnings related compensation. I say again, be aware, Flatback is progressive as you have been told by my doctor and as I can see, from what I can achieve today from when looking back even 5 years ago. I am on Morphine and another drug in an effort to help contain the pain I suffer each and every day. It is physically difficult for me even to stand up, let alone undertake activities which is why I have to rest often. What sort of employee would I make in needing to do this I ask you, not to mention being completely unreliable due to the pain? This is why I have Physiotherapy treatments (which you used to pay for in NZ) of massage and ultrasound, however the cost of these is prohibitive for me to have often - which I really need.

I did not want this herald article to be about only me but about all ACC claimants who are continually being given a hard time by ACC and I personally know many now thanks to this Forum - and of course on the Gold Coast too, one of those having had the same Surgeon! ACC, accept that there are some people who have suffered 'an accident' who will never get better - who are at the best they will ever be. Let it be hoped that out of Judge Trapski's reply, a long overdue Inquiry into ACC takes place.
0

#6 User is offline   fairgo 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 15 October 2005 - 11:40 AM

You are a very brave woman Limoges!! Thank god for your strength of character which has allowed you to speak out. It is very difficult to go public and I commend you for doing so.

Judge Trapski is, and always will be, an honorable man who says what he thinks. It must be very difficult for him to see what happened to his report in 1994 and now to be called 'uninformed'. Just who the hell does McGreedy (not a spelling mistake BTW) think he is?? Good grief! :angry:
0

#7 User is offline   happy1 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 15 October 2005 - 12:36 PM

RESIGN M`Greevy ,you are obviously very deluded and need Psychiatric

treatment.GO BEFORE YOU ARE FORCED TO GET TREATMENT .

YOU AND POSTIE BOY WILSON SEEM TO THINK WE CLAIMANTS ARE STAMPS TO

BE STAMPED ON[LIKE LETTERS] WELL WE ARENT
0

#8 User is offline   mouse 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 16-September 03

Posted 15 October 2005 - 12:53 PM

Limoges - well done, but I see Judge Trapski has refused to comment. Was he aware that the contents of his letter were going to be publicised?
0

#9 User is offline   doppelganger 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 12:59 PM

thanks Limoges, you have just made a complaint to the AG for his shoddy report a lot easier.

The Minister has my file in front of her at this moment and is looking at whether the reinjury on 26 September 1994 is a new claim or as the Dr says a reinjury and part of the old orginial claim.

I havent read all the report but beleive that my file is a blue print of what happens to claimants.

I think it is well past time the minister gave me my answer, but I will send her another problem so that she can explain why the ACC altered the medical report and that the lump sum medical assessment does not include the injury, although there was an increase warded.
0

#10 User is offline   magnacarta 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 01:33 PM

Mouse, Judge Trapski did not actually refuse to comment - he was asked to expand on his comments by a newspaper and he declined - and why should he expand??? - it is for an inquiry to establish all the facts.

He has raised some very succinct and relevant points which most certainly indicates and supports that an inquiry is needed.

Indeed, he says so - and that is enough at this point.
0

#11 User is offline   watcha 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 15-November 03

Posted 15 October 2005 - 03:30 PM

Quote: ACC Minister Ruth Dyson said she was "interested to know" the reason for Mr Trapski's views. She had asked her staff to contact him to see if he was "willing to share his concerns".

Guess who will probably write the letter to Judge Trapski? Her ACC Man Friday Brendon Gage no doubt. It will be an interesting letter, I hope Judge Trapski will release it to the media.

Brendon Gage, ACC employee seconded to the Minister For ACC Ruth Dyson's office; that's great, refer issues from Minister's office to ACC, ACC writes response to the Minister, Minister (Brendon, or should that be Bendon) writes to Judge Trapski, hopefully Judge Trapski says get stuffed just do your job, Minister instigates a formal inquiry and Joe Public wins a resounding victory. Woops, glass is empty.

Good on ya Limoges, stick it to em where ths sun don't shine, I know exactly what you've been put through - time to call to account.
0

#12 User is offline   batman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: 17-September 05

Posted 15 October 2005 - 03:41 PM

Hello, hello its Batman here. Mr McGreevy, how many claimants would I need to show you that what you are saying about ACC being so wonderful is a fiction and falacy? Would you and the board be prepared to let some of the dissatisfied claimants present their experiences to them illustrating the truth about ACC, the culture, the mindset. Nothing has changed since the Trapski report except ACC has become more cunning in how they deny people their lawful rights and then dump them on to sickness or invalid's benefits, or nothing if their partner/spouse is employed. How many people have lost their homes, thier marriage, their family or their life because of this ongoing fraud? Who is accountable? The CEO, the board, the minister or all of them. The minister can't say she doesn't know because there are claimants who have been going to her with their horror stories and she does nothing!! I will be pleased if Labour gets back in and she remains the minister because she won't be able to say that it was someone elses portfolio and responsibility. Labour has forgotten what it used to stand for, the average hard working NZer. Maybe the opposition will be interested in bringing them to account -Brash wants to show ACC doesn't work and privatise, wouldn't this be a great opportunity to show it?? :ph34r:
0

#13 User is offline   flowers 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 04:21 PM

He can have my files.
0

#14 User is offline   MadMac 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 06:07 PM

:wub: YEEEEEEP ... been reduced to the point of committing suicide to escape the outragious stress, depression absurdity created by the style of management by ACC ...

