Hi all, how does one get ACC to actually make the appointment for an assessment? The referral has been made, it is even on my IRP but I've been waiting for 2 months for notification of the appointment.

Mine took about 5 months to complete

Funny olde world, we received the 2 yearly medical fiel review and find that it is a complete u turn to anything ACChas dealt with in the past.

Origionally they concentrated on occupationally induced chemical sensitivity and carefully removed or denied any mention of associated brain injury, even going so far as to demand that doctors replace any medical certificates mentioning such.

In 1998 they tried to prove sleep deprivation or atypical migraine and shot themselves totally in the foot.

During this time they made anybody questioning their collected information out to be adversarial or generally beligerant.

Now we find that the review says Chemical sensitivity is not covered by ACC and that I suffer brain injuries to the extent that sheltered workshop type employment is the only sort of employment suitable for me and even that I need constant supervision and care.

Funny that!

Strange thing is that it appears I live in three worlds, ACC world in which I am perfectly physically fit to do anything.

The Medical view of things in whichACC has all sorts of programs and support in place because of my injuries

And our worled where we ignore everything and keep charging ahead as best we can despite the efforts ACC makes to block any rehabilitation or advances we make.

So the medical answer is the one we like, ACC? They are not paid to care!

A letter of complaint about your Case Manager not acting in a timely manner may nudge things along.

Its a sad case however that some Specialists are well booked in advance and a six month wait may be required... However that's a six month wait from the time the appointment is booked.

As a proactive participant in your own rehabilitation wait no longer! Make the appointment yourself. It's in your IRP! ACC can't very well say no. Can they!

Chris wrote:

QUOTE:

During this time they made anybody questioning their collected information out to be adversarial or generally beligerant.

(snip)

Strange thing is that it appears I live in three worlds, ACC world in which I am perfectly physically fit to do anything.

The Medical view of things in whichACC has all sorts of programs and support in place because of my injuries

And our worled where we ignore everything and keep charging ahead as best we can despite the efforts ACC makes to block any rehabilitation or advances we make.

I'm experiencing dejavu

You are not the only one.


Anyway get hold of the September 2008 issue of Scientific American magazine if you want more dejaviuew.

The future of Privacy there are some excellent articles in there which any ACC client who has been raped and pillaged by ACC will identify with.

Mind you the article on NF3(nitrogen triflouride)pg 17 used in flat panel TV's may make you think twice about having one in your house

Edited this post as We have had a major discovery today (Wednesday)3weeks before the election and

We are going to be calling on a City Solicitor initially to read through the file and information and see if it is worth pursuing matters further.

Unfortunately with no accountability and a completely rigged dispute and complaints system one has to look at mortgaging the house to pay for decent Legal Support!

One can always hope that the change of Gumbootment to more trustworthy rulers ,may bring accountability and sense back into dealings with quazi gumbootment organisations mind you it seems labour is desperate to hold onto power, maybe they are afraid that if they lose the election investigations into dishonesty and fraud may point back at them.

Scientific American www.SciAm.com may be a useful link if you cannot get hold of the magazine

Ok the Privacy articles are on the site if you are interested http://www.sciam.com/search/index.cfm?q=privacy&submit.x=19&submit.y=12&submit=submit

Just curious.

I like to keep working to at least some extent but because of my dissabilities I require certain pieces of equipment to help me out.

In theory, at least from many persons points of view, ACC supplies all ones needs and has support in place so you do not need any further help and seemingly therefore equipment you buy "outside the System protocols would not be deductable.

In practice any approach to ACC for help is met with "there is no provision in the legislation for such"

Or as some have found after long drawn out consultation you end up with, for example a half finished shower box which seemingly cost ACC $15000

Or (On expert advice) ACC suplies a stundent grade basic computer which has a price tag of the space shuttle.

Or even worse ACC staff block or stop the rehabilitation attempt as unstructured or unsuitable.

So are reahbilitation aids which you have provided yourself Tax Deductible?

I seem to have hit a brick wall on this as it seems what to us is a reasonable and necessary aid whichw e wouldlike to buy is considered to be an attempt to rip the tax man off or get tax deductions for expensive equipment which people view as being for "Personal use".

I have done a few lessons and courses, at our expense, lately which have really help me understand how visual communication makes a huge difference in my daily life and just how such can help me.

So I have asked the simple question, as I do

"If I buy such and such an aid to help me in working is it tax deductable."

seemingly this is a difficult question which has people running around trying to find an answer to.

Anybody know what the answer is so I can short cut the hoo ha.

No do not tell me ACC should or are supplying any necessary equipment to help with your social and vocational rehabilitation, all we need to do is ask for it.

Trust ACC? Sure can! not!

On a similar vein I asked the other day, if ACC have repeatedly refused to aknowledge an exsting dissaility when consideraing my physical fitness for work are they discriminating against me on the basis of dissability.

