ACCforum: Hemi - Viewing Profile - ACCforum

Jump to content

User Rating: -----

Active Posts:
3013 (1.11 per day)
Most Active In:
Personal Stories (625 posts)
05-January 12
Profile Views:
Last Active:
User is offline Private

My Information

Member Title:
Advanced Member
Age Unknown
Birthday Unknown
Not Telling Not Telling
the running of this forum
interesting web site here

Contact Information


Latest Visitors

Posts I've Made


    14 June 2019 - 06:40 AM

    View Postkeentohelp, on 13 June 2019 - 07:54 PM, said:

    Out-of-time decisions can only be readdressed, once the three months allowed are past, by providing new information and requesting a new decision. 'New information' is usually quite hard to provide as there is a 'high bar' set as to what it amounts to.

    Often the best first step is to seek a reassessment of the current condition of those injuries. If that generates a payment going forward then good while if the assessment discovers something not found in the initial assessment it is possible that might qualify as 'new' information and allow ACC to reconsider their original rating going backwards.


    Maybe the soothsayers will finally read and leave there own crap out of others issues.

    As you say it is a very hard road on ones like this and the re assessing will be most intensive and require a high standard of evidence to go back to the initial injury with the many years of the claimants life being scrutinised as is usual to offset any change in initial injury % to lay it on anything else that acc may probably will find to deny. Quite some journey to the detriment of the claimants well being health etc unless there is already in hand clear precise information collated over the years to show the issues raised were in fact caused of/by the original injury.


    13 June 2019 - 01:57 PM

    View PostBrucey, on 13 June 2019 - 01:25 PM, said:

    Off Topic.

    Very on topic

    Medical before the Claire money grab

    13 June 2019 - 12:29 PM

    View PostMINI, on 13 June 2019 - 12:07 PM, said:

    Hemi/David Butler

    It is not off topic as it relates to the work needed to be done to make it worthwhile or not. Depends on if it backdated, and you don't know that unless you make it part of you application to ACC. Totally on topic. I know from personal experience that you learn a lot off this forum if given the information as to what cant and cannot be an entitlement.

    When learning all information is useful.


    Claire Hollis
    Your bollocks
    All ways ranting on about money you can grab
    Think outside the square and the claimants well being before you spout off about the dollars
    $ Be the last thing on the agenda on this one
    You need to get there first on medical issues.
    Read the info on post 1 and see what if anything constructive you can come up with other than a money grab from acc for IA.

    Dave. :)

    11 June 2019 - 09:02 PM

    View PostMINI, on 11 June 2019 - 04:24 PM, said:

    I got IA backdated five years. That made a pretty nice sum and worth the hard work. but then I had to prove that the case manager lied to me when she told me I wasn't entitled to weekly compensation as well. That was also backdated, but once taxed was not such a tidy sum. Added up over the preceding years though and very grateful for it.

    They can only say No and you work from there, it is a clear road to follow, just like the yellow brick one.


    Off topic.
    Not interested in your issues in in here based on the money grab from acc Claire
    It’s a different kettle of fish

    09 June 2019 - 06:45 PM

    View PostMINI, on 09 June 2019 - 04:07 PM, said:

    In the first instance you will need to obtain the right to a late application against the 4% only. so that is your first approach to ACC.

    If they agree, then they will have to supply you with the necessary specialists to see to give you a proper examination, re: the real amount of damage done to your brain and parts of your brain that allow you to physically compete in the job market, but do not allow you to hold onto a job long. This could likely be cognitive damage or even social damage, which would include anxiety and depression and lots of other specialist areas. As I am not a specialist I will not carry on about what it could be.

    If ACC do not agree to a right of late application against the 4%, you will have to go to Review for the late part first then to the district court if the Reviewer does not allow the late Review. at the time of the Review you will have to prove that you had extrodinary circumsances that stopped you from reviewing in the past. This would take all the paper work you have from that time written by the doctors and specialists which show you had a injury that was far worse than the one that gave you 4% only. You would also need up to date specialists updates to say you have gotten worse and need another assessment, backdated if possible.

    If declined at that stage you will have to think about take the late application to the District Court.

    It does not hurt to ask ACC in the first place, as they can only say No and then you have to make up your mind what you are going to do about the next move. But I feel that if you knew that you were only going to get $1 for every dollar, if they gave you 10% before they paid you $10 per week........ask yourself if all the tremendously hard work is worth it.

    Your claim would probably come under the IA as it already has done and that is the entitlement it would be, presuming you got it. I do not think you could get Lump Sum as the injury happened so long ago.

    Having been thru both IA and Lump Sum, I can tell you this much, but it is you who will have to do the work. Which could be expensive and upsetting, only you can make the decisions that take you into the land of fighting with ACC.

    Good Luck


    No time period date etc is given as to when the 4% rating was given.
    On that I would take it as an assessment re looking at the rehab as to what was actually needed to be done and the rehab based on that 4% tally.
    They seemingly were under acc care with rehab provision set and in place possibly some social needs and with return to work as the outcome as only a 4 % to work with.
    They have said they never entered into that rehab process as a whole, and went there own way going back to work.
    To go back to work must have been a viable option for them to leave the rehab offered although personally knowing that at times viable options are really not that and doctors input needed which acc would have asked doctor for that.
    There own medical doctor handling there injury’s would not have allowed back to work if they were not capable of that. ??? On that one.
    That would leave them as opting out of treatment rehab offered. No certificate of capacity provided with acc having no more to do apart from at some Time an assessment to clear the files as either fit for Fit for selected work or no work at all. Or fit to work full time,which I would think the 4% one would be used that process.
    The question to ask with this is of there own medical doctor of what they said to claimant and the acc at the time of them going back to work.
    It must have been good to go or part time.
    To have a reassessment of so long ago injury one would have to show documentation medical / work records as to what happened at that rehab time, and subsequent documentation along the way /years showing that it was that initial injury causing problems more than the assessment showed.
    On tne lump sum that if applicable that would have been processed back then. Pre IA coming in.
    They don’t say on that nor exactly what the rehab was = medical and or social needs rehab.
    Could be another one slipped they the cracks but to challenge from so long ago not an easy thing to do and times the amount of work stress etc just worsens an already bad situation for a most likely small gain.
    The IA would along the process arrive into play and need to meet the threshold for that less any possible benefit gained via the 4% assessment data.
    I note that it is said as the first motor vechile accident??? Meaning More than one now?? And then more later new head injury’s to deal with.



Hemi has no profile comments yet. Why not say hello?