[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:

Mr Thomas you must be very lucky to have multiple number for the same injury and under different Acts.
''Greg not only do I have one claim number for my wrist injury ACC have been operating with numerous claim numbers in my name for this injury.''

Hense the fraud is now open for all to see.

Greg the most common reason for multiple numbers game plan is that an ACC staff member has set up a bank account in my name and my entitlements are being diverted via by the axillary claim number that I don't officially know about. I am told that the biggest problem of this type North of Auckland.
The numbers of course I will the same injury under the same act.
I would be most interested as to what there is you might have as to why multiple numbers have been produced for the same injury. Perhaps they might be highly my file under different numbers? What you think?

Because I have multiple other injuries such as additional injury caused by the ACC instruction to the surgeon to perform an operation to the wrong part of my body and the medical mistake that occurred while are trying to find out what the surgeon had done wrong the following year there are quite a significant number of claim numbers. But wait the plot becomes... Wait a minute exciting new episode when I have recovered from this marathon session on the Internet site today.

What you mean by "Hence the fraud is now open for all to see" in relation to multiple claimant's produced by the ACC. Of course it goes without saying there is only one initiating document coming from myself.

[greg]

Alan Thomas, on 23 February 2014 - 06:32 PM, said:

Greg the most common reason for multiple numbers game plan is that an ACC staff member has set up a bank account in my name and my entitlements are being diverted via by the axillary claim number that I don't officially know about. I am told that the biggest problem of this type North of Auckland.
The numbers of course I will the same injury under the same act.
I would be most interested as to what there is you might have as to why multiple numbers have been produced for the same injury. Perhaps they might be highly my file under different numbers? What you think?

Because I have multiple other injuries such as additional injury caused by the ACC instruction to the surgeon to perform an operation to the wrong part of my body and the medical mistake that occurred while are trying to find out what the surgeon had done wrong the following year there are quite a significant number of claim numbers. But wait the plot becomes... Wait a minute exciting new episode when I have recovered from this marathon session on the Internet site today.

What you mean by "Hence the fraud is now open for all to see" in relation to multiple claimant's produced by the ACC. Of course it goes without saying there is only one initiating document coming from myself.

Are you claiming they setup your numbers for fraud. hope the judge got a couple of numbers might be why you went to jail.

[MINI]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

he claimed under 82 Act. I had operation and never was required to sign any form before or after..

He hurt his wrist under the 1992 Act and he had an operation that wasnt good enough so he says, therefore he would have had to sign this document.

I come under the 1982 act as well but it is the date you become incapacitated that matters. Do you know what date he stoppedn work for his hernia?

Mini

[greg]

Added to the robustness of my claim under the 1982 act I have two review hearing decisions that confirm my claim and entitlements to ERC and surgery whereby ACC's decision that my claim was only temporary and under the s59 portion of the act together with the ACC's assertion that my injury had run its course because they thought I was working was overturned in my favour. ACC were directed by two reviewers that my entitlements remained intact and would do so unless the ACC agreed to fund reconstructive surgery to return me to my pre-injury occupation. ACC has refused to fund the reconstructive surgery and that has only recently occurred at a cost of $40,000 without any contribution by the ACC despite the ACC claimant to the court that it still would pay such costs. The ACC even refused to pay for the taxi to and from the hospital and any home help much to the dismay an alarm of all the medical professionals supporting my well-being and recovery.
His statement not mine

[Alan Thomas]

MINI, on 23 February 2014 - 06:12 PM, said:

I though Gregg made those remarks. Do you like the 1992 document I found that could tell all why you were found guilty? Pray tell, I thought ACC had investigated every single possibility imaginable, including Douglas weal imagination written by his dog and enjoyed so much by Dane Tui

Too arrogant to see that someone was going to put some thing up that was the truth.

ACC wrongly may have given you cover for your wrist while you were awaiting surgery for the hernia. But remember, ACC can cut you off anytime they feel like it. That is a fact. Although I have personally never been 'cut off', I have been deprived, therefore I make it my business to know what ACC can do and what they cant do. obviously you thought they couldnt do much, or you wouldnt have opened so many companies.
My investment and number of companies is entirely my own business and nothing whatsoever to do with the ACC. How on earth do you imagine ACC have any business having any involvement or not it about my companies iinvestment and suchlike?

