ACCforum: DRSL Reviewer's manual posted - ACCforum

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

DRSL Reviewer's manual posted

#1 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 07 January 2010 - 06:47 PM

Attached is DRSL Reviewer's manual

Posted here and on Acclaim Waikato on behalf of Darrell.

Attached File  Reviewers_Training_Manual.DOC (1.48MB)
Number of downloads: 149

Thanks for making it available to everyone Darrell.
1

#2 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 03-February 07

  Posted 08 January 2010 - 06:35 AM

View PostBLURB, on Jan 7 2010, 08:47 PM, said:

Attached is DRSL Reviewer's manual

Posted here and on Acclaim Waikato on behalf of Darrell.

Attachment Reviewer...g_Manual.DOC

Thanks for making it available to everyone Darrell.

Hi Blurb it is Darrell here mate. Thanks for posting that manual on both the accforum.org & acclaimwaikato websites for me. I have the individual service agreement on me that should be posted on this website next. I may have to post you a copy as it is too big to send by e-mail.
I Look Forward To Your Reply Soon
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce
0

#3 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 08 January 2010 - 10:13 AM

Darryl

have you got the Accredited employers and ACC agreement for the 1992 Act available.

This would give me great understanding as to who was responsible for my treatment on light duties when back at work.

ThanKs

Mini
0

#4 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 03-February 07

  Posted 08 January 2010 - 10:54 AM

View PostMINI, on Jan 8 2010, 12:13 PM, said:

Darryl

have you got the Accredited employers and ACC agreement for the 1992 Act available.

This would give me great understanding as to who was responsible for my treatment on light duties when back at work.

ThanKs

Mini

Hi Mini it is Darrell here. I don't have the accredited employers & acc agreement for the 1992 act. I only have the individual service agreement on me that reviewers have to comply with. If you want me to post you a copy send me a personal message with your address details. I was also reading those 2 cases of Gale & P. Why is it then when a review hearing takes place acc only want to attend by teleconference. I have had reviews where acc only turned up at 2 reviews. in 2001 & 2007. In 1999 they did not turn up, in 2002 they wanted to be heard by teleconference but the reviewer declined acc's request. In 2004 acc attended by teleconference. The last review i had was on the papers.
I Look Forward To Your Reply Soon
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce
0

#5 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 08 January 2010 - 11:27 AM

Darryl

Personally i prefer the one to one eyeball contact with the ACC legal person at Review, but have adabted to the style of telephone review.

Makes one wonder why we cant stay at home in our jama's and have ours conducted the same!!!!

I just look on Review as a stepping stone to Appeal now. As I have said in another thread, if they made the right decisions in the first place they wouldnt even have the expense of review, but if that was the case, they would have no way to train their Reviewers eh??? And around and around we go.

Anyhow try not to look back and wonder why Darryl, you have had your big fights, and got the results, so best to put it behind you now and get a bit of life.

I hope you are keeping well, as can be expected.

Cheers
Mini
0

#6 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 03-February 07

  Posted 08 January 2010 - 12:21 PM

View PostMINI, on Jan 8 2010, 01:27 PM, said:

Darryl

Personally i prefer the one to one eyeball contact with the ACC legal person at Review, but have adabted to the style of telephone review.

Makes one wonder why we cant stay at home in our jama's and have ours conducted the same!!!!

I just look on Review as a stepping stone to Appeal now. As I have said in another thread, if they made the right decisions in the first place they wouldnt even have the expense of review, but if that was the case, they would have no way to train their Reviewers eh??? And around and around we go.

Anyhow try not to look back and wonder why Darryl, you have had your big fights, and got the results, so best to put it behind you now and get a bit of life.

I hope you are keeping well, as can be expected.

Cheers
Mini

Hi Mini it is Darrell here. I am fine & divine. I no longer have to keep fighting acc as i have given up the ghost. The fact is the review process should be used as a last resort when mediation is available. Mediation is a voluntary process which is not in the legislation. Thanks for your support & others on this website. I am sure one day acc will go belly up but personally i don't think that will happen. I have also advised acc that i am not having anymore assessments as i have had enough.
Take care & good luck with your upcoming appeal in the district court
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce
0

#7 User is offline   MINI 

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

Posted 08 January 2010 - 04:52 PM

Darryl

As soon as the good Judge is back from holiday I will be on his tail!!!

