ACCforum: Law Society Committee supports inquiry into ACC - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Law Society Committee supports inquiry into ACC

#1 Guest_IDB_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 16 July 2004 - 03:55 PM

Posted Image

Law Society Committee supports inquiry into ACC
Friday, 16 July 2004, 12:41 pm
Press Release: Acclaim

Fri, 16 July 2004

Law Society Committee supports inquiry into ACC

The recent decision by the New Zealand Law Society ACC Committee to register its support for a petition calling for a Parliamentary select-committee inquiry into ACC has been warmly welcomed by ACC claimant support groups across the country.

The July edition of the NZ Law Society's fortnightly magazine, Lawtalk, is reporting that its ACC Committee has discussed the public petition calling for an inquiry into ACC and has examined the recently published Auditor- General's report into ACC case management.

The committee has decided to write to the Transport & Industrial Relations select-committee registering its support for an inquiry and suggesting that it should cover Dispute Resolution Services Ltd and the Employer Partnership Programme.

ACClaim Canterbury President, Murray Jorgensen, said "Dispute Resolution Services Ltd (DRSL) reviewers conduct initial reviews of ACC decisions but are seen by a growing number of claimants and their lawyers as unfair and inequitable resulting in a huge number of appeals to the Distrcit Court."

"DRSL is a wholly-owned subsidiary of ACC itself, with more and more lawyers commenting that the way DRSL reviewers conduct reviews is like buying a ticket in a lottery." Mr Jorgensen said.

Lawtalk also reports, Mike Mercier, Manager of ACC Legal Services saying;

"...that as a publicly funded organisation, ACC tried to be fiscally responsible and maximise its limited resources. This meant that instead of instructing lawyers when a notice of appeal was filed, the corporation did not take any action until the case was set down for hearing. This meant that even if the appellant's submissions were filed the response would be delayed."

However, ACClaim groups across the country make the point that:

ACC has $5 billion of public funds invested in NZ and offshore.

"We simply cannot accept that ACC can claim to the Law Society that it has limited resources when it has $5 billion invested which the public pays for ACC to provide cover, rehabilitation and weekly compensation to injured New Zealander's," ACClaim Otago President Denise Powell said.

Under section 275 of the Act, subject to any policy direction under section 270, the Corporation must invest all money received by it in respect of any Account that is not immediately required for expenditure.

Under s164 the Corporation must pay such amounts as the Corporation and the Department of Courts agree as being the reasonable costs of appeals and the reasonable costs in relation to judicial salaries, fees and allowances.

It would certainly appear that Parliament's intention was that ACC must not invest any money that is immediately required for expenditure.

Mr Mercier then offers an excuse for the problem being the dramatic increase in appeals. He says the backlog of cases meant the registrars set down cases as soon as possible, regardless of the state of the file.

There appears to be a simple solution for ACC - comply with section 275 and take some of the money invested - which is immediately required for expenditure - and apply it to the exercise of due diligence in prosecuting its case.

If that means more internal ACC staff and Court staff and judges, then ACC is empowered to do so by virtue of section 164 of the Act.

It appears that ACC is able to financially benefit through inordinate delay and its practice of waiting for a hearing to be set down, because the appeal will invariably be about ACC not providing cover, rehabilitation or weekly compensation while it collects money from the public on a daily basis to do so.

Consequently, it can retain the public money which it collects, and ought to be spending on the claimant, in its investment accounts earning interest for many months while the person and their legal counsel grind their way through the review, appeal and, if necessary, the leave to appeal process.

In fact, ACC itself may also appeal thereby causing it to be able to make yet more profit from interest on its investments at the expense and suffering of the injured party.

ACC is therefore in a win-win situation. It has the public money earning interest for many many months even if it eventually loses at review or appeal.

Delay would certainly appear to be a very good way for ACC to manage its cash flow and maximise investment returns.

ACC's current practice of waiting for a hearing date to be set before providing submissions clearly causes inordinate and inexcusable delay, is unacceptable and considered to be an abuse of the judicial process.

"The corporation has an obligation to the Court, to litigants and to the levy-paying public to practice due diligence", Mr Jorgensen said.

Moreover, the Court is in control of its own processes, fortified by its own case management system. Therefore, the Court must control its process, not ACC.

http://www.scoop.co....0407/S00186.htm
0

#2 User is offline   accvictim 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 04-November 03

Posted 16 July 2004 - 07:28 PM

It would certainly appear that Parliament's intention was that ACC must not invest any money that is immediately required for expenditure.

