ACCforum: Total Declinature Of Claim / Alan Thomas - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 905 Pages +
  • « First
  • 467
  • 468
  • 469
  • 470
  • 471
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

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

#9361 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 27 February 2014 - 03:17 PM

View Postgreg, on 27 February 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

There were not many companies in NZ. who had the specialised trademans required for
this very specialised training back then. 1970's.
Plenty of Fitter welders ,, Fitter turners .
Any qualified Toolmakers I have worked with were trained overseas.


Southern CroSs did have and DID do such apprenticeships training Greg
fitting toolmaking -twas in the area of a lot MOST of there design build fabricate work so they did the fitting toolmaking /fitter apprenticeships plus one got to do turning welding etc as a bonus apprenticeship add on later
plus the rest of the associated trades
A nice dutchman was the apprentices tutor of kiwi lads there-IN MY TIME THERE.Posted Image
0

#9362 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1159
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 27 February 2014 - 03:27 PM

View PostDavid Butler, on 27 February 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

Southern CroSs did have and DID do such apprenticeships training Greg
fitting toolmaking -twas in the area of a lot MOST of there design build fabricate work so they did the fitting toolmaking /fitter apprenticeships plus one got to do turning welding etc as a bonus apprenticeship add on later
plus the rest of the associated trades
A nice dutchman was the apprentices tutor of kiwi lads there-IN MY TIME THERE.Posted Image

"Toolmaking " alone is very rear. If Mr Thomas has a "Toolmaking" Trade as he claimed that would have been his pre-injury occupation.
0

#9363 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 27 February 2014 - 03:41 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 27 February 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

David it is quite clear to me that you have an inability to organise yourself.

With regards to a quotation prepared August 1990 You will note that it was not an offer to build the machine as my injuries prevented it. Had I been able bodied there is no possibility that anybody was going to have access to the plans to build their own. That would just be stupid. Selling intellectual property certainly is not under any circumstances considered to be of any interest to the ACC. However what could be of interest is it the contract was accepted and I actually generated earnings from providing any assistance along the way if it was needed. Obviously the ACC have no entitlements of this type of information whatsoever unless I actually carried out activities of some description and were paid. My medical certificates allowed me to carry out light duties two hours per day fragmented throughout the day so this type of contract was perfectly in line with my ACC claim and medical information. What exactly is the problem that you perceive? Or are you just attempting to create mischief like an ACC informant who the ACC like to rely upon in order to pretend to be confused and steal claimant is money.

In the context as you have imagine it to be I was offering my services for reward in the manner of my pre-injury state it is perfectly normal to make arrangements for working after receiving the prescribed surgery. You are imagining that intelligent people would wait until after they have received the medical treatment that they would begin looking for work? Do you really really think intelligent injured claimants would be so stupid? Obviously if I was able to get a contract and my normal 30% payment in advance before I started then I would do so. That way I would have funds in the bank ready to pay me the moment the doctor gave me clearance. Isn't that what the ACC actively encourage us to do? Or are you a complete moron?

Naturally the ACC making representations to a court that are in fact false which causes the judge to misunderstand then that is perjury. Is it possible that you are helping point out ACC perjury? If so thank you.


With regards to "fitter toolmakers"as you put it it is perhaps a good thing that you have never been involved in managing any project that required eengineering support. You will find that in the Australian and New Zealand standard classification of occupations that there is no such title and that you are in fact referring to 2 entirely different jobs that have very little in common.

I'm not quite sure whether you are just an idiot or whether you are actively lying and trying to disrupt the site.

What do other people think you are up to?


I think the inability of you to organize hiding what you could do back then is the problem here Thomas
I organize myslef quite well thanks re what i say from documents and the laws findings
NOT your view of he law-which appears to be a VERY UNSUCCESSFUL view of the laws of the land ending ya up in clinky land.
You offered/PROFFERED the plan all right Thomas as a means to disguise what you were really up to.
To which the Judge could clearly se thru that guise yo tried to put across

You offered to provide the plan and ALL associated works to proceed to allow the machine to be built and definitely offered ''AND'' said you WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL
THE WORK you OFERED to be able to have a machine built from your plans
qUOTE tHOMAS

TOTAL FEE $****** **
50% PAYABLE ON COMMISSIONING OF THE said MACHINE
50$ on completion
whilst you cunningly say the person would be able to build the machine off your plans
you go on to say
Additional modifications such as different pumps etc would be at arate of $35.00 an hour
Other manufacturing support such as purchasing assembly supervision and commissioning would be at 30 hour
and unlimited access to purchases suppliers
along with
You were in a POSITION TO PROVIDE Continued support thruOUT the construction and commissioning stages
WHAT does a design engineer do exactly Thoma
Oh thats righ You fully expalianed that all in a recent post
Seems the Judge and I agree with your explanation of what a design engineer does and that you HAD THE ''very obviousl'' ''SHOWN'' ABILITY TO BE A DESIGN ENGINEER BCAK IN 1990
WHEN YA WERE CLAIMING YOU COULDNT BE AN ENGINEER-DONT COME THE CRAP RE GETTING READY' AS THE jUDGE Said
Yo failed in your duities and obligations to the ACC under the cc act


Dave.
SEEMS AS YA DONT WANT THE ORIGONALS UP HERE TOMMO
LOCKED DE UPLOADER ON ME again eh??
0

#9364 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:08 PM

View Postgreg, on 27 February 2014 - 02:57 PM, said:

Are you prepared to name the firm you completed this toolmaking qualification with.?