Its been over five months now...............I cant beleive it!!!

Will let you all know outcome. Its only the start date for IA backdating. I have seen another couple come through from other Judges in the meantime and they are in favour of 'date of application'. If i don't get that then there is a huge discrepencey in the use of the legislation for people who have been assessed on the old system for their physical being 'date of application' for mental caused by physical and people like myself who have only been assessed for both on IA 1992 model being set start date, next payment made. Which is sometimes three months down the track.

Gee, when you really look at ACC legislation it is a minefield of contridictions. Its a wonder anyone gets it right.

These are the problems that need to be put before parliment and aired.

Mini
0

#8 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 08 January 2010 - 06:14 PM

I asked the reviewer Michael Dunn for a copy of this manual and he said the manual does not exist. I have recorded the the lie on an audio recording. Quite a number of inconsistencies between his activities and what is required of him by this manual the most serious misconduct. Of course the same thing applies to a number of his colleagues.

Thank you Blurb for the purpose of this site is reconfirmed once again!!!
0

#9 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 03-February 07

  Posted 08 January 2010 - 08:00 PM

View PostMINI, on Jan 8 2010, 06:52 PM, said:

Darryl

As soon as the good Judge is back from holiday I will be on his tail!!!

Its been over five months now...............I cant beleive it!!!

Will let you all know outcome. Its only the start date for IA backdating. I have seen another couple come through from other Judges in the meantime and they are in favour of 'date of application'. If i don't get that then there is a huge discrepencey in the use of the legislation for people who have been assessed on the old system for their physical being 'date of application' for mental caused by physical and people like myself who have only been assessed for both on IA 1992 model being set start date, next payment made. Which is sometimes three months down the track.

Gee, when you really look at ACC legislation it is a minefield of contridictions. Its a wonder anyone gets it right.

These are the problems that need to be put before parliment and aired.

Mini

Hi Mini it is Darrell here. I can tell you in my last appeal 2 years ago acc only went back as far as the last quarter. The reviewer sided with acc all along at my review hearing. I can tell you the acc leglislation is difficult to apply retrospectively. Only acc know how it is worded. You can why from my own personal battles with acc that they will dominate you as they did with me. The fact is clause 63 (e) needs to be repealed & taken out of the legislation. A claimant who is in receipt of an independence allowance they should have there payments backdated only back as far as the last quarter. In my case my claims come under the 1998 act not 2001 as applied by acc. I am even thinking of writing a book about my experiences with acc. But before i do that i will seek legal advice from a lawyer who can advise me on what i can & can't put in the book but surely all records that i have should be sufficent. Anyway all the best for the new year & good luck with your court case in the courts against acc.
Take care now
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce
0

#10 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 January 2010 - 01:29 PM

As can be seen by appendix 7The review is a provider with an induction program of which means training on how to interpret the act in order to make decisions. This appears to indicate that the review is are not independent but are many are reiterating what they are told and as such the review are merely puppets of whoever is in control in the background.

I for one would like to know what the review is are being told about how to determine the end of incapacity given that the ACC and a significant number of reviewers have been in disagreement with the Supreme Court .


Appendix 7

Reviewer Induction Programme

ACC legislation – an overview
Dispute resolution provisions of the current ACC Act, independent role, natural justice, costs
Conducting hearings, informality, introduction, explanation, oaths/affirmations, strategies for controlling the hearing, dealing with difficult behaviours, alarms, etc
Investigative role
Review decision writing, contents, reasoning, quality and measurement of quality (including peer reviews)
Jurisdiction
Onus and standard of proof
Digital voice recorders and the Document Management System (DMS)
Case Management
Technical training:
- PICBA
- Medical Misadventure
- Gradual process, work-related injuries
- Sensitive claims
- Exclusion
- Revoking cover
- Suspension of entitlements – causation
- Suspension of entitlements – weighing
competing medical evidence
- Suspension of entitlements – non-compliance
- Vocational independence
- Incapacity
- Social rehabilitation
- Vocational rehabilitation
- Weekly compensation
- Independence allowance/lump sums
- What constitutes a primary decision
- Deemed decisions
- Maori and Pacific People protocols
- Different insurers, administrators, Partnership Programme, etc
- Electronic resources, Indices, Informe, etc
Attend a driver-training course if the role requires much driving.

