ACCforum: urgent help please re abatement - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

urgent help please re abatement

#21 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10802
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 15 November 2008 - 03:17 PM

Mini I have no interest whatsoever in building a case from anybody's "point of view". The only things that are relevant the raw verifiable facts and the legislation. Where we get into trouble is pandering to the corporate culture of the ACC mindset and the various advocates that have learnt to do things the ACC way simply so they can get an easy settlement.

The purpose of the site is to assist one another learn how to qualify and verify real information and to understand the Act.

I have no interest in looking outside of the square under rocks or turning over coins and especially distinguishing the wood from the trees. All this is emotional namby-pamby mumbo-jumbo.

Abatement of earnings is simply arithmetic. There is criteria, simple. Why would ACC hired the criteria from both staff and claimants unless they were conspiring not to pay? Why would they want to negotiate unless they were trying to acquire an illegal discount?

Mini the best way to stop dreaming is to wake up. The ACC is functionally incompetent. It has got this way because senior management have failed to properly train their staff and have relied upon an invalids ability to challenge wrong decisions and from there it goes downhill.

I joined this thread because like Jordan I needed information directly from the source, legislation, so as a proper calculation of entitlement can be made which would form the basis of the claim. I note that nobody has made any references to legislation except myself. Others make reference to the way ACC doing things but that does not mean what is being done is lawful with the result that anybody could be as exposed as I have been which potentially results and incarceration by way of ACC staff perjuring themselves as an ACC last resort to avoid their liabilities.


Sparrow this site and Jordan's problem demonstrates the beginning and end point of the claimant who tries to look at working while injured and as such both Jordan and myself accurately represent this particular problem.

To reiterate Sparrow my doctor gave me two hours per day clearance to work in activities that did not impact upon my injuries. I explored my options and when the ACC mistakenly thought that I had successfully started working cancelled my claim and prosecuted for fraud instead of calculating abatement of earnings. For this reason why postings regarding this subject belong on this thread. Unless you have something meaningful to contribute in regards to fact or legislation please do not express your animosity by not posting at all.
0

#22 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 15 November 2008 - 03:26 PM

He must have one hellva sore throat by now Sparrow!!

Im off to water my tomatos.

Jordon dont forget to get it in writing as well.

Cheers
Mini
0

#23 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 15 November 2008 - 03:28 PM

Abatement simple thomo

Well why you need us. Go and find the answer Yourself.

You are a liar.

Who mentioned section 54 and 114 and also sorts of stuff that people have turned into a win.

Just because you dont know how is not my problem. I am not here to be anyones advocate and read the law for them I am hear to steer them in the right direction.

If they dont want to use my advice dont I dont care one bit.

And doople puts heaps of legislation online just because you cant use it does not mean it is not useful to others.

You are so full of yourself, my tomatoes deserve more attention than you.
Toodlepip

Mary Jane Hopkins
0

#24 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10802
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 15 November 2008 - 04:27 PM

Mini the purpose of this site is to share what little knowledge we had with one another. If you are not willing to do this you are simply taking up space.

Who is Mary Jane Hopkins?
0

#25 User is offline   Sparrow 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 534
  • Joined: 22-March 07

Posted 15 November 2008 - 05:11 PM

Tomo you are an utter pest. why did they let you out on bail?
For goodness sakes we are satuarated with your rubbish and keep it to your own thread. Jordans troubles ar e nothing like yours, he is honest.
Go away
0

#26 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 16 November 2008 - 06:27 PM

Jordan,
I sincerely hope you have been able to find the relevant answer to your simple question in amongst all the crap. Just in case - here it is again -


The abatement rules changed in August this year. You are now entitled to earn the 20% that you don't receive from ACC of your before accident pay. After you reach the total amount of your pre injury earnings, then your earnings above that are abated $ for $. It is very important that you either supply earnings details your self to ACC or agree that ACC can get that information directly from your employer. There will be a calculation sheet done and you are entitled to ask for each of these as they are done.
Work with your case manager on this but be aware that the actual calculations are done by a specialist payments team. This means that your case manager may not always give you the correct information. If in any doubt ask to speak to a member of the payments calculations team.

