ACCforum: ACC LIMITING CHOICE FOR INITIAL MEDICAL ASSESSMENT - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

ACC LIMITING CHOICE FOR INITIAL MEDICAL ASSESSMENT Urgently need advice by Friday 15 May 2009

#1 User is offline   Fighter for Justice 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 23-August 08

Posted 14 May 2009 - 08:30 PM

I am being put through Assessments by ACC on Deemed IRP. In February Case Manager gave me a choice for Initial Medical Assessment of the following Doctors:
Dr Alec Marshall
Dr Angelo Anthony
Dr Andrew Porteous
Dr David Kerr
Dr Michael Antoniadis
Dr David Richards
Dr Jonathan Wright
Dr Nicola Hartland
Dr WED Turner
Dr Chris Strack
Dr Robert Blackmore
Dr Robert Biggs
Dr Martin Robb
Dr Jorgen Schousboe
Dr Rob Williams (2 hours required)
Dr Xiong

I gave ACC my choice.

NOW ACC in letter dated 29/4/09: "ACC will not be referring you to Dr ??????????? as we feel you should be seen by an Occupational Physician, who is better qualified to assess your personal injury, chronic pain and work fitness".

ACC attached a list of six Occupational Physician and or Pain Specialist:
Mr Michael Antoniadis
Dr Mary Obele (also works for ACC as a BMA/does Comprehensive Pain ASsessments for EnableWorks)
Dr Martin Robb
Dr Chris Strack
Dr Robert Blackmore
Dr WED Turner

I protested in writing stating my original choice of Doctor from first list - who had the same qualifications as some of the Doctors on the second list.
Reply from ACC states I must choose from second list of six Doctors.

I have until Friday 5 p.m. to make my choice.

It appears ACC are giving different claimants varying amounts of choice - according to ACC's wishes!

I have requested confirmation in writing from Case Manager that I have been given a full list of available Doctors. To date no confirmation has been received.

ADVICE NEEDED: CAN ACC REFUSE TO SEND ME TO MY ORIGINAL CHOICE OF DOCTOR (FOR IMA) FROM A LIST SUPPLIED BY THEM OR NOT?
CAN ACC AFTER "CONSIDERATION" LIMIT MY CHOICE OF DOCTORS FOR IMA (UNDER DEEMED IRP) TO SIX (INSTEAD OF ORIGINAL 16)?

Thanks, Fighter
0

#2 User is offline   Sparrow 

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

Posted 15 May 2009 - 12:00 AM

You were kicked off because of Turners report you told us.
You also said you won your court case.
I guess the good judge would have rejected Turners report??
Well, go back to Turner and show him your Court judgement and it would not be in his interest to write a report again saying you are fit for 35hrs a week.
He would look a fool wouldnt he.
You are on the slippery slope and ACC have decided to do a VIA on you without all the follow up, that is why you have been given a choice of the 6 VIA toadies.

You are badly in need of advice from your lawyer, why dont you take it?
0

#3 User is offline   Fighter for Justice 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 23-August 08

Posted 15 May 2009 - 10:23 AM

ACCFORUM USERS - SUGGESTIONS PLEASE.
ACC have further reduced my choice of Doctors for IMA: originally given choice of 16, gave choice, ACC refused my choice. ACC's second list gave only 6 choices (now down to 5 choices). As apparently Mary Obele (Branch Medical Advisor for Christchurch Branch Office ACC/Christchurch Contact Centre is not available to do IMA's currently due to other commitments.

Choice now limited to: Antoniadis, Strack, Turner, Blackmore and Robb.
0

#4 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 15 May 2009 - 11:15 AM

 Sparrow, on May 15 2009, 12:00 AM, said:

You were kicked off because of Turners report you told us.
You also said you won your court case.
I guess the good judge would have rejected Turners report??
Well, go back to Turner and show him your Court judgement and it would not be in his interest to write a report again saying you are fit for 35hrs a week.
He would look a fool wouldnt he.
You are on the slippery slope and ACC have decided to do a VIA on you without all the follow up, that is why you have been given a choice of the 6 VIA toadies.

You are badly in need of advice from your lawyer, why dont you take it?