There is only two types of individuals that open multi companies and dont connect them togeather, one is your sort and the others are so rich and straight they have others doing everything for them.
I was the type that had employees working for me, including the manager.

They dont need to try to rip off the govt, their big lawyers will find a way to do it legally
No one, not even the ACC have accused me conducting any kind of illegal business

Go and make up with davie. Nottingham for bridesmaid??

Mini

My response to you has been in blue

[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 06:14 PM, said:

it been shown now why a judge would not continue on when things are twisted and 'muddied waters'.
ACC can only have ONE injury they pay ERC. on and all covered injuries require unique read codes and numbers today.
Maybe the ACC learned something from his fraud case and have not repeated the fraud .

No you are wrong on each of these points Greg.

[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 06:34 PM, said:

Are you claiming they setup your numbers for fraud. hope the judge got a couple of numbers might be why you went to jail.

I don't know but the multable numbers are there!!!

[greg]

Alan Thomas, on 23 February 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

I don't know but the multable numbers are there!!!

How can you know if as you claim ACC will not give you your files?.

[Alan Thomas]

MINI, on 23 February 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

I just gave you some truths as to why Thomas could be found guilty. When he went in to have the hernia operation he would have had to sign on of these Satements. Can you not see how easy it would be to disentitle him for taking the boat out. Do you not see how he was making money and didnt tell them. Either one on there own could mean prosecution.

Is that not the type of truth you want. Do you see now why I have never had too much faith in Mr Thomas. How much more do you need?

Mini

What statmentes
But I was not making money but it would be okay if I did.

Mini I need real facts an d not you imagination

[greg]

Alan Thomas, on 23 February 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

What statmentes
But I was not making money but it would be okay if I did.

Mini I need real facts an d not you imagination

but to claim you were not making money an IRD document would be required for ACC.

[Alan Thomas]

MINI, on 23 February 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

He hurt his wrist under the 1992 Act and he had an operation that wasnt good enough so he says, therefore he would have had to sign this document.

I come under the 1982 act as well but it is the date you become incapacitated that matters. Do you know what date he stoppedn work for his hernia?

Mini

Stopped full time June 1998 and stopped part time October 1989 (hernia)
Claim under 1982 Act and ERC from October 1989
WRist December 1989 ERC from April 1990 when hernia erc finished
Operation to the wrong part of the body 1992 under 1992 act

All documents given signed

[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 06:53 PM, said:

How can you know if as you claim ACC will not give you your files?.

The reviewer quoted ACC gave it to him and ask that he not show it to me.

[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 06:59 PM, said:

but to claim you were not making money an IRD document would be required for ACC.

Yes the IRD gave me a clear report. No earnings

[greg]

Alan Thomas, on 23 February 2014 - 07:04 PM, said:

Yes the IRD gave me a clear report. No earnings

which year ?.

[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 07:09 PM, said:

which year ?.

When ACC asked as part of the traud inversigation 1996 and again 1999 and 2002

[greg]

Alan Thomas, on 23 February 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:

When ACC asked as part of the traud inversigation 1996 and again 1999 and 2002

1990 WHEN you were so injured According to you and the info you supplied to acc and on ya medial certification to receive the ERC money you could not be an engineer
whats up dere doc??
If you were going to be an engineer in 1990 -After your wrist injury prevented you from allegedly being one -why not say so Alan??
intent to mislead for fraud or just Thomas thinking everyone else is dumb and wont see what hes was actually doing
That failed alan like the rest of ya trickery
did you reinjure the very older wrist injury on the boat hector,or did you claim you reinjured the boat wrist injury when you finally claimed for an accident after you were removed from erc as to the hernia,
2nd option would be a re-injury of a reinjury of an very old injury WHICH took many months to see a doctor for and then a bloody long time to actually claim to acc -[after Hector grounded alan in the high three miles out to sea in a raging 60 knott storm when in fact you were still sailing within the actual confines of the Marlborough Sounds which mate =AINT 3 MILES OUT TO SEA.
try this year according to IRD,

[David Butler]

Very much of a contrary look into the bollocks that THOMAS says
take ya time and peruse
you will see how thomas omits certain things in here and then you will know why


http://www.nzlii.org...CC/2010/61.html

[MINI]

Alan Thomas, on 23 February 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:

When ACC asked as part of the traud inversigation 1996 and again 1999 and 2002

Then why did you ask me to help you with tax of 1/4 million dollars that IRD said you owed recently?? But I declined.