What purpose would that serve?
The company has been sold renamed and no longer has any of the former employees working there.
0

#9365 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:10 PM

David the Dutchman was not a tutor of all of the apprentices. The law requires one tradesman to one apprentice at a time.
0

#9366 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:12 PM

David neither what you nor the judge think is relevant as neither of you are qualified to have an opinion.
0

#9367 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1159
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:39 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 27 February 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:

What purpose would that serve?
The company has been sold renamed and no longer has any of the former employees working there.

I did a trade .
Will prove you have done a claimed a "Toolmaker" job to up to claimed trades level.
The training person/trademans will need to have a "Toolmaker" qualification, hense
the reason why so few were ever trained.
0

#9368 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:44 PM

View Postgreg, on 27 February 2014 - 04:39 PM, said:

I did a trade .
Will prove you have done a claimed a "Toolmaker" job to up to claimed trades level.
The training person/trademans will need to have a "Toolmaker" qualification, hense
the reason why so few were ever trained.


The company where I did my apprenticeship only had toolmakers employed.
In New Zealand there are two categories of toolmakers with one not knowing how to do any of the work of the other.
We specialised in press tools and special purpose machinery.
I have never had any experience with plastic tools. I would find that type of toolmaking quite boring.

At trade school a lot of the books were quite old, pre-World War II, which shows that toolmaking had been taught to New Zealand for quite a long time. I spend a lot of my apprenticeship learning how to make the tooling to manufacture armaments hence my continuing interest in the subject which includes armament manufacturing.
0

#9369 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1159
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:46 PM

Please lets shutdown the replies to MR Thomas , It worked on his thread for 3-4 days.
This person seems to need some form of input via this site .
Don't post anything if you can or use PM. for 4 days and see what happens.
-1

#9370 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:48 PM

View Postgreg, on 27 February 2014 - 04:46 PM, said:

Please lets shutdown the replies to MR Thomas , It worked on his thread for 3-4 days.
This person seems to need some form of input via this site .
Don't post anything if you can or use PM. for 4 days and see what happens.


If that isn't organising a conspiracy for the purposes of plotting and scheming I do not know what is.
Should I be afraid
yes
very afraid

What is the reason for my fear
past experience of exactly what Greg suggests
0

#9371 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 27 February 2014 - 04:57 PM

tia coming up soon greg
he be sick for three days then

31 readers of this thread as of now

make sure ya look ath hector the boat differing tales of bollocks from thomas while ya all here folks
0

#9372 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 01 March 2014 - 09:37 AM

http://www.nzlii.org...CC/2014/36.html

http://www.nzlii.org...CC/2014/35.html

Great to see you can handle the very basics Alan and do what is required of you under your obligations and duties under the act as claimants are obliged to do.


And you try and tell us all your the expert
its so bloody basic re the transport payments from the acc and you cant even abide by that
as usual you make your own version on the laws
AND as usual /predi-ctable the judge told you to f off
i see they refer to the 2010 decision ACC APPEAL COURTS THOMAS V ACC 61/2010 - DCA 129/98
Quite the informative set of paperwork there Aaln wouldnt ya agree?
dave
0

#9373 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 01 March 2014 - 09:40 AM

you really must take some lessons there Thomas on how to wordsmith
as ya failing badly at it everywhere /one you deal with
acc will pay for ya taxi transport to the experts
just ask them /acc after ya been there
im sure they will abide by your rulesPosted Image
dave
0

#9374 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 01 March 2014 - 12:14 PM

David have you considered the possibility that the ACC might have committed perjury to the court with the result that the court made a wrong decision?

Already the ACC has confessed that they got it wrong so why are you trying to defend the ACC when they have already confessed their mistake?
0

#9375 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 01 March 2014 - 12:17 PM

David are you able to comprehend the reason why the ACC refused to pay home help and taxi as part of the medical costs connected to the artificial wrist joint reconstructive surgery awarded to me by the 1992 review hearing decisions?

This time David none of your nonsense rhetoric but hard-core facts and legally based rationale.