I agree with Sparrow as turner will look stupid and ACC will never be able to give you the VIOA because it shows that ACC used turner just to kick you off. turner did not ask the correct questions to see if you were Vocational Independent.

I am prepared to help you prepare the documentation and I think that sparrow will check it. I am sure that sparrow won't mind checking that there is no holes in the documentation for you.

you are worrying about whats going into the report. The last person who put this type of document in from of the Doctor wrote in the report that ACC should cease sending claimants for an IMA. The chalange is to get Turner to put that in his report.
0

#5 User is offline   Sparrow 

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

Posted 15 May 2009 - 04:57 PM

Dopel, dont assume.
I have advised this person to get legal help and I mean it, end of story.
0

#6 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 15 May 2009 - 06:39 PM

 Sparrow, on May 15 2009, 04:57 PM, said:

Dopel, dont assume.
I have advised this person to get legal help and I mean it, end of story.


Sparrow legal help arrives after the decision not to guide the claimants to obtain information. Go to any assessment with out the correct and relevant information ACC specialist will place what ACC wants in the report so they can.

To reverse the report you need to supply a second report showing the error of the first and that cost money and time.

ACC will keep paying large sums to assessors as long as the assessors supply information to remove entitlements.
0

#7 User is offline   FRED1956 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 09-December 07

Posted 04 October 2009 - 06:13 PM

I protested in writing stating my original choice of Doctor from first list - who had the same qualifications as some of the Doctors on the second list.
Reply from ACC states I must choose from second list of six Doctors

ACC have further reduced my choice of Doctors to 0
I am being put through Assessments by ACC on Deemed Referral for Pain Specialist Assessment.
i was not given any choice of any Dr's but must go to there approved one so to them im not entitled to pick a Dr from the list




Claim number:
Purchase order:


??????????? 2009
Dear ???????
Referral for Pain Specialist Assessment
ACC requires an assessment of your current condition. This will enable ACC to determine your entitlements. A referral has been made for you with Dr??????? ???????. The details of this appointment are yet to be confirmed:
Specialist's Name: Dr ????????????
Location: ??????????
???????
Appointment: To be confirmed
Dr ????????? may ask you to undergo a physical examination, as well as to answer questions about your medical, work and recreational history. You have the right to a full explanation of any examination before it proceeds. You also have the right to take a support person with you to the appointment.
ACC have an expectation under section 72 that you undergo an assessment with Dr ????? as part of your rehabilitation. Failure to attend any appointments, without reasonable explanation will result in your weekly compensation entitlement being suspended from the date of the appointment.
Please contact me if you have any questions about this appointment. Yours sincerely

??????????? Case Manager
Telephone:?
enc. Copy of section 72 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001




Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001
Section 72
Responsibilities of claimant who receives entitlement
(1) A claimant who receives any entitlement must, when reasonably required to do so by the Corporation,
give the Corporation a certificate by a registered health professional or
treatment provider that deals with the matters and contains the information
that the Corporation requires:
give the Corporation any other relevant information that the Corporation
requires:
authorise the Corporation to obtain medical and other records that are or
may be relevant to the claim:
undergo assessment by a registered health professional specified by the
Corporation, at the Corporation's expense:
undergo assessment, at the Corporation's expense:
co-operate with the Corporation in the development and implementation of
an individual rehabilitation plan:
undergo assessment of present and likely capabilities for the purposes of
rehabilitation, at the Corporation's expense:
(h) participate in rehabilitation.



