ACCforum: Total Declinature Of Claim / Alan Thomas - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 905 Pages +
  • « First
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

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

#681 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 16 December 2007 - 06:12 PM

Hardwired is absolutely nothing wrong, morally or legally, with posting state servants, ACC employees, private investigators and others photos, home address and so forth on the Internet including this site. I wish more people had the courage to do so and actually did.

If there was any response from Sue North resulting in an un-authorised manipulation of the site perhaps the same information should be posted again to see what happens.

Are you able to enlighten us the nature of what you think might have been threatening/libellous together with reasoning and justification as an advisory. If others think that it is safe to continue and can justify their position satisfactorily then maybe the posting will be made again.
0

#682 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 16 December 2007 - 07:24 PM

Hardwired I have never controlled any thing and neither do I feel the need to control anything, as is common with people who believe in freedom of speech. I do often worry however that a Socialist government might have me in court for defending others rights to have freedom of speech. .

I do not seem to understand why some people think freedom of speech is threatening. But then I am not a Socialist.

People who believe in freedom of speech are usually quite easy to understand because they say what they mean. Others seem to like a little bit of in your end oh (innuendo) and criticise me for not caring to experiment with my preferences.

The only reason why my issues have remained unresolved for such a long time is because I am up against those who are willing to break the law by cancelling my claim and then break the law again by stealing the evidence that proves them wrong when obtaining a search warrant and keeping the exhibits away from the eyes of the court. Naturally these people are going to use levy payers money to prevent themselves from being convicted for perjury.

I will use my dying breath to defend my integrity and will not capitulate to bullies while I still breathe in and out.


Doppelganger the issue that you have raised is already conceded by the ACC that a person who was injured while earning who suffers an additional unrelated injury prior to recovery and while still on ACC I regarded to be earners and therefore entitled to continuous ERC even though they have recovered from the first injury but are still incapacitated from the second unrelated injury.

ACC had issued a decision on each injury in my favour and two review hearings were also in my favour when the ACC came up with the ill-conceived nonsense that I was working because I owned businesses and were investigating other business opportunities.

Your hypothesis that the ACC did not issue a decision then used the fraud to cover their tracks is not supported by any facts.

I think you are right that ACC have mismanaged my claims. My files are an absolute mess is acknowledged by the ACC auditor immediately after the criminal conviction that claimed to possess information that I was no longer entitled. The auditor confirmed that no such information existed on my file. Michael Dunn has undertaken to examine the entire 20 file boxes in the hope to come to grips with what has happened. If the auditor had failed it is most likely that Michael Dunn will also fail. Everybody looks at my file into giving up in despair because they can make no sense of it. The information is just not there.

There is medical evidence that I am incapacitated to return to my preinjury occupation or any other occupation. There is no evidence that I have been involved in any work task activities either related to my preinjury occupation or a new occupation. The only evidence that I have been made aware of and have declared to the ACC is that I owned a number of businesses, fail to carry out the directors duties, invested money and make a profit because others claiming to manage the companies embezzled from the companies. Possibly because they knew I was not involved with the companies to the extent they were confident they could get away with it.
0

#683 User is offline   neddy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 362
  • Joined: 17-September 03

Posted 16 December 2007 - 07:59 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on Dec 16 2007, 05:57 PM, said:

Perhaps those posting shameful postings might be encouraged to remove them so we can move forward with purpose and pride to achieve our common goals.



Whats the saying Et Tu Bruté? or is it "Out of your own mouth you are condemned"
0

#684 User is offline   Spacecadet 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 24-January 07

Posted 17 December 2007 - 08:29 AM

View Postdoppelganger, on Dec 16 2007, 07:40 PM, said:

Alan I posted section 115 of the 72 Act to show that that section had been removed. you had no cover when you had your second injury while waiting for treatment on the first injury.

After your operation for the first injury in which you had 100% recovery ACC should issued a decision on the first injury and a decision on the second injury.