If you go through this exercise you will come to realise that everything unravels for the ACC the moment ACC pay for the taxi etc. They either have a liability for everything or nothing at all. The ACC have told the court that they still accept liability to fund the surgery so what do you think happened?
0

#9376 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:42 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 27 February 2014 - 04:48 PM, said:

If that isn't organising a conspiracy for the purposes of plotting and scheming I do not know what is.
Should I be afraid
yes
very afraid

What is the reason for my fear
past experience of exactly what Greg suggests


what is the benifit to us of Greggs suggestion. If there is none. There is no conspiracy.

I actually would be in to it, as you were into Butler and nottingham and LF. And yes I know exactly what the benifit for you was in that, but it didnt work out did it because we all or most stood up for ourselves and we were stronger than you and we are still stronger than you Mr Thomas.

The only thing this accforum will show if left to tell its own story, is that a group came on here at a specific time and it was jacked up to come down as it did, but it didnt would because those being named and defamed and bullied took a stand against the bullies and squashed them so hard that the bullies had to use threatening and harm and accusations of paranoia etc, to belittle the victims, as there was no other way to quite their discontent.

In the meantime all the time the faceless ones, with new non-de-plumes slowly but surely abated into cyberland and had not much more to say. One way or the other.

Mini
0

#9377 User is offline   David Butler 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3370
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:42 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 01 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

David are you able to comprehend the reason why the ACC refused to pay home help and taxi as part of the medical costs connected to the artificial wrist joint reconstructive surgery awarded to me by the 1992 review hearing decisions?

This time David none of your nonsense rhetoric but hard-core facts and legally based rationale.

If you go through this exercise you will come to realise that everything unravels for the ACC the moment ACC pay for the taxi etc. They either have a liability for everything or nothing at all. The ACC have told the court that they still accept liability to fund the surgery so what do you think happened?


YOU LOSTPosted Image
0

#9378 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:59 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 01 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

David are you able to comprehend the reason why the ACC refused to pay home help and taxi as part of the medical costs connected to the artificial wrist joint reconstructive surgery awarded to me by the 1992 review hearing decisions?

This time David none of your nonsense rhetoric but hard-core facts and legally based rationale.

If you go through this exercise you will come to realise that everything unravels for the ACC the moment ACC pay for the taxi etc. They either have a liability for everything or nothing at all. The ACC have told the court that they still accept liability to fund the surgery so what do you think happened?


I will answer if you dont mind, (well even if you do I will still answer). They did not pay because you had no documentation to show that you injuried covered wrist was the operation you had if any, that is what Judge Joyce said.

You did no take any evidential evidence to court and you actuall told a porky in these two cases which directly clashes with you story in the main IA claim.

In the IA case Thomo says he has permanent injury although unstable and will need
ongoing treatment. Therefore should have IA done now (being 2012/2013) YET

in other cases of Taxi and homehelp, Thomo is asking for rehab to get back to his old job.

Now ask all 2 or 3 of you out there how can Thomo go back to his old job, or in otherwords be rehabilitated if he has permanent injury that is unstable??

Close enough for you Mr Thomas.

Now do you need me to show where I have helped anyone on this site by giving them the correct advice.

You had two different stories that even I can see and according to your mate netcoachnz i am supposed to be paranoid, Imagine what the Judge and Mr Tui could see, and this is without any evidence.

Dont do your own legal, you are ratshit at it.

Mini
0

#9379 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 01 March 2014 - 03:06 PM

View PostDavid Butler, on 01 March 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

YOU LOSTPosted Image


He really did lose and they know exactly if they let him have one thing he will get the lot. That is not the point. The point here is that if I can see the discrepancy of him using two stories, so can they. They have had at least as much background in picking up discrepancies as I, so they will, see that he is trying to con them again.

He needs to keep his stories straight or he will lose it all again.

Now if he was to show his documentation of his operation on here dated in 7/8/2012 he may get back a bit of crediblity, but he still would have twisted the words in each case to suit the outcome he wanted. He is so used to making that mistake that I wonder if he even sees he is doing it.

Mini
0

#9380 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

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

Posted 01 March 2014 - 03:11 PM

Mini the ACC were reminded of the 1992 review hearing decisions that remain binding which in effect required them to pay for surgery, transport to and from the surgery and home help after the surgery. The ACC received numerous letters requesting confirmation that they still accepted liability together with confirmation of the surgical arrangements. For you to imagine the ACC did not have the necessary paperwork is just complete nonsense. The fact of the matter is that if the ACC did pay it would be tantamount to accepting that I was incapacitated to return to my pre-injury occupation and undermine the original decision to cancel the claim and criminal conviction as they would have been acknowledging that I still needed the reconstructive surgery. What actually happened as they ignored everything as they did not want to produce any documentation and without documentation they felt that I would not be able to get the matter in the court. Both the reviewer and the district court agreed with the notion that the ACC does not respond or completely ignores the claimant then there is no case to answer. Is that what you meant to say? Read the judgement again and let me know.
0

Share this topic:


  • 905 Pages +
  • « First
  • 467
  • 468
  • 469
  • 470
  • 471
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

7 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users

  1. Google