accident compensation corporation

Dear Mr ???????
Choice of Provider
Further to your complaint on- ?? ????? 2009. your request for clarification of what direction ACC are taking with your claim and policy of assessor choice, also reference about communication between yourself and ACC.
The Injury Prevention. Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 does not require ACC to offer a choice of providers. However ACC operates a policy whereby clients are provided with a choice of assessors, where possible.
The rationale behind this policy is to encourage a partnership approach to case and claimants management, in accordance with the Code of ACC Claimants' Rights (the Code). Please note the Code itself does not state a choice of providers must be offered by ACC.
ACC has reviewed the Code of ACC Claimants' Rights and policy, and considers its request for you to be assessed by Dr ???? ???? (Pain & Palliative Medicine Specialist) to be fair and reasonable as he has the necessary experience and qualification to complete the assessment. The appointment with Dr ????? will be confirmed in due course and you will be notified in writing.
ACC respectfully requests you to comply with the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001,
"section 72 OM claimant who receives any entitlement must, when reasonably required to do so by the Corporation, - (d) undergo assessment by a registered health projessional specijied by the Corporation, at the Corporation's expense".
Please be aware that failure to participate in rehabilitation can result in the decline of further entitlements.
You also raised the concern about communication between yourself and ACC, with reference to a letter you provided the Corporation in ????? 2007 asking that all contact with you must be in writing.
This recent communication oversight was not intentionally made by the Corporation. The Corporation sincerely apologise for this occurrence, and will endeavour to ensure this does not happen again.
0

#8 User is offline   Fighter for Justice 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 23-August 08

Posted 04 October 2009 - 06:29 PM

Fred1956, I am no expert (as my ERC presently cut due to Consent matters)! My suggestion would be to write immediately to ACC requesting confirmation of what Section of the ACC Act they are assessing you under.
Another question to ask ACC is why the Assessor will go into your recreational activities?

Also: take a support person and a recording device e.g. MP3.
Once you have received replies seek further advice!
If you are willing - post your replies to these questions.

Fighter for Justice
0

#9 User is offline   FRED1956 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 09-December 07

Posted 04 October 2009 - 06:32 PM

as above
ACC have an expectation under section 72 that you undergo an assessment with Dr ????? as part of your rehabilitation
0

#10 User is offline   Sparrow 

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

Posted 04 October 2009 - 07:37 PM

This is the latest ACC tactic. This letter you have received is being sent to every long term claimant and the same wording. So it appears there is a new policy and the letter is a form letter all CM's are using.
I know of one person who refused their toady and has had ERC cut off and they wont restore it even tho that doctor is not available. The CM's are bullying people. Everyone must stand up and fight and go to COmplaints with a well worded CODE OF CLAIMANT rights breach!
They are using a small selcton of their own toadies who must be making a good riches out of this too. People are not being given any choice and are bullied.

Can anyone tell me if they have had dealings with a certan Dr Frank Thomas of Palmerston Nth PAin clinic.
Anyone had dealings with this clinic or Frank Thomas?/It is a Southern Cross clinic.
I see he is an anaesthetist stationed in Paraparaumu
0

#11 User is offline   Sparrow 

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

Posted 04 October 2009 - 07:47 PM

What ACC are doing is sending people to their toady assessors and then they are deciding if that person needs the medicine that has been prescribed by the person's GP or Specialist or both.

Then if they think that it isnt relevant it is declined. In some cases the claimant is not notified.
This is a breach of care and it is serious that an assessor, who may just be a voc assessor is having the power to decline payment for medicine.We need to kick up huge about this as it is serious and ACC have no authority to over ride a claimants Specialist and decline certain meds if they decide not to fund it any more. This is so serious that a persons life is now at the whim of a case manager to decide thru the BMO to cut medications.... They just go on assessing till they get the answer they need.

BEWARE EVERYONE, YOUR MEDS COULD BE DECLINED WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE.
Also ACC are using this as blackmail to get people to do their bidding.

things have droppped to an all time low.
All we have is to complain, complain and complain. The REview process takes too long if your meds are stoppped.
It is a worrying trend and all long termers are subject to this.
Police arent interested either!
Maybe they may have to be if the CM is acused of homicide??
0

#12 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 04 October 2009 - 08:56 PM

Sparrow you are more than likely correct that this is policy

The policy if like in the past is to get people for nopn compliant. If not non compliant then try fraud.

The ones collecting Compensation want under the official Info start asking for the policies and directions that the long term case managers are using.

Others need to ask branches and head office what is the purpose of carrying out non rehabilitation assessments. This is assessments that need to add extra injuries to claims.

A Good question is to ask how many claimants now have a mental injury after the medical examination as well as a pain claim after they have been found to have pain isues.