WELL IT DOES JUST THAT!!,,ACC DOESNT GIVE A TOSS ABOUT CLAIMANTS OR THEIR RIGHTS,,JUST LOOK AT THE MESS THIS EVIL CORPERATION HAS BEEN IN OVER THE YEARS WITH IT`S FRAUDULENT MANAGEMENT SWINDLING THE PUBLIC AND DENYING INJURED PEOPLE THEIR "EQUIPMENT FOR INDEPENDENCE" AND REHABILITATION.

AN INQUIRY IS NOT ENOUGH,, BULK SACKING OF LONGTERM ACC STAFF AND MANAGEMENT WOULD BE A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

BROKEN!

Attached File(s)


0

#3 User is offline   happy1 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 16 July 2004 - 09:24 PM

Yes I totally agree.

This is yet another of Dysons portfolio cock ups !!!She must be held fully responsible for this.I have written to her many times and been fobbed off by the privacy act etc.Fobbed off by anything just to shut me up.HAVENT WE ALL !!!

Wilson must also bear a lot of the blame for the A.C.C shambles.Have written to
him too and been referred onto a complaints officer.Fat lot of good that did ,as Wilson knew it would.

Next branch managers and team leaders must be held accountable.

Greed has been the major problem within A.C.C.So much greed in fact it has led to more and more deceit,lies with claimants suffering needlessly.What of the homes /families destroyed needlessly.???

I doubt whether A.C.C `s ill gotten five billion will be anywhere near enough
to compensate for the misery that has been caused to claimants.

The day cant come soon enough,lets just hope justice is done sooner rather than later.

I can only guess but I bet the paper shredders are going flat out within A.C.C as the evil seek to cover their vile tracks.They may shred paper but not consciences .
They still have to live with themselves.
0

#4 User is offline   jocko 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 18 July 2004 - 12:19 PM

When ACC tried to improve itself in the eyes of the public recently by lowering motor vehicle levies. It was stated the corporation could only do this because of the good performance of its investments. This money could have been used to fulfill its obligations. The reason they are using the term "limited resources" is they are broke. They have blown it. All the money they figured they were going to make out of the EXIT programme has been sucked out by David Rankin via Healthwise parasites pouring water down peoples noses. Cut Rankins bludging service providers budget by 25% and ACC would show a half billion dollar profit instead of the loss it will post for this year. I forecast a loss because this bunch of poor performers can never post a profit above 200 odd million even with investments of 5.1 billion dollars.
I sincerely hope the Law society is serious in its call for an enquiry in to ACC.
The Scheme has been hijacked by a lazy, incompetent group of parasites who have chosen embezzlement above hard work and wise investment,that utilises the skills and experience of the disabled workforce through proper rehabilitation.
Never once in the eight years of my rehabilitation did an ACC representative set foot on my boat. Instead I was paraded before a succession of case managers, branch managers, assessors, reviewers doctors and specialist. This situation must be brought to a rapid end. We are entering a period of skilled worker shortage that is going to cripple us if injured workers are not placed as close as possible to the work they were doing and experienced in. If that means paying them ERC while they are doing it, well so be it and self employment should be the most well supported of any rehabilitation option
0

#5 User is offline   Unicorn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 06-July 04

Posted 19 July 2004 - 10:00 PM

:D

Hi all,

Can anyone out there prove ACC still has all this money ?

or is that what they want us to think maybe Acc has money troubles ?
0

#6 User is offline   Unicorn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 06-July 04

Posted 19 July 2004 - 10:01 PM

:D

Hi all,

Can anyone out there prove ACC still has all this money ?

or is that what they want us to think maybe Acc has money troubles ?
0

#7 User is offline   jocko 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 20 July 2004 - 10:33 AM

It does not have any money. The Accident Compensation Corporation still carries 9.5 billion dollars debt. Long Term Liabilities, Actuarials, Stock. Call it what they like to disguise it, it is debt. When Labour took it back the figure was 11 billion
ACC claims to have reduced it by 1.5 billion. But this figure is very vague and of course very easily manipulated. It is the estimated future cost of ACC payments.
You can not tell how long you will live for, but ACC can, so it bases its calculations on that. By shifting claimants from one account to another, i.e. shifting the claimant from the long term ERC account in to the Rehabilitation account via the IRP process they are also able to manipulate the figure of the debt to make it look better and shorten the claim life. Even if the claimant wins at review, the debt is still off the books for a period. Hence the backlog of reviews and apeals. ACC does not care about the backlog of apeals because while people are waiting they are not on the books as a long term liability.
The reason we see what seems to be a blanket purge of claimants on site at times is they must balance the books. You note everyone was hit a few months back? End of financial year mate.
We only look at it from a claimant/ policy holder perspective. Most production sector accountants have a distinct dislike of ACC too. They see first hand what happens to their clients if they are injured. ACC fraud is also strong in levy assessments for self employed. Most people can not make head nor tail of their levy assessment and ACC has ripped off millions this way . When ACC started up again after privatisation they stole over 120 million by double dipping on levies. The minister,Michael Cullen said at the time what ACC had done was not illegal but it was wrong and people could appeal and get it back???? They exploited a loophole in the act so they could double dip. ACC is stealing from every angle it can. It is corrupt and bankrupt. Worst of all is its totally dismal performance as an insurer.
0