Best of luck,
Fairgo
0

#27 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 16 November 2008 - 06:37 PM

Alan,

Changes to weekly compensation (in force 1 August 2008) were as a result of the IPRC ammendment Act 2008. If you want to read the full bill then suggest you read it on the govt website. The relevant section as it relates to weekly compensation is explained below. This is taken from ACC's briefing paper July 2008

Issue
Weekly compensation is an earnings-based sum paid to injured people to help them meet their everyday needs and focus on recovery

If employees were between jobs, they were eligible for weekly compensation if they were injured within 14 days of stopping work or during a period covered by holiday pay etc, provided they had arranged future work as an employee.

Full time employees who earn less than the Act’s minimum weekly earnings are eligible to increase their weekly compensation to the minimum rate after the first five weeks of incapacity.

Weekly compensation is also paid for Loss of Potential Earnings (LOPE) to people aged 18 years or older if they have incapacity for a period of six months or more from a personal injury, suffered when they were younger than 18 years, or when they were in full-time study that started before they turned 18 which has been continuous since then. Weekly compensation is based on the greater of the minimum wage or 125% of the Invalid’s Benefit, and is payable at 80% of the greater rate.

Nearly a quarter of today’s workforce is in non-standard work – including part time, self-employed, casual and seasonal work. Because long-term weekly compensation for casual and seasonal employees is assessed against periods of both earnings and non-earnings, these workers can receive significantly reduced weekly compensation in the long-term.

Currently, the level of compensation for LOPE does not adequately reflect an average life-long pattern of earnings.

Intent of the Amendments
The Act updates the weekly compensation framework to respond to the changing labour market and is intended to ensure that clients receive weekly compensation that is certain, reasonable and easy to understand. It applies to people between jobs, seasonal, casual, and minimum wage earners.

The Amendments
• The Act extends the period of eligibility so that clients can access weekly compensation if they are injured within 28 days of stopping work and had arranged future work as an employee. It also allows self-employed people who are injured during a transition to employment as an employee to be eligible in the same way as employees are.
• For long-term weekly compensation, clients’ earnings in the 52 weeks prior to the accident/illness will be divided by the number of full and part weeks worked during that period.
Employees are able to earn up to 20% of their weekly earnings (as calculated under the Act) before weekly compensation is abated dollar for dollar. Any leave entitlement paid at the end of a person’s employment is not considered as ‘earnings’ for the purposes of abatement.• Full time employees will now be eligible for minimum weekly compensation after one week of incapacity.
• People eligible for LOPE compensation will receive this compensation at 100% of the greater of the minimum wage or 125% of the Invalid’s Benefit.
0

#28

  • Group: Guests

Posted 16 November 2008 - 11:59 PM

Firstly: fair go.....thanks for the informative info!
Secondly: I'm with you sparrow.......I hope Jordan, who started this thread, has some answers and is able to see through the blogging of waffle & "crap" on this thread. Typical of the train driver.....that I have got foggy brained with trying to remember to the origin and issue of the thread! I am not wanting to get into fighting online.....but shit, what a load of waffle in between - this is deffinatley what puts people off this forum, sadly in my opinion. "Taking up space" was mentioned......yeah go figure!
Jordan.....unless your treatment providers, including GP, specialist etc agree to and supervise all this then tell your case manager.......ALL in writing of course. I know it's more pain & work but no more phone calls.
Have a great day all!
0

#29 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 17 November 2008 - 08:50 AM

Jordon

My apoligies are sent.

I expect to get sandpitted, but look who never does, even though it bloggs everything in site!!

I sincerely hope you are able to sort the wood out from the trees, and carry on with your work part time.

Again I say, get it in writing, that you are working part-time, so it does not come back to bite you.

Regards
Mini
0

#30 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10802
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 17 November 2008 - 11:39 AM

Fairgo thank you very much for pointing in the right direction. It took quite a long time to find that I got there in the end. Some others such as Jordan and myself can share your expertise I have posted the current legislation.

Of course as per usual there is a big difference between what the legislation actually says and the ACC spin. This appears to clarify or more as it has always been. Does this mean the ACC have been getting themselves an illegal discount by feigning incompetency in calculation?

51 (2) In calculating weekly compensation under this Part, the Corporation must reduce the amount of weekly compensation paid to a claimant so as to ensure that the total of the claimant's weekly compensation and earnings after his or her incapacity commences does not exceed the claimant's weekly earnings as calculated under clauses 33 to 45 or 47.