Sorry I am not going to collect the information but some need to look at the larger picture than just there own claim.
0

#13 User is offline   Gloria Mitchell 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 98
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 04 October 2009 - 09:24 PM

Seeker for Justice.......They do not need consent form signed to get information released....I have a form sent from cm to the WHB which states simply.......claimant has given consent by signing the acc45. (that is the original form from time of injury......and in this case it was not released to them, they took acc cm at her word and released the info) So they cannot say they cannot collect information because you have not signed their consent form. Somewhere on forum is the scanned portion from my pathways update...this was done this year.

I had written the cm an email giving them consent to collect that info....but it appears they didn't need it. I am one of those who is on a case by case basis by request for consent to release info. I don't sign arc 18's either with its small print as I fax an Aussie WC form which is much more basic.

Feel free to use the document to show your cm how wrong is the punative decisiion to withhold your erc because he/she hasn't got the acc form signed as it is an uneccessary extra which is not required to collect information.....(you have not interferred with their ability to manage your information/ file)therefore they have made a wrong decision and need to not only restore erc but backpay whatever they have wwithheld.

Gloria. from the other thread....

"It is stated on the acc 2386 - the Request for copies of Clinical NOtes from a District Health Board.....The claimant/patient has authorised the release of this health information to ACC on the ACC45 (Injury Claim Form)

Using this they collected....not only the clinical notes I had authorised release for to do with one injury.....but a blanket collection of clinical notes from 1986 to 1990. This included private information they were not entitled to collect." This all without even sending on a copy of that injury claim form.
0

#14 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 05 October 2009 - 12:37 AM

Fred

I dont see your problem. Just do what they ask, then go see your own specialist, use the Martin case and override their quack at Review or Appeal and bobs your uncle.

No hassle mate. Then ask the Judge for your expenses to get your report from the specialist.

We have so many good cases and decisions out there and who is using them. Dont let the hard work not to mention the cost someone has gone to to get a High Court decision, go to waste. The ACC cant do this to us anymore the judge said so!!!

Mini
0

#15 User is offline   Easyrider 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 111
  • Joined: 16-September 03

Posted 05 October 2009 - 07:58 AM

The main thing is to keep your entittlements.

After you make the appointment, tell the assessor in writing you will be recording the assessment.

Make sure you ask ACC to supply you with a copy of all documents supplied to the assessor.

Make sure you take the assessor a lette from your GP, stating his views on the jobs your OA found you were qualified to do. And the hours he knows you would be able to substain a week. If you can get this also signed by a specialist who has been involved in your rehab all the better.

At assessment make sure you ask the assessor the right questions, while the tape is going.

Take a experinced support person with you.
0

#16 User is offline   Sparrow 

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

Posted 05 October 2009 - 10:22 AM

Easyrider and many others.

This is a new trend in the search for 5,000 to chuck off ACC>
ACC are sending all, it appears long term clamants, a letter telling them they have to go and see a toady to "review their entitlements". The letter is set out in Fred's post.
This is a serious matter and as I said can lead to your medications or other entitlements DECLINED until such times you have seen the toady or after seeing him.They are being ruthless and so beware and make sure that you ar e not sent to the worst toadies, the MArtin case will have no bearing in this. I have hard facts so know what I am talking about.
Beware everyone who is a long term claimant, they are doing the tough love already and it is harsh.....
0

#17 User is offline   FRED1956 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 09-December 07

Posted 05 October 2009 - 10:48 AM

 MINI, on Oct 5 2009, 12:37 AM, said:

Fred

I dont see your problem. Just do what they ask, then go see your own specialist, use the Martin case and override their quack at Review or Appeal and bobs your uncle.

No hassle mate. Then ask the Judge for your expenses to get your report from the specialist.

We have so many good cases and decisions out there and who is using them. Dont let the hard work not to mention the cost someone has gone to to get a High Court decision, go to waste. The ACC cant do this to us anymore the judge said so!!!