Job specific training for Mediators

Outline of DRSL mediation and facilitation services and interface with review, explanation of the “one-stop shop” approach
Outline of DRSL marketing initiatives and project work with ACC and other clients
Familiarisation with mediation processes and procedures documented in the Administration; Products and Services; and Business Manuals
Mediation time recording
Familiarisation with standard letters, Agreements, etc, publications and website
Mediation report writing

Understanding of roles of mediator and resolution co-ordinator

Understanding role of Manager Mediation
Awareness of coaching programme and requirement to debrief
Networking with other DRSL mediators
Professional development
AMINZ membership
“Gaining Agreement” training
Attend a driver-training course if the role requires much driving.



I will now be requiring Dispute Resolution Services limited and the ACC to be providing me with a copy of this induction program so is I may know what the reviewers know in order that I may have more successful reviews in my favor.
0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 January 2010 - 01:31 PM

I find it difficult to believe that the review is a truly independent If they are provided with instructional material of any description, subject the review hearing a pre hearing Surgeons are exposed to screening and pre determination, have their decisions peer reviewed prior to the decisions being finalized and delivered, while at the same time being under the supervision of the "Manager Adjudicator".

This Handbook is a central reference guide for persons appointed to hear 2001 Act applications for review. Other documents will be referred to by reviewers in the course of their work, including the 2001 Act and amendments, the former Acts and their amendments, Regulations, and decisions of the Court of Appeal, High Court, District Court and the Accident Compensation Appeal Authority.

Reviewers can obtain further guidance from the Manager - Adjudicators.
...
Appendix 7

Reviewer Induction Programme




Obviously if Reviewers and their decisions are subject to a boss (Manager Adjudicator) and instructional material originate in from the ACC and DRSL management they cannot be independent.
2.3 Manager - Adjudicators

2.3.1 Oversight of Review process

The Manager - Adjudicators has a duty to oversee the work of the reviewers.

0

#12 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10801
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 11 January 2010 - 01:13 PM

The Reviewer's training manual clearly instructs the reviewer to conduct a pre hearing yet I don't find any mention of a pre hearing within the context of ACC legislation. Is this a construct pervert the course of justice by creating a requirement or terms of employment for the reviewer to conduct hearings in a certain manner in accordance with a certain doctrine of belief rather than actual legislation?

Does anybody have any thoughts on the legal basis the ACC relies upon when instructing the reviewer to undergo a filtering process of the claimants right to be heard by way of per hearing?

It appears that there is a clear intended process to filter out review hearing applications in a manner to prevent the substantive matters from being heardby way of your review hearing, perhaps based on and a claimant's inability to express themselves very well. this would seem to go against all the principals of natural justice and the intended informality of review hearings.
0

#13 User is offline   Moeroa 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 940
  • Joined: 20-November 09
  • LocationWellington Central City

Posted 21 March 2011 - 12:55 PM

Thanks Blurb. This might be old but they're still stacking the odds against claimants by over riding Human Rights legislation for disabled persons rights.

http://accforum.org/...-drsl-reviewer/
http://www.hrc.co.nz...h-disabilities/

View PostBLURB, on 07 January 2010 - 06:47 PM, said:

Attached is DRSL Reviewer's manual

Posted here and on Acclaim Waikato on behalf of Darrell.

Attachment Reviewer...g_Manual.DOC

Thanks for making it available to everyone Darrell.

0

#14 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 16 February 2013 - 08:01 AM

View PostBLURB, on 07 January 2010 - 06:47 PM, said:

Attached is DRSL Reviewer's manual

Posted here and on Acclaim Waikato on behalf of Darrell.