#8 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 20 July 2004 - 12:16 PM

ACC's own press releases and financial statements show this 5 billion $ investment. Its real alright.....
It was 3.8 billion in 2002
The Press has reported that ACC has $25 million invested in DB Breweries and $23 million invested in rival Lion Nathan. 2002
ACC also has $102.9 million invested in Telecom and other $5 million each invested in 37 other companies 2002

This from the Govt early this year:

Investment income boosts ACC surplus

Date : 21.01.2004

Strong equity markets, careful investment and solid scheme performance lifted the Accident Compensation Corporation to a better-than-expected surplus of $279 million in the six months ended 31 December 2003.

The first-half surplus compares with $23 million in the same period of 2002.

Chief Executive Garry Wilson said the scheme had performed well with improved processes benefiting claimants and providers to ACC alike.

'We have extended our injury prevention programmes and we have greatly increased the quality of the rehabilitation for many claimants by shortening the waiting time for assessment and treatment,' Mr Wilson said.

'We also continue to re-evaluate and improve our claims and provider payment systems and it could soon be possible to initiate rehabilitation processes the day an injury occurs.'

Mr Wilson said ACC's strong investment performance had been a factor in the 2004/05 levies that come into force in April remaining steady or reducing.

The investment portfolio now tops $5 billion as the scheme builds reserves to fully-fund the life-time cost of injuries.

Investment income of $271 million exceeded benchmarks and was up from $84 million in the previous period, with strong domestic and international equity returns partially offset by weakness in the domestic bond market.

Non-investment income jumped $121 million to $1321 million, despite little change in levies, because New Zealanders had earned more.

The surplus also took account of a $247 million rise in the claims liability which was based on a forecast at the end of the 2003 financial year.

However, Mr Wilson said ACC's surplus is sensitive to interest rate movements which in turn affect the cost of its liability to long-term claimants.

If rates continue at 6.1 percent for the remainder of the year, ACC's long-term liability will fall by $500 million with a corresponding impact on the year-end surplus.

Richard Braddell

Media Advisor

DDI 04 918 4291

Mob 021 474 240

http://www.govt.nz/
0

#9 User is offline   jocko 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 22 July 2004 - 11:03 AM

Five billion in stolen money. Money paid in levies in the honest belief it was for accident insurance. They have 80 odd million invested in the media Fairgo. A hefty price to pay for silence one might say. When we look at the heavy investment in the alcohol industry it stands in stark contrast to the investment in booze buses etc.
The booze buses themselves provide a door to the police commissioners office no doubt. ACC meddling is everywhere. Corporate scum who have for years used the media to denigrate claimants and place the blame for their incompetence on their backs. All the while contriving to introduce an illegal Exit programme into the act, providing them with a vehicle to deny the entitlements of the long term disabled. The thing is they are not performing as well as they would have the country believe. All of the dirty laundry is coming to the surface. The only ones who enjoyed ACCs Birthday celebrations was us. Eating Radio pacifics pies with Ben and listening to their candles being blown out by Mark Bennet and watching Winston pouring nasal enema water on the cake!
0

#10 User is offline   Unicorn 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 06-July 04

  Posted 24 July 2004 - 06:17 PM

:o

So if ACC has all this money why do we fright to get medical equipment
we need thats been told we need

so if there is money why are we not having a better life
0

#11 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 24 July 2004 - 07:10 PM

Never been able to figure out what a billion consists of as I have nevered out which definition we use here in New Zealand.
the brittish 1,000,000,000,000
or the US 1,000,000,000
If a billion is a thousand million then their ROI is 18+%.
I suppose it's handy having help from an ex-treasurer.
Then again if a billion is one million million then their performance is abyssmal
at about 1.8%.
In that case my bank offers a better return.
Of course one could dream of having an income where those types of figures are meaningful.
0

#12 User is offline   sp8smate 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 27-April 04

Posted 26 July 2004 - 03:48 PM

Looks like ACC is going to get some money for us haha

Asia Pacific Breweries will offer NZ$9.50 each for the balance of DBB shares, valuing DBB at NZ$479 million, APB said.

"The offer is being made to enable APBL to privatise and de-list DB, and reflects APBL's strong long-term commitment to its business in New Zealand," the company said in a statement.

DB's capital expenditure needs could be met without the need to go to the stock exchange and a listing was "less relevant".