Mini



I have no proberlum seeing any Dr that wants to see me im only makeing the point that i was not given a list of Drs to pick from as i have been told IS the case many times in these forms i already have had 3 IMA'S and 2 assessments that put me at 48 percent incapacitated and each time im told not to return to work BY THERE OWN DR'S
0

#18 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 05 October 2009 - 06:45 PM

Fred
48% is a huge % of incapacity. How I read it is that you have nearly half of your body has Whole Person impairment. So what do they expect you to do when half of your energy is taken up just preparing yourself to go to work. How is that equate with 35 hours spent in the workforce, in even a light job.

The fact is there is probably not enough hours in each day to accommodate you managing you individual social ability and your vocational ability for 37 hours per week.

Do your sums now, how long does it take you to get ready to start the day in the morning.
Do you need help preparing yourself for the day.

Remember also that you need to go shopping. How long does that take and why do you have to do it in daylight hours etc. Like safty and such. Do you need any assistance with this.

How much home help do you get and how long does it take you to prepare your meals etc.

So in essence you are counting up your daily hours to see how much time is spent on individual living and then seeing if realistically you could be expected to work in any hours of daylight you may have left over.

You cannot physically cram a square peg into a round hole, and therefor ACC cannot expect you to work hours in the week that are taken up by you ensuring that you remain individually independent socially. This also includes excercise to keep you healthy as possible and all your parts moving as good as possible.

Now we have not touched on if you can stand the pain of the extra effort needed to work 35 hours.

This is what ACC must get past before they can judge you able to work 35 hours per week.

With a 48% WPI, that is superman stuff.

I suggest very strongly that handled right, you can be assured you will not be going back to work. Do not let them push you past IMO. You must be prepared to stop them there before going onto Vocational part of assessment. The aid of your GP is very important at this stage. Getting his input on your IRP is imperative.

Good Luck.

You will find there is legislation to accommodate your stance, that they are expecting too much of you.

I am assuming that the whole 48% is injury related and that you have no Medically related % to be deducted from that amount.

Mini
0

#19 User is offline   Easyrider 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 111
  • Joined: 16-September 03

Posted 05 October 2009 - 08:45 PM

If any claimaint goes to any of the above assessors with letters from their GP and specialists, the assessor must take that information into account when writing his report.

If the assessor is given the right information from another medical professional he will take it into account.

And if he does not, then you will win at appeal.

The forum should be giving the claimants the right tools to attend a assessment, then they will not wind up with the long expensive fight to get their rights back.
0

#20 User is offline   Sparrow 

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

Posted 05 October 2009 - 10:23 PM

Mini, please read the letter that Fred has posted up here.
Quote
"Referral for Pain Specialist Assessment
ACC requires an assessment of your current condition. This will enable ACC to determine your entitlements. A referral has been made for you with Dr??????? ???????. The details of this appointment are yet to be confirmed"


THIS IS NOT A VOCATIONAL ASSESSMENT.
read my posts.
This is the new tough love policy coming into force at ACC to exit all long term claimants.
As I said, this is a form letter being sent to many ltc's.

People are being pulled indiscriminatley from the Serious injury unit into the LTCU and harassed into attending assessent after assessment till ACC get the one they want. MEdicatons and entitlements are being stoppped and declined with no authority to do so. They are blackmailing people into obeying the Case Mongrels.
CM's are working hard to get their KPI's.
As I said this is a serious matter.

ACC are assessing all LTC's to get them off. Toady assessors of whom we all know are getitng richer by the day and are overworked to get these assements done.People are not given the choice and all sorts of lies are being told them.
I have a lot of info, and I know what is going on. SO leave poor FRed alone, he is not being forced to work, they are more subtle, they are going to gaslight and bully and then decline entitlements if you dont obey.
This is seriouss and this is the start of Reily's tough love.
I will not give details here, but it is shocking believe me!!

you all have to be on your guard and then take note of easyriders advice to get a Specialist report to take with you. This is really important. A Toady who is usually only a GP cannot over ride a Specialist and we have seen in the MArtin case about that.
However they are ignoring Specialist reports at their peril.
So everyone be on your guard, I am warning you tough times are ahead for all of us. Even those of us who do no longer receive weekly COmpo will still be declined entitlements as well if we refuse or kick up about these assessments!!!

Mini, you should also be aware you are in the firing line as well., you have received compo for over 5 yrs and they are out for your blood. Take this as a warning
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