I think that ACC did not issue a decision on any claims and used the fraud unit to cover there tracks

If I got things correct ACC are trying to cover up the mismanagement of your claim. Check it out.


Doppelganger You have a really good point here.

Mr Thomas has previously posted his tax returns for these relevant years on the forum. They show that in 1991 (?) Mr Thomas was working for Trigon on wages and paying PAYE.

As this is what his tax record shows - hard evidence. $36,000 per year and paying PAYE.

There is nothing about "design engineer" or Mr Thomas being self employed, or owning a company. Indeed there is no evidence of this at all. In fact, if what Mr Thomas now claims has any validity - he would not have been paying PAYE tax and would have been on an IR3/5 tax code. We have heard from Mr Thomas that at the time of his second injury, the one he now suffers from, his was no longer working for Trigon, and was soley dependent of ERC.

IMHO Mr Orange may have been mistaken in his decision to grant ERC for this accident? It appears Mr Thomas is spinning a story about being a design engineer and running his own company during this time - to cover for this.

At the end of the day, the question of whether Mr Thomas was working in his immigration business in 1997 when he was convicted of fraud will become irrelevant, as the behind the scenes legal developments going on at present may see all ACC fraud convictions in the past 10 years be overturned. Mr Thomas is aware of these legal developments so he is using this forum to create a smokescreen to cover up the of a second accident while on ERC and having no employment.

Something to think about?

Mr Thomas - you do not have to answer this with a long blog about your fantasies about what your business empire was up to at this time. What we would like to see are your business records; and it is those documents, and those documents alone which will confirm what was happening with companies in which you had an involvement. I think it is also important to note that ERC is only calculated on past declared personal earnings, on which personal taxation was paid, in this case $36,000 paid to Mr Thomas by Trigon in 1991.

IRD have these records and they cannot be disputed by ACC or the Courts. All Mr Thomas has to do is require IRD to produce them, that is if they do indeed exist.

So much argument and spin about something that can be determined so easily, even after all these years.
0

#685 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 10:55 AM

Spacecadet & doppelganger ACC also believed in the concept that you have tried to describe that the matter has been resolved first by John Orange December 1990 and again reconfirmed by review hearing decision 1992 that acknowledges the relationship between the first and second injury and continuity of ERC etc. These decisions are binding upon the ACC because they are correct. If the ACC later decide they do not like these decisions, which they have not, they would need to make a new decision which would need to be addressed through Part 5 of the Act.

Perform the contract of employment for Trigon for part of 1989 both before and after I owned businesses which provided additional income and earnings. The earnings part of the business is over and above what I earned from Trigon. Trigon earnings was made up of a salary, the use of a vehicle for my business activities as well as personal use, including some thousands of dollars of fuel used for my business, accommodation and food plus progress payments which were paid out on the day I ceased being employed by Trigon.

As far as my work task activities they are evidenced by history and tangible items produced as witnessed by a significant number of people to the point where my business activities cannot be doubted if brought into question.

Spacecadet you are building hypotheses based on speculations which is never a good way to arrive at the truth.

In 1997 all company management and documentation, including the dealings with the accountant and so forth was carried out by Paul Topp Mitchell. During the search warrant the ACC private investigators went into his office where he was working and also the business reception computer to extract documentation that he produced and presented it to the court as an it was produced by myself. At this stage Paul had been offered a partnership and had purchased his own office furniture and other items to contribute towards this end. As a result of the ACC communications with the immigration services on the same floor of the same building or business activity came to an abrupt go slow and even stop, including the process of my own fiancee and permanent residency application with the private investigators representing such work is being carried out by myself. As the loss of business and humiliation caused or extreme distress he said he was going to commit suicide. One month later he died at the bus stop on the way home from work as a result of taking too much medication.

Spacecadet there was never a business empire as the ACC caused the court to imagine so as to cause the judge to believe I was managing an empire of businesses as described in the judgement.

I do however agree that the ACC will lose but will continue finding more and more creative ways of evading their liabilities.