Gregg dont be taken in by this Thomas has already told us that there was over a million $$$ in and out of his bank accounts at the time he was not supposed to be working.

Even over a number of years, in those days you had to be registered for GST if you earned over $30,000. It is double that these days I think. Do your maths quickly in your head, if you had over million dollars in those years you would have GST returns, he would not get a clearance from the IRD on those stats alone.

Even if it meant doing the GST returns to find out he was owed a refund for the income being less than the expenses, they would still do them. If he was not registered through they would force registration on him and still do the returns. They would also be highly likely to do him for fraud, as he had been a self confessed owner operator for a long time. There fore he would be expected to know when he should register his companies for taxes.

I do not believe he has ever had a clearance in the years he was ripping ACC off,
guilty or innocent IRD would be in like flynn, if he had companies but were not registered. IRD are not ACC, they do not do things half pie and if he does get found not guilty of this crime of fraud he committed, they would come get all their tax money (if any) back off him. By the time the penalties from back there were added in, he would be bankrupt again.

He has left it too long to be able to gain a profit out of this. As soon as IRD knows of the over a million dollars and if he gets anything they will take it. There is no such thing as a permanent clearance from the IRD if you are fraudulent and havent registered companies that you have been using, even if the turnover was only 1/4 million dollars.

You show us the clearance letter you have thomas. Then get it verified as kosha under the official information act and I will not only give you a great big sorry, but I might shout you a real bottle of whiskey as well.

Mini

[Alan Thomas]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

1990 WHEN you were so injured According to you and the info you supplied to acc and on ya medial certification to receive the ERC money you could not be an engineer
whats up dere doc??
1989!!
I was an injured engineer who owned businesses but could not do my job
What is you point?.

If you were going to be an engineer in 1990 -After your wrist injury prevented you from allegedly being one -why not say so Alan??
I did say so

intent to mislead for fraud or just Thomas thinking everyone else is dumb and wont see what hes was actually doing
No
No
& no

That failed alan like the rest of ya trickery
No

did you reinjure the very older wrist injury on the boat hector,
no it was to a different part of my body

or did you claim you reinjured the boat wrist injury when you finally claimed for an accident after you were removed from erc as to the hernia,
No
ACC notified with in a few days when I asked for home help and transport when ACC returned to work

2nd option would be a re-injury of a reinjury of an very old injury WHICH took many months to see a doctor for and then a bloody long time to actually claim to acc
As above above, no

-[after Hector grounded alan in the high three miles out to sea in a raging 60 knott storm when in fact you were still sailing within the actual confines of the Marlborough Sounds which mate =AINT 3 MILES OUT TO SEA.
Hector???
I di not go out of Marlborough Sounds
The wind was 45 gusting to 60
Marlborough Sounds is not out to sea


try this year according to IRD,
Why? I am up to date but running at a loss

[Tomcat]

greg, on 23 February 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

1990 WHEN you were so injured According to you and the info you supplied to acc and on ya medial certification to receive the ERC money you could not be an engineer
whats up dere doc??
If you were going to be an engineer in 1990 -After your wrist injury prevented you from allegedly being one -why not say so Alan??
intent to mislead for fraud or just Thomas thinking everyone else is dumb and wont see what hes was actually doing
That failed alan like the rest of ya trickery
did you reinjure the very older wrist injury on the boat hector,or did you claim you reinjured the boat wrist injury when you finally claimed for an accident after you were removed from erc as to the hernia,
2nd option would be a re-injury of a reinjury of an very old injury WHICH took many months to see a doctor for and then a bloody long time to actually claim to acc -[after Hector grounded alan in the high three miles out to sea in a raging 60 knott storm when in fact you were still sailing within the actual confines of the Marlborough Sounds which mate =AINT 3 MILES OUT TO SEA.
try this year according to IRD,

/>/>...
When I first heard of the "Boat Story" from Tomo ", as having OCCURRED IN THE WAITAMATA HARBOUR...
I am not the only one who was given that version...

this is just one of the many lies Tomo expected me to believe and support...
and I did make it clear on here that I could not ...
He was never entitled to ERC for the "wrist injury" as he was on ERC for the hernia...
ACC made a blunder giving ERC for the alleged "wrist injury"...