<H5 class=head5 lang=en-NZ>Abatement</H5><H5 class="prov labelled" lang=en-NZ>49 Earnings definitions for purposes of clause 51</H5>
  • (1) [Repealed]

    (2) [Repealed]

    (3) In clause 51(2), earnings does not include any payment made on the termination of employment in respect of leave entitlements.

    (4) In clause 51(2)
    • (a) earnings includes payments—
      • (i) whether made in New Zealand or overseas:
      • (ii) whether made in New Zealand currency or an overseas currency:
    • (B) employment includes employment whether in New Zealand or overseas.
    (5) Payments made in an overseas currency must be treated as having been converted into New Zealand currency at the average rate of foreign exchange offered, at the date of payment, by registered banks in New Zealand.

    Compare: 1998 No 114 Schedule 1 cl 23

    Schedule 1 clause 49(1): repealed, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).

    Schedule 1 clause 49(2): repealed, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).

    Schedule 1 clause 49(3): substituted, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).

    Schedule 1 clause 49(4): amended, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).
<H5 class="prov labelled" lang=en-NZ>50 Estimation for abatement purposes of earnings that cannot be ascertained</H5>
  • (1) This clause applies to a claimant who has—
    • (a) earnings as a self-employed person; or
    • (B) earnings as a shareholder-employee.
    (2) This clause applies when the Corporation cannot readily ascertain, for abatement purposes, the claimant's actual earnings during a particular period, during incapacity.

    (3) In order to calculate the claimant's earnings under this Part, the Corporation may estimate an amount that represents reasonable remuneration for the claimant during the period.

    (4) The Corporation must have regard to—
    • (a) the evidence available of the claimant's earnings; and
    • (B) the nature of the claimant's employment immediately before his or her incapacity commenced; and
    • © the nature of the claimant's employment that the claimant has during the period of incapacity.
<H5 class="prov labelled" lang=en-NZ>51 Abatement of compensation</H5>
  • (1) [Repealed]

    (2) In calculating weekly compensation under this Part, the Corporation must reduce the amount of weekly compensation paid to a claimant so as to ensure that the total of the claimant's weekly compensation and earnings after his or her incapacity commences does not exceed the claimant's weekly earnings as calculated under clauses 33 to 45 or 47.

    (3) [Repealed]

    (4) The amount of a claimant's weekly earnings under subclause (2) must be adjusted in the manner provided in section 115.

    Compare: 1998 No 114 Schedule 1 cl 24

    Schedule 1 clause 51(1): repealed, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).

    Schedule 1 clause 51(2): amended, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).

    Schedule 1 clause 51(3): repealed, on 1 August 2008, by section 33(1) of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Amendment Act 2008 (2008 No 46).


0

#31 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 17 November 2008 - 01:46 PM

"1998 act sch 1 cl 24 (2) The insurer may also reduce the amount of weekly compensation paid so as to ensure that the total of the insureds weekly compensation and earnings after his or her incapacity commences does not exceed the insureds earnings (including weekly compensation) immediately before his or her incapacity commenced".

This has the same meaning as I have told you previously, as soon as the ACC are aware that your earnings will be the same or larger than those you were earning before your injury, you are not entitled to any weekly compensation.

For instance if you return to your work on the same salary, but not necessarily the same tasks (lighter duties), you are no longer entitled to weekly compensation. This is commonsence stuff, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to work this one out. You don't necessarily have to have a letter from ACC to say you can do this, or what would happen if you do, you just need to present a medical cert saying you can go back on light duties. If you so have the motivation. This if accepted by your employer would not need ACC to put one through the hoops of Vocational Rehab etc, to stop paying your weekly compensation. It would simply be stopped because of the medical cert, allowing you back to work (albeit on light duties). So long as the income was the same as you were on previous to having the accident.

What you forgot to tell them was that you were in an earning capacity position and they found out that your were withholding information and cut your entitlement and charged you, which they had every right to do.

This is why I keep on telling Jordon to get a written statement off them that they are aware he is working and taking the necessary steps to abate his income if need be. So that he doesnt end up being accused falsely of not having informed them.

As you say, nothing much has changed.
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