The bottom line is that the ACC have never calculated ERC but rather allowed the ERC to be continued at the rate of 80% of only the salaried portion which represents just over 50% of my total earnings preinjury. 1992 legislation requires certain criteria to be fulfilled and in particular with self-employed activities that are not easily determined there must be a calculation based on a reasonable estimate in circumstances where the IRD have not made the records available regardless whether information has ever been presented or not. ERC is not based on IRD but on actual earnings even in circumstances where the tax has not been paid as in the case of a jewel thief or prostitute.

I agree that everything can be determined very easily even after all these years.
0

#686 User is offline   Spacecadet 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 24-January 07

Posted 17 December 2007 - 12:01 PM

And what do we get in reply - a long blog about the fantasies of Alan Thomas.

Quote

Quote: "Spacecadet you are building hypotheses based on speculations which is never a good way to arrive at the truth.

An opinion is not a hypothesis.
I was expressing an opinion of what little factual evidence has been provided, and pointing out how this scant evidence does not stack up with the story Mr Thomas is trying to present. No doubt Judges will have no problem seeing through this, as they have done repeatedly in the past. But then - one is not to suppose to have opinions that do not agree with Mr Thomas on this forum
I suggest it would have been better for you to have plead not guilty to fraud on the grounds of insanity, in that you are a compulsive liar.
You clearly do not live in the real world.
0

#687 User is offline   waddie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 25-August 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 12:15 PM

I'm waiting for book release. Hope you have a copyright on this Alan. Put me down for an autographed copy.
0

#688 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 12:38 PM

Spacecadet you can build a hypothesis subsequent to facts that it is impossible to have a meaningful hypothesis from speculation. You speculate that John Orange and two reviewers are wrong so you can have a hypothesis all without any information. This is how the ACC private investigators conduct business so I could speculate that you have been spending time with them learning how to make hypotheses.

How can I have told any lies if I had not been asked any questions? ACC conceded that I had provided all the necessary information but the judge concluded that I had cunningly asked questions in order to prevent the ACC from carrying out the necessary procedures and by this dastardly plan had committed fraud. It would seem that somehow I had caused the ACC to lose two years of my files 1993-1995 and portions of two years of written correspondence causing the ACC to produce half a letter in order to interpret a different meaning from that letter.

In the real world when I designed and built computer-controlled machinery every single item of many thousands of items had to be 100% correct when the green button was pressed otherwise I would not be paid. I survived in business 17 years this way.

By way of reminder ACC acknowledge that I was an earner as described by the act prior to both injuries which has been confirmed by 2 reviewers which is a decision still binding on us all as nobody has appealed. Naturally I would be surprised if there was a reconstruct of existing documents configured to your hypothesis Mr Spacecadet.
0

#689 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

  Posted 17 December 2007 - 12:38 PM

Spaccie

Interesting stuff used in calculating Mr tankengines wages from trigon, (thousands of dollars of fuel used for his business) Wonder with one. Income for that business. By golly.........yes. And if receipts used to gather Gst expenses, Mr TE owes the Inland Revenue money back.

As I said Mr T there are times one needs to keep there big mouth shut!!!

You are talking youself into another stint in the lock up!!!

Getting interesting eh??

Mini
-1

#690 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 12:53 PM

Mini as there was a large expenditure with a GST content and projects were not completed Because of the injury and therefore not paid, there was a significant GST refund. Mini there is no information to hide and I would not anyway as that would be wrong. Information is power and information is my protection. The only difficulty I have experienced is when the ACC disposed of the information and stole the rest so they could keep that information from the gaze of the court. The lesson learned is to make sure as many people as possible know the information and that to the foundation proof beyond reasonable doubt documentation is kept safe.
0

#691 User is offline   neddy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 362
  • Joined: 17-September 03

Posted 17 December 2007 - 01:53 PM

View Postwaddie, on Dec 17 2007, 01:15 PM, said:

I'm waiting for book release. Hope you have a copyright on this Alan. Put me down for an autographed copy.


I wonder if it needs a title page?