:wacko: specialist even wrote to ACC...ACC where fully aware ...yet where toooooooooooooooooo busy trying to manage which claim no, OOOOOOOOOPs ...

:blink:Appears even had an ACC Fraud Officer open a claim ...then had me investigated for fraud by having 2 claim nos for the same accident date ...

:wacko: OOOOOOOO YEAH ...toooooooooooo busy trying to manage who was managing my claim ... appears case manager busy telling the medicial proffesion NOOOOOOOOOO ... appears case manager telling the legal proffesion YEEEEEEEES ... so who do I believe the medicial or lawyer ... all I know is that I had a disability recquiring surgery ...

:D YEEEEP still trying to get the basic of basic details correct ...LEFT or RIGHT arm ?

:wub: Have a great day everyone ... be PROUD be STRONG ... keep smiling...
0

#15 Guest_Percy_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 15 October 2005 - 07:58 PM

McGravy's comments are sick.
Just goes to show how a spin Doctor works!
Big bunch of red roses to you Limogues, you are very brave bringing this to the media.
Hope there are no PI's sent from McGravy following you around.!
Would the surgeon be OTTO by any chance?
There a lot out for his blood and throat too I would think?!
0

#16 User is offline   flowers 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 11:25 PM

magnacarta, on Oct 15 2005, 08:47 AM, said:


ACC Minister Ruth Dyson said she was "interested to know" the reason for Mr Trapski's views. She had asked her staff to contact him to see if he was "willing to share his concerns".


Stupid cow has'nt the wits or decency to contact the judge herself.
Instead she will get one of her minions to do it and "pen a suitable reply"
Good chance she will get her resident ACC asset Brendon Gage to do the calling.
She is as useless as tits on a football and is totally incapable of doing anything except parrot the pap she is fed by her masters ACC.
She should be sacked and charged with criminal negligence. I have 6 letters from this hetera and all parrot the same bullshit written and compiled by brendon gage. even one has his signature on it.
Irt's about time some of the up and comming members of parliment start putting some serious questions to her and watch her squirm and her boss as well.
Labour by their support of her and ACC actions have proved that they care stuff all about the disabled and are only too keen to use the billions of dollars they have stolen from the disabled that they have thrown onto the taxpayer (some 17000 exited to winz sickness and invalids benifits) so as to make the books look good. Even the reserve bank is bleating about the bullshit ecconomy they have hoodwinked the New Zealand public with and will continue to do if they are allowed into power again.
0

#17 User is offline   Karney 

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

Posted 15 October 2005 - 11:39 PM

If the Herald article had published the whole of Trapski's report there would be no need to ask him to expand on his comments nor explain his concerns to the minister. His report was sufficiently detailed to explain where his opinions came from and why. And he was also commissioned by ACC itself to do this research report so had no vested interest in giving a falsely negative view.
The mark of a good leader, politician or organisation is the willingness to honestly investigate their own behaviour and the courage to admit failure or poor practice. Obviously neither ACC nor the minister has the integrity to do this.
0

#18 User is offline   Limoges 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 25-November 04

Posted 16 October 2005 - 08:42 AM

Yes Percy you are right!
0

#19 User is offline   batman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: 17-September 05

Posted 16 October 2005 - 09:32 AM

Have just watched the league test which my wife video'd for me and thought to myself how proud I was to be a NZer. I think of the NZ'ers that gave their lives in the 1st and 2nd world wars for the life we have today but then reality hit in. How can fellow NZers in the name of ACC do what they are doing to their countryman. Why was ACC set up, it was definitely not to be a revenue gathering monopoly for the government. The selected few - ACC minister, board and employees - don't seem to have a care for the rights and wellbeing of their fellow human being. In fact with what is written in some claimant's files it appears they take great delight in ridiculing and demonising the injured and disadvantaged. The Act was set up to protect them and save them from having to employ lawyers and the cost of expensive litigation to access their rights and entitlements - it seems that the Act just means you are fighting a government department in court instead of an employer and thereby having a much lesser chance of winning (power of the purse). Don't get me wrong, some people are doing really well out of this system, unfortunately it is not the person that the Act was set up to protect - the person with an injury. Why is it ACC can dump someone off and deny them their lawful entitlement by getting one of their Dr's to say they can work 35 hrs a week yet a WINZ approved Dr puts them on a sickness or invalid's benefit because they can't work more than ?15 hours per week due to the result of their injury not an illness? I thought that was why ACC was set up, the silly taxpayer is paying twice for the same thing. ;)
0

#20 User is offline   magnacarta 

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

Posted 16 October 2005 - 10:20 AM

I guess we have all had time to consider the NZ Herald story, Judge Trapski's comments and the posts on this thread.

By law the new Parliament must be commenced no later than 18 November 2005.

I understand that our petition for an inquiry into ACC is still with MP Sue Bradford who originaly presented it to Parliament in June 2004 -

We know that Parliament's Transportand Industrial Relations Committee misunderstood the substance, wording and intention of the petition and didn't properly deal with it.

That being the case, can someone who has contact with the Green's, MP Sue Bradford or her office please contact them urgently and ask for that petition to be reinstated onto the order paper of the new Parliament's business.

There is a Standing Order of Parliament which allows this - I think it is SO 249 although I stand to be corrected. Anyway, Sue Bradford will be able to find out from the Office of the Clerk of the House.

We now need to get our A's into G.
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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