ACCforum: Total Declinature Of Claim / Alan Thomas - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 891 Pages +
  • « First
  • 889
  • 890
  • 891
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Total Declinature Of Claim / Alan Thomas Allegations of working while incapacitated

#17801 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1614
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted Today, 11:55 AM

there would be big holes in the case as here is one hole from page 12

I have totalled the debts and credits to be $1,276, 283.00 and $1,286, 767.00 respectively.

It would be a hole if he just admitted that he carried out work and received $40.00 per week. This theory also has flaws in it as the Court Documents show Mr Thomas has identified that his business have low overhead. This would mean that he was avoiding to pay tax or more commonly known as tax evasion.
0

#17802 User is offline   Hemi 

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

Posted Today, 12:32 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 19 June 2018 - 11:53 AM, said:

As you have no ability to address ACC legislation and ACC's conduct in accordance with that legislation you found yourself ill-equipped to contribute towards this thread. Your inability to participate in a rational discussion concerning legislation and the facts has left you perplexed and out of your depth with the result that you have become abusive and even accusing me of being angry with that in the evidence to leave you with this conclusion. Probably you are simply responding to everything in life in accordance with the way you interpret the world and respond based on the interpretation. It is plain to see that you interpret the world based on speculation an assumption in circumstances when you are ill-equipped to address technical matters such as legislation combined with not having any facts in your possession to make your point. Given that this is the process you are relying on it is clear that your point can only be irrational and not worthy of discussion.
Those of course who do have the ability to read the legislation and generate an opinion as to what that legislation means and are able to apply that foundation material to the facts of my case I welcome to continue to participate in this discussion.



read your own case files and court documentations thomas
your so called acc legislation was shoved up you in your fraud case and was why you were convicted
you even attempted the bullshit youve placed out here within the pretrial hearing where you LOST that and as ALAN THOMAS you and your legal
CONCEDED to a Prima Facie case of FRAUD against you which was established by the prosecution and you went to a full trial;
acc legislation
if you were so correct with all you spout in and out of here then you'd have won that debate and gone home instead of jail.
this forum is littered with all your utterances of nonsense on acc legislation according to thomas law WHICH HAS NEVER got you anywhere
all you do is attack those
WHO ARE FAR BETTER THAN YOU at dealing with acc legislation and discovering terrorists amongst the membership of this forum
which by the way if youve forgotten YOUR the Takapuna Bomber and have NO PLACE IN HERE AMONGST THE VULNERABLE to promote your nasty means of dealing with legislation you cant defeat in a court of law.

What was your real reason thomas for wanting the location names personal details of those in the remote case managers departments

your a real bad ass thomas.




you welcome participation
hahahahah to that -NO YOU REALLY DONT WELCOME THAT
As that is ONLY if those participants agree with your BOLLOCKS
0

#17803 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted Today, 01:31 PM

View Postdoppelganger, on 19 June 2018 - 11:55 AM, said:

there would be big holes in the case as here is one hole from page 12

I have totalled the debts and credits to be $1,276, 283.00 and $1,286, 767.00 respectively.

It would be a hole if he just admitted that he carried out work and received $40.00 per week. This theory also has flaws in it as the Court Documents show Mr Thomas has identified that his business have low overhead. This would mean that he was avoiding to pay tax or more commonly known as tax evasion.


Let us for one moment make the assumption that I did work and then make another assumption that all of the income and expenditure was as a result of my activities to the exclusion of anybody else.

I wonder if you have actually done any sums?Totalling the income against expenditure come up with a figure of $10,484.Then if we average that figure over the period from 1993-1997 we come up with $2621 per year and if we divide that by 52 weeks in the year we come up with a figure of $50.40 per week.
Doppelgänger are you aware that my medical certificates to work two hours per day fragmented throughout the day. So if we were divide $52.04 by 10 hours we come up with a figure of $5.40 per hour.

Doppelgänger are you trying to tell everybody that I have gained a capacity to earn equal to that of my preinjury occupation by only being able to work 10 hours per week and only earn a maximum of $5.04 per hour?

