I feel for the woman being sued by Senior ACC advisor Dr Peter Jansen for comments she made on her blog.

Her description of an ACC staff member as a completely incompetent prick is however the best description of some of ACC's staff I have had recent dealings with.

Completely incompetent Prick #1.

Justin Raffin Operations Analyst, Customer Service Technical Support, for example stated that my "staff loan was not a staff loan but an interest reducing agreement with my employer" and that I was not entitled to any benefit.

Mr Raffin also stated that my gross income included a staff loan to which I am not entitled and yet the benefit of that staff loan to which I was not entitled was included as taxable income with my gross earnings.

I did query this concerned that ACC had been overpaying me for years for a staff loan to which i was not entitled to receive a benefit. Strangely the only answer I got was that ACC was sorry for loosing my query.

Mr Raffin however stated that his letter was not a decision.

What wasn't a decision? It's fairly clear to me that Mr Raffin' statement that a Staff loan was not a staff loan but an interest reducing agreement with my employer is a decision.

Mr Raffins decision that ERC included a mortgage as tax paid earnings is even more bizarre.

Completely incompetent Prick #2.

Randle Southee Service delivery Manager of the National Serious Injury service.

Mr Southee stated that "ACC's 1990 decision was correct", and that ACC did not intend to address those matters further.

Well obviously Mr Southee was wrong. I have been waiting 20 years and 11 months for a written decision and I am still waiting.

Completely incompetent prick #3.

Tom Hardy, Senior Accounting Adviser, Accounting Advisory Service, Customer Service Technical Support.

For example he stated "Also, it appears the inclusion of holiday pay in the final annual figure may account for the large difference in average 52-weekly earnings between the December 1989 and January 1990 certificates".

I would suggest that Mr Hardy got a calculator out (that is if he can use one) and reconciled the figures from the C3 forms before stating that the final C3 form contained annual leave ( 16.5 days) plus a months salary minus 1 day.

Neither a rocket scientist nor an accountants arsehole is Mr Hardy.

Strangely enough Mr hardy wrote "The recommendation in this memo differs from those in the memos by Justin Raffan dated 1 October 2008 and 13 May 2009 following consideration of further information and the reviewer’s comments".

Why is it that the memo from Mr Peter Flynn dated 16'th September 2008 was not referred to by Mr Hardy? ACC is all to good at withholding information prejudicial to their argument from their asessors and obviously their own accounting staff.

It's a great pity that Mr Raffin ignored Mr Peter Flynn's advice that ACC had made a mistake and that the ERC calculation was in error.  I'd have been happy to accept Mr Flynn's decision.

Four years later that decision cost has ACC an extra 12,000 a year. Half of what I believed I was entitled too including an Order in Council payrise of 5%.