APB said the Accident Compensation Commission, a state owned workplace insurer, and several other investors had agreed to sell their stakes, giving it an 85.25 percent interest.
0

#13 User is offline   gaffa09 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 02-November 03

Posted 31 July 2004 - 02:06 PM

Sue's News

Attached File(s)


0

#14 User is offline   gaffa09 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 02-November 03

Posted 31 July 2004 - 02:08 PM

page 2

Attached File(s)


0

#15 User is offline   flowers 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 25-March 04

Posted 03 August 2004 - 09:52 AM

ACC Revamp Tabled
03/08/2004 06:09 AM
NewstalkZB

A revamp of Accident Compensation Corporation legislation has been tabled in Parliament.

ACC Minister Ruth Dyson says the new Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill will make ACC fairer and simpler.

She says the amendments should also make ACC more responsive to the needs of claimants. An example is the removal of the need to find fault if a person is injured during medical treatment, which will speed up the claims process.

Ms Dyson says the current provisions are confusing and out-of-step with ACC's no-fault principle.

They must be getting pissed off with all the appeals they are losing.

One thing is certain the claiment will not be further advantaged.

One wonders what chicanery will be hidden in this new anmmendment to further disentitle the injured.

''ACC Minister Ruth Dyson says the new Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill will make ACC fairer and simpler.''

How often have we heard that phrase used by this lying piece of excrement and found ourselves worse off.

0

#16 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 07 January 2005 - 10:06 AM

On June 17 2004, Sue Bradford tabled the petition for a public inquiry into ACC.

Since then the politicians have duck-shoved the petition around Parliament.

Result???? - Nothing - not even a decision either way.

It's now time for claimant's to be told whether an inquiry will proceed or not.

It is simply unfair and unreasonable for petition signatories/claimants to be left hanging by politicians without a decision.

A decision has some urgency because this morning I now understand that politicians conduct in this matter is to become part of the TV documentary.

I would not like to think that those very few politicians who have supported the petition for an inquiry would inadvertently become tarred with the same couldn't- care-less brush.

Can someone with political connections quickly try and sort-out whether there will be an inquiry or not and inform the Forum.
0

#17 User is offline   jocko 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 07 January 2005 - 03:14 PM

Fortunately we are the enquiry Magnacarta. The reason they are desperate to avoid a real transparent and independent enquiry is because we have all the evidence needed to convince a tribunal that embezzlement of entitlements has clearly become identifiable fraud .
ACCs modus operandi. With its highly paid quacks producing reports to give medical evidence for exits where none actually exists. Ocupational therapists colluding with their employers to reduce payment of home help entitlements by ACC and abetting denial of the right to transport for independence for tetraplegics. When these employers are service providers who draw 90% of their income from ACC.
It is all very clear and obvious. The numbers transferring from ACC to benefits is the most damning of all. Steve Maharey Says "I think it was 17,000" Rubbish. I have been personally told by a senior winz staff member that the exact number is easy for winz to get. Maharey knows the true figure and it is so damning he came up with the "I think" bit to help blur the true situation.
If you ask, why no enquiry? Think about New Zealands credit rating with Standard and Poors or Moodys. Where will foreign investment go when it is revealed the main investment arm of this Labour government is blatantly stealing the entitlements of policy holders in wheelchairs and the traumatically brain injured. When we look at Americas biggest disability insurer UNUM and the way that corporation has been convicted of fraud for employing exactly the same practises and procedures as ACC engages in here. It is extremely difficult to understand why the Government is so reticent in having an enquiry. One would think that a "Labour" government would be the first to have an enquiry if any hint of the same thing was happening in this country.After all they were the ones who vowed they would put things right with ACC. Especially on behalf of the workers who built the party. The single fact that they refuse an independent enquiry is evidence enough that they know the truth and wish to keep it hidden from the eyes of the financial and political world.
0

#18 User is offline   Ivan 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 0
  • Joined: 22-September 04

Posted 10 January 2005 - 06:54 AM

It certainly is disappointing that the Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee have not considered the petition. Unfortunately, the timing of this is under the control of the Committee Chair, Mark Gosche, and he will take instructions from Michael Cullen and the Government whips as to what business takes precedence. Although there is a Green Party MP (Mike Ward) who is a permanent member of this Committee, there is little he can do to hasten the process, other than to hassle Mark Goshe about when it will be coming up. I will talk with him, and with Sue Bradford and Sue Kedgley, and see if they can make some inquiries as soon as Parliament resumes.

Ivan
0

#19 User is offline   magnacarta 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 10 January 2005 - 11:54 AM

Thank you Ivan, I will pass your message on. The Green Party deserves enormous credit in joining in the quest for justice in this matter.
0

#20 User is offline   fairgo 

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

Posted 10 January 2005 - 08:08 PM

Hear hear... thank you Greens :D
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