In addition if we were to take the ACCs word that their informants were reliable and that I had been working was there any evidence that I had been working more than 10 hours per week but most importantly had demonstrated capacity to have a capacity to return to my preinjury occupation in order that I may resume that occupation at those earnings so as to be not entitled to earnings compensation?
The company accountant has not assigned those funds over the years and the ACC forensic accountant agrees that those funds appear to be the typical float that exists with any company from year to year and as such have no meaning whatsoever. Further the ACC forensic accountant confirms that it is not possible to reach a conclusion that those funds were destined to myself and as such the ACCs point is not only wrong but irrelevant. If the ACC forensic accountant with authors qualifications and experience state that those funds are a relevant then it follows that those who are not qualified and experienced in such matters, such as the judge and doppelgänger then we are seeing just how rational people can be. It is for this reason that the higher court have outlawed any kind of "common sense" being applied to matters relate to the ACC duties to determine matters in accordance with legislated criteria. Doppelgänger are you going to be obedient to the law or mock the law?

The ACC have established proof beyond reasonable doubt that I never withdrew any funds from the company but rather had only deposited a considerable sum into the company.

Now after looking at all that information We see that a significant number of staff had functioned for the purposes of generating earnings for themselves and that their work task activities had resulted in income for the company with the company actually making very little income. All the staff including the manager, my de facto wife, had been paid for the work that they had done in the ACC have not been able to identify any work that I could have done given the fact that all of the work carried out within the company had been identified to have been carried out by the staff of the company to the exclusion of myself. This left the judge to conclude that somehow I have been the driving force and Energizer of the company not being aware that the ACC are required to identify a capacity to earn from either my preinjury occupation or a particular new occupation. The judge did not go down this road to find out whether or not a driving force and energizer is an occupation for the purposes of earning and whether or not the maximum potential earning of $5.04 per hour meets the of having returned to the previous earnings capacity or occupation etc.


Throughout the entire episode the ACC have acknowledged that I am injured and incapacitated to some degree but they have never defined the quantum of incapacity in accordance with the criteria required of them within legislation. Doppelgänger the judiciary now require the ACC to carry out those calculations to determine the degree of my disability. Are you trying to argue for the ACC before they have acknowledged their mistake or are you to ring with the current judiciary requiring the ACC to carry out the proper calculations to determine the degree of disability?


My position is that the ACC and the judge had not adhered to the legislated criteria for the purposes of the decision-making.


Doppelgänger, do you think that the ACC and the judge had relied upon the ACC legislation or had made a decision based on some kind of common sense/intuition as claimed by the ACC staff and the judge alike and whether or not the legislation allows them to do so?
0

#17804 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted Today, 01:52 PM

View PostHemi, on 19 June 2018 - 12:32 PM, said:

read your own case files and court documentations thomas
your so called acc legislation was shoved up you in your fraud case and was why you were convicted
you even attempted the bullshit youve placed out here within the pretrial hearing where you LOST that and as ALAN THOMAS you and your legal
CONCEDED to a Prima Facie case of FRAUD against you which was established by the prosecution and you went to a full trial;
acc legislation
if you were so correct with all you spout in and out of here then you'd have won that debate and gone home instead of jail.
this forum is littered with all your utterances of nonsense on acc legislation according to thomas law WHICH HAS NEVER got you anywhere
all you do is attack those
WHO ARE FAR BETTER THAN YOU at dealing with acc legislation and discovering terrorists amongst the membership of this forum
which by the way if youve forgotten YOUR the Takapuna Bomber and have NO PLACE IN HERE AMONGST THE VULNERABLE to promote your nasty means of dealing with legislation you cant defeat in a court of law.

What was your real reason thomas for wanting the location names personal details of those in the remote case managers departments

your a real bad ass thomas.




you welcome participation
hahahahah to that -NO YOU REALLY DONT WELCOME THAT
As that is ONLY if those participants agree with your BOLLOCKS

The prima facie casefour a trial is whether or not the ACC possessed any information that I was working and whether or not work form the basis of cancellation of the claim for cover and entitlements.