This set about a chain of buck passing from one place to CCS who suggested the health and dissability commisioners office and so I gave up.

I am however now assured that such does fall into discrimination under the Bill or Rights if you can be bothered chasing the trail which it would start into action.

Are necessary aids to elf employment Tax deductable, even though other people may not need them or not?

If not does IRD Discriminate against dissabled people, I like that idea!

Not bad for Friday,

Received an answer of able to put in a claim for 50% of the cost.

Which, while not perfect is probably acceptable as it may make getting the equipment a little more achievable.

Without mind boggling writing proposals, waiting, discusions and eventual rebukement.

And once again we can say we have done it all ourselves.

Without anybody else taking the credit or sticking their oars in.

Besides it may be a cushion in that by the time the return goes in, if all turns to custard or if rejected we hopefully will have built up enough from its use to cover the whole cost,

Nothing like a little adventure in your life now and again aye!

Watch this from a mr J. Inkspot in about 2001

Reason for return Risky Claimant

Please provide examples of risky behaviour

Extensive litigtaion involvement preventing IMNZ meeting the contractural requirements as agreed with ACC.

Non compliance resulting in involvement of ACC complaints Investigator and two Ministerials to Ruth Dyson and Michael cullen.

IMNZ has been unable to delier the terms of contract as a result of the dsiruptive and non - compliant nature of the claimant.
Factors impeding rehabiliation including evidence of identitfied barriers

The continued use of legal council for all matters relating to the management of IMNZ and ACC entitlement by the claimant (legal council named, to which he took extreme exception to being called such)

The drawn out difficulties geting client to attend appointments without changes or threatening letters being produced, either by the claimant or his Solicitor and the administrative requirements preparing written responses and the need to cancel and reschedule appointments with providers (Small note much of this revolves around IMNZ flatly refusing to accept evidential reports of brain injury and even lesser qualified people refusing to assess me on IMNZ terms)

The large amount of adminsitrative work required to manage this claim due to the amount of corespondence being received from the claimant, his wife and Solicitor that has to be researched and answered to.

Summary of all factors impacting on the ability to achieve outcomes.

The large number of specialist reports on file, either sourced by ACC or provided by the claimant that conflict in opinion (Forget the evidential facts)

The large amount medical information sourced from the internet relating to Chemical toxicty/sensitivity and Gluteraldehyde poisoning which has been requested by the claimant placed on file.

The claimants belief that he has suffered major brain damage due to Gluterladehyde poisoning as a result of details from the internet and various conflicting asessments on file

The clients belief that his diagnosis is Chemcial Sensitivities including significant Cognitive Impairment with Diffuse Brain Damage and that this claim should be managed by ACC Serious Injury (A) Seems the risky claimant author could read expert neuro reports and knew something about the requirements for entry into "Yahoo serious" injury aye)

The claimants decision to use his wife as "Supervisory caregiver" who alters medical certificates, writesd the claimants letters and signs documents on his behalf

Hello My Supervisory Caregiver came to me during a time when my ACC claim was closed, Snady from the Brain Injury association knew about this and ACC requested her to act on my behalf in all matters many years ago, was only when this chump realised she should be being paid that they got nasty, and lost that battle to.

The provision of curent consent provided for a month only with attachment of a "Supplemnetary sheet" to be read in conjunction with the consent form that the claimants Solicitor has prepared, which si misleading and gives rise to the claimant believing that he has the right under the privacy act to direct how ACC/IMNZ deals at all times with his file.

(Actually as pointed out o ACC and IMNZ many times the file they use in my name and to pay me from is not my file.

My file was replaced in mid 1993 with someone else who fell over in a park in Carterton and hit his head on concrete which resulted in brain injury and chemical sensitivity my file was archived and destroyed in about 2004, after we started asking questions.

Seems when I wa sgiven my new file some paperwork was created to show the claim started in 1986, but information in some of that can only have happened post 1993 and at least one report appears to be a forgery, the named author when conatcted has no recollection or record of meeting with us or writing the report. Pays to ask the Author directly if you are unsure or have fogotten attending assesments.

The one month only bit is covered in the file showing they required it and also monthly doctors certificates.

The delays getting new consent at the expiry of the current consent form (much to do with not my claim not my problem as we now describe the situation)

Eventual compliance with requests to attend appointments then attemtping to supply his own demands with the provider. Example of two non- complaice letters issued and to attend medical assessement with then when he consented to attend preceeded (I am the only one who cannot spell or use the right words) to demand conditions (Like using the correct identity and information)

The use of the "Sullplementary sheet" by sending it to Providers which in the case of ...Occupational medical Specialist led him to cancel the occupational medical asessment and advise that he would not complete the assessment due to the threatening nature of the supplementary sheet (Interesting here as someone anonomonously later sent an enveliope of material which IMNZ had sent to that assessor to my Solicitor it seems to show the assessor actually told IMNZ he would not be co erced into writing the report on their terms.