Attachment Reviewer...g_Manual.DOC

Thanks for making it available to everyone Darrell.



View Postdarrellpearce, on 08 January 2010 - 06:35 AM, said:

Hi Blurb it is Darrell here mate. Thanks for posting that manual on both the accforum.org & acclaimwaikato websites for me. I have the individual service agreement on me that should be posted on this website next. I may have to post you a copy as it is too big to send by e-mail.
I Look Forward To Your Reply Soon
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce



View PostAlan Thomas, on 08 January 2010 - 06:14 PM, said:

I asked the reviewer Michael Dunn for a copy of this manual and he said the manual does not exist. I have recorded the the lie on an audio recording. Quite a number of inconsistencies between his activities and what is required of him by this manual the most serious misconduct. Of course the same thing applies to a number of his colleagues.

Thank you Blurb for the purpose of this site is reconfirmed once again!!!


I do apologize for not acknowledging your post until now Alan Thomas.

I have only just come across it (and this thread) whilst looking for some information relating to another matter.

Thanks should go to Darrell Pearce for making it available for me to upload to the forum.

As for Mike Dunn (DRSL Reviewer), I too have good reasons not to trust that man.

I have seen written here on the forum somewhere that he was an ACC case manager before going to DRSL.

I'm uncertain if that is correct so I stand to be corrected on that point.

Cheers
0

#15 User is offline   Battleaxe 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8096
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 21 December 2014 - 03:40 PM

I requested a copy of Fairway Resolutions Reviewer's manual. It has been refused. I am complaining to the Privacy Commissioner. Any ideas on what points I should include in this complaint from members here?

Thanks.
0

#16 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 03-February 07

Posted 22 December 2014 - 10:53 AM

View PostBattleaxe, on 21 December 2014 - 03:40 PM, said:

I requested a copy of Fairway Resolutions Reviewer's manual. It has been refused. I am complaining to the Privacy Commissioner. Any ideas on what points I should include in this complaint from members here?

Thanks.

Hi battleaxe Darrell here. I have the reviewers training manual on me if you want me to send you a copy by e-mail.
Kind Regards
DARRELL PEARCE
0

#17 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 26 December 2014 - 08:04 PM

View Postdarrellpearce, on 22 December 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Hi battleaxe Darrell here. I have the reviewers training manual on me if you want me to send you a copy by e-mail.
Kind Regards
DARRELL PEARCE


Hi Darrell, hope you are well as can be expected under the circumstances. Hope your Christmas went well.

If you don't mind, we would love to have a copy of the latest Reviewers Training Manual available for members and visitors to the new ACCforum.nz

The email address to send it to is [email protected]

Thanks mate. Happy New Year to you.

Fran
0

#18 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 26 December 2014 - 08:11 PM

View Postdarrellpearce, on 08 January 2010 - 10:54 AM, said:

Hi Mini it is Darrell here. I don't have the accredited employers & acc agreement for the 1992 act. I only have the individual service agreement on me that reviewers have to comply with. If you want me to post you a copy send me a personal message with your address details. I was also reading those 2 cases of Gale & P. Why is it then when a review hearing takes place acc only want to attend by teleconference. I have had reviews where acc only turned up at 2 reviews. in 2001 & 2007. In 1999 they did not turn up, in 2002 they wanted to be heard by teleconference but the reviewer declined acc's request. In 2004 acc attended by teleconference. The last review i had was on the papers.
I Look Forward To Your Reply Soon
Kind Regards
Darrell Pearce


The reason they teleconference is that not only one ACC staffer is sitting by the phone, it is two or three. You only hear one but the other two assist with looking up stuff that will help ACC win the review etc.
1

#19 User is offline   Rosey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1808
  • Joined: 25-December 09
  • LocationHamilton

Posted 02 January 2015 - 02:11 PM

THANK YOU.

View PostBLURB, on 07 January 2010 - 06:47 PM, said:

Attached is DRSL Reviewer's manual

Posted here and on Acclaim Waikato on behalf of Darrell.

Attachment Reviewer...g_Manual.DOC

Thanks for making it available to everyone Darrell.

1

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • 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