This means that ACC must disclose the alleged information of work during the trial. Such information is not up for debate during a depositions hearing. With regards to whether or not work forms the basis of a cancellation of claim under the ACC legislation is a matter for legal debate. Obviously ACC thought that does what my viewpoint is that it does not. This means You must be a trial to determine such matters and as such David Butler that you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about concerning legal processes.
During the course of the trial the ACC did not disclose a single piece of evidence describing a single work task activity of any material time. They had no evidence of any work for me to challenge. The ACC however pointed out to the judge that it is up to the ACC to determine on balance of probability whether or not I was working and that in their minds eye they could make a decision based on what they viewed as common sense. Further the ACC instructed the judge that it is the ACC that has the authority to determine whether or not I have a valid claim and entitlements to compensation and not the judge and that the judge had no business ruling on such matters. The judge agreed with the ACC which meant that there was no possibility I could mount any kind of the defence to the ACC accusation of ACC fraud with the result that the judge found in the ACC's favour. This formed the model for the ACC to convert quite a number of claimants and threaten many many more to surrender their claim and entitlements or face execution for fraud. The following years resulted in upwards of 300 per year being accused of ACC fraud. I have assisted legal representative challenge two cases of fraud conviction appeals which found in the claimant's favour based on my understanding of the law. My application for an appeal of the criminal decision is waiting for a proper outcome's earning the requirements for a court to rule on whether or not ACC ever possessed information of work and whether or not work forms the basis of the ACC determining cancellation of claim and entitlements is within the criteria described in legislation. I have not been granted leave to appeal myself and with regards to the issues raised in that application no judge is actually answer the questions put before the High Court or Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal is the last of the appeal process. I am now waiting for the ACC to comply with the judiciary that has instructed the ACC to determine my degree of incapacity and disability. ACC continue to ignore the directives of the judiciary.

The ACC response to my approach which has been exclusively through the judicial processes as to accuse me of planning to blow them up. This accusation came three days before my presenting submissions to the court which could not go ahead because the ACC false allegations resulted in my submissions being taken from me thus upsetting my appeal to the court. Again the only evidence that the ACC have relied upon as the imagination of one interests of which would normally be discounted because of a conflict of interest. It seems to me that the ACC rely upon idiots who come up with all manner of ridiculous theories such as David Butler who acted in a collaborative manner in the form of a conspiracy with one of those the ACC have relied upon for the information. David Butler is one who tried to provide the ACC with information but because of his incapacity to express himself in writing resulted in his email being presented to the court as being relevant despite the fact that no one could actually understand what he was writing. The police had taken the view that he would have been inebriated with the legal drugs at the time of is writing given the nature of the content of the email. Nonetheless the ACC fully relied upon David Butler to carry out an investigation which included Kenneth Miller who they also thought to be an idiot so relied upon Douglas weal who had offered the ACC what he called "high-value information" quite some time after the allegations of terrorism had passed which is time he should have made some form of disclosure if he was to be believed. At no time did Douglas weal volunteer himself freely which adds to the already existing conflict of interest.

This site exists to assist those who are vulnerable from the ACC carrying out illegal activities while also providing assistance of those who are attacked by individuals on behalf of the ACC to generate all kinds of nonsense in a manner that emulates or attempts to emulate Douglas weal, such as the other members of the tagteam who make it their business to attack all kinds of claimants on behalf of the ACC.

0

#17805 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1307
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted Today, 05:32 PM

ALAN GORDON THOMAS , is in dream land , and will report back in a timely manner , as when , and if his entitlements are restored . it appears to tommy B)
0

#17806 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1307
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted Today, 05:52 PM

of any up to date ,on the twenty day , report back time frame , al :rolleyes: an
0

#17807 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1307
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted Today, 06:23 PM

as your issues with the corporation , is in a eleven year thread . as in Total declinature etc, ones does would question . as in alans resolvements with the corpration :mellow:
0

Share this topic:


  • 891 Pages +
  • « First
  • 889
  • 890
  • 891
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

6 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 5 guests, 1 anonymous users