The constant demands for copies of the information being provided to the various providers to help with their assesments.

What rehabilitation has been identitifed as still outstanding?

To have this claim thoroughly researched by Occuational medical Specialist with an excellent knowledge of chemcial Related Sensitivities (Actually the specilaist concerned field was fatigue in Airline pilots)

To have the claimant fully assessed by a Clinical Psychologist who is experienced in working with people who have problems with excessive fatigue. (Dr Mossman, Kay Farrar, Dorothy Gronwall oh and a comment by Bill Glass obviously were not considered sufficiently qualified by IMNZ .

When was the proposed exit date

I have not been able to identify a propaosed exit date as I have been unable to get the claimant to attend an Occupational medical Specialist for an assessment and recomendations for rehabilitation.

So that my friends is how you become a "Risky Claimant"


2008, Medical File Review


2nd August 1999

It is quite clear that ACC according to Dr Monigatti, have accepted that .... has a chronic gluteradlehyde induced encephalopathy.


Discussion

.....presents with an accepted case of gluteraldehyde induced chronic encephalopathy

....also has what is diagnosed as being Multiple chemical sensitivity. This has not been acepted by the corporation.

I have discussed his main ongoing impairments above.

I note Dr Monigatti and in fact most of the emdical reports on file, indicate that it was reasonable to assume that .... could work in some capacity in an occupation not exposed to gluteraldehyde and in my opinion ina job that would take into account his cognitiver impairments.

I note in my opinion it will be a difficult long rehabilitationand the sucess of which I do not believe I could gaurentee.

I note in my opinion he has some difficulty with compleex attention and memeory tasks and poor strategy on construction tasks. he is noted to have a pre morbid ability well above average which is consistant with my impression today

and there is more, like needing constant supervision care and so on.

Hows that Brain injured and super intelligent that seems to cause a few people problems, how can someone be brain injured and NOT THICK AS WELL?

Oh By the way, the assesment report which we believe to be possibly a forgery (We had no record of attending the assessment and the Doctor on whos Letter Head paper the report, (which appears simply to be an earlier report by another specialist written in the negative)had no memeory or record of writing the report was sent to this bloke but has now vanished from mention.

Trust, what was that stupid program on Telly a few years back where the bloke kept saying something like "Trust me, I know what I am doing!)

Who the hell am I again??? seems I now have so many identities that even I am wondering.

http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=7228&pid=75008&st=0&#entry75008

I was just reading the above posts.

Our input.

We had a very heavy tilt a door tpe garage door.

Concern was what would happen if we got it half way up and ran out of strength, it would probably kill us on the downward drop.

So Supervisory Caregiver, recognised by ACC but unpaid,
without resorting to ACC beurocracy suggest we buy two sheets of heavy plywood and some hinges and make side opening doors.

Seemingly a pretty silly idea to me.

BUT it worked AMAZINGLY Well, DID NOT NEED experts, assessments or consultants, that was about 3 years ago and the only modification needed was a spring loaded top lock with a string attached to hold the top closed.

Origional cost of 2 sheets of ply and six hinges?

Around $150
Paint, mistint brought on special

Operating costs (Electricity) over 2 years NIL
Carbon credits? Should be stacks
When People complain about the economic downturn we simply say
Welcome to our World

Nice one Chris! Some good old kiwi ingenuity is still around. I've been reading your posts and am just dumbfounded as to what to say to you regarding your journey. Is it you who is interested in doing some photography? If so, I think that would be a great thing for you to do. I used to be a photo printer in professional lab, printed transparencies etc. by hand. In terms of the photography side though, you really learn to look at things in different way- I found that eventually I was 'seeing light' instead of just objects or scenes and opens up a whole world of beauty and nuance. It can be a fantastic way to express how you see the world and if successful you could wind up getting paid to do something you love which is surely what we all want ultimately? Anyway, take care, Phoeniks.

I used to play up to my elbows in Photgraphic chemicals myself.

Was at the Logan Brown Restaurant in wellington recently and noticed the serviettes were bound in paper tape with images of fish which look suspiciously like ones I printed zillions of in my time as a photgraphic technician.

How they were made is a story in itself.

Drawn by the draftsperson, photgraphed onto 4x 5inch Ilford line film using a Linhoff technica camera.

Deliberately over exposed then the negatives were "cut back" by hand in a cynanide solution

(Cyanide eats away the exposed emulsion ina controlled sort of way leaving very sharp fine line work.)

One had to be VERY careful not to pour Acetic acid down the drain after tipping the cyanide solution out.

Ahh glorious 1970's unmonitored Radiation, Cyanide Solutions in open trays and what we called bucket science, good times good times!



Thanks been a long uphill battle but have at last found a new Pentax K200D, if you want really great people to deal with in the Digital camera field visit Camera House in the St George Hotel in Wellington, small shop family atmosphere great service.

Now to find a way to get a decent laptop, inverter and Photshop cs3 or 4 and see what we can really do.