If you think that is a bit rough, then consider these statements made by Hitler, and compare them to Thomas.

By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.

Great liars are also great magicians.

If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.

It is not truth that matters, but victory.

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.

The great mass of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.

The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth.



0

#692 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 02:58 PM

Neddyfor serious minded people to take you seriously you need to do better. Perhaps actual facts to support your viewpoint might if some traction because eventually propaganda always fails so long as those who are victim to propaganda remained steadfast and not succumb to that type of bullying.
0

#693 User is offline   Spacecadet 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 24-January 07

Posted 17 December 2007 - 03:12 PM

Nice one Neddy!
0

#694 User is offline   neddy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 362
  • Joined: 17-September 03

Posted 17 December 2007 - 03:28 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on Dec 17 2007, 03:58 PM, said:

Neddyfor serious minded people to take you seriously you need to do better. Perhaps actual facts to support your viewpoint might if some traction because eventually propaganda always fails so long as those who are victim to propaganda remained steadfast and not succumb to that type of bullying.

We don't have to trawl far to find evidence of your lying, deceptive statements and your deliberate policy of twisting facts and not replying to a straight question.

I don't worry about my credibility as I don't post "advice" to people or harass them with PM's just to score brownie points.

Your bullshit is propaganda for the Thomas cause as you see it, as we've seen through it and through you.

Your day is coming and you will be caught by the big lie you are promoting.

As for bullying, you do it all the time without thinking, you harass people via PM's and castigate anyone who has a different point of view to you as well as having a virtual monopoly on postings to this board.

I can live with your lies, I suppose I'll have to learn to live with the liar.

As for the facts, I and others have repeatedly pointed out your deception, manipulation and outright lies and if you conduct a search on your own threads you will find where you've been caught with no clothes so to speak.

It must be very self-satisfying to know you can create such mayhem and dissent, also by your contemptuous behaviour and replies you reveal more of your true self and little bits come to the surface as the gloss wears off.
0

#695 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 03:30 PM

Neddy does prove that power of propaganda in the way in which it appeals to the mob mentality and how it does have an effect on weak minded individuals who likes to hunt with the pack.
0

#696 User is offline   neddy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 362
  • Joined: 17-September 03

Posted 17 December 2007 - 04:11 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on Dec 17 2007, 04:30 PM, said:

Neddy does prove that power of propaganda in the way in which it appeals to the mob mentality and how it does have an effect on weak minded individuals who likes to hunt with the pack.

Firstly, I am my own man, I don't run with a pack, and I don't think I would qualify as weak minded either as I fight my own battles and choose whom I wish to engage with.

You seem to think there is a conspiracy toward you, evidence of your paranoia I suppose.

Wea are not a conspiracy, it's just that we tend to think alike when it comes to your lies and deceptions, and wrong advice. on all manner of subjects.

I have posted this before but it has relevance to T.E.'s latest spin, this is in regard to Medical matters, but the pattern is there to see.

The pronouncements of Sir Les Paterson’s Protégé as taken from just two current threads

“I have raised the issue that we should rely upon those who have a degree in medical science rather than our own understanding which has led onto scaremongering”


”It is quite proper that we should discuss the merits of our belief systems in these threads”

“It is quite inappropriate to recommend someone accept what they have been given because it is similar to what someone else has been given”

“There is absolutely no harm in sharing our experiences and discussing similarities of conditions and treatment plans without treatment providers.”

“Do not worry about the addiction of the pain medication asif your pain is permanent you will never needed to deal with that or you will find it a comparatively minor problem to withdraw under medical supervision once you are no longer suffering”


“Anyperson who is in genuine need of an opiate type medication is not going to be worrying about the side effect addiction”

“No one is so stupid to believe they can be on an opiate and not be addicted”

“Therapists are not qualified to actually treat PTSD”

“What can a D & A accredited Doctor do that a general practitioner cannot do?”

“I have a similar complaint to ….”

“There is absolutely no possibility that this can be achieved with a D & A Team simply because they are not set up for this purpose.”

“I have enjoyed the benefits of high-level expertise at the hospital other a significant number of years. I would not be so presumptuous as to suggest my knowledge base is of direct value but at least worthy of initiating an enquiry”

“I have not recommended any particular treatment”


”In actual fact there is a pharmaceutical that does work for PTSD”


”Personally I think there is a very good case for vengeance being used as a therapeutic tool”

“I would not be so presumptuous as to think that I knew better than the GP”

“Stress is no more a disorder than the extreme stress of Post Traumatic "Stress" Disorder.”

”It is perfectly natural and not a disorder”


”While I have discussed various medication I had not gone so far as to suggest a prescription”

“There is no relationship between PTSD and Borderline Personality Disorder. Borderline Personality Disorder is not even a medical or mental condition!”


”Sir Les Patterson and I do not generally comment on sexual confusion”

“I object to being offered PTSD counsel about somebody else's sexual confusion by someone who is themselves sexually confused who tries to insist on a hug.”

“Borderline personality order is simply a creation of socialist governments that they use to make enemies of the state mentally disabled so they can lock them up.”

“There is no medical moral or legal basis for therapists and psychologists attempting to treat pain and are especially ill-equipped to deal with the complex situation of pain and PTSD which may very well now be CPTSD.”


If one takes the time and reads carefully, one can see that every statement is contradicted by another, commonly referred to in the vernacular as Blue on Blue , or shooting up the friendlies. or putting your big bloody foot in it

That's just one example, we would flood the board if we looked for others similar.
0

#697 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 04:35 PM

Neddy are I appreciate the tremendous amount of work that you have put into your last posting but unfortunately I simply had no comprehension of what you are trying to tell me.

You have gone through a large volume of postings in order to cut and paste some examples. For the life of me I cannot see any connection between as examples and your following statement.

If one takes the time and reads carefully, one can see that every statement is contradicted by another, commonly referred to in the vernacular as Blue on Blue , or shooting up the friendlies. or putting your big bloody foot in it

That's just one example, we would flood the board if we looked for others similar.



I would very much like to understand you as what I am seeing as an alternative viewpoint or lifestyle mindset on one or more people that I had never had any association or experience with. Obviously we have been mixing in different circles . But it would be good for us to understand what makes each other tick so as despite different thinking processes we may work in unison.

for example I have no idea what blue on blue means and where you think I might have been shooting friendlies. Far from "putting my... foot in it, I think the above comments are well thought out and contribute to the thread. Clearly you have a different viewpoint it appears to me to be cultural of which I have no comprehension.

As far as I can see if I am culturally different or believe in freedom of speech that does not mean that I could be labelled suffering from "borderline personality disorder". Neither do I want to receive an injection, treatment or incarceration from anyone who has a political persuasion, ACC or otherwise.
0

#698 User is offline   waddie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 25-August 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 04:51 PM

Neddy, who are you trying to convince other than Alan, why bother? Life's to short. He can create another identify so he can have a conversation with himself.
0

#699 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 December 2007 - 05:00 PM

Waddie clearly Neddie has a viewpoint and has gone to a lot of trouble. I am not about to ignore such efforts just because I do not understand. Naturally if I am truly deficient in some way where I have gone wrong should be explained, whether it be fraud or personality deficiency. Naturally I am never going to be responding to a volley of criticism when the criticism has no basis in fact or rational reason. Clearly Neddie is operating by some form of reason, but I just for the life of me do not get it.
0

#700 User is offline   neddy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 362
  • Joined: 17-September 03

Posted 17 December 2007 - 05:19 PM

View Postwaddie, on Dec 17 2007, 05:51 PM, said:

Neddy, who are you trying to convince other than Alan, why bother? Life's to short. He can create another identify so he can have a conversation with himself.

Yeah Waddie, I should know better by now. I'll just sit back now and view rather than post and keep my thoughts in my journal that way I wont get aggravated.

Thanks for the advice, I'll take it.
0

Share this topic:


  • 905 Pages +
  • « First
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

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