Jump to content
A big Welcome to the remaining few members of the now defunct accforum,org.
ACC Clients/Claimants - Know your rights or get screwed
Share your experiences and knowledge - when injured, helping each other through the ACC process
Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Prior to 2000 / 2001 my then long term lower back injury claim file was managed by a "case manager" employed direct by the ACC.

 

My lower back injury file was then transferred to AON NZ Ltd - WorkAON

 

I have often wondered if the ACC did a background check on AON before transferring hundreds of ACC's Long Term Claimants files to them (AON) for "Better Managing"

 

Yeah right!

 

 

Quote

•Despite his threat of legal action (pretty standard tactics from the life insurance industry) Mr Routledge was proved incorrect. Subsequent to AON’s publication of its Prospectus it had altered its fees in a re-issued Investment Statement – totally permissible but clearly Routledge playing the ugly American bully was hardly appropriate. No apology from him was forthcoming.
•In 2005 AON was ordered by New York Attorney General to pay US$190m in restitution to clients for cheating them. Chief Executive Patrick Ryan was reported as having issued a public apology for the firm‘s actions. "I deeply regret that we took advantage of those conflicts”.

 

Quote

Aon to pay $20m to settle bribery claims
5:30 AM Thursday Dec 22, 2011

In the US, Aon Insurance Brokers has agreed to pay US$16million to settle criminal allegations.

WASHINGTON - Insurance brokerage firm Aon has agreed to pay more than US$16 million ($20.7 million) to settle criminal and civil allegations that it bribed employees of government-owned companies and others in several countries between 1983 and 2007, US authorities said yesterday.

 

If your ACC injury claim file was transferred to AON or to any of the other three case management service provider companies that were given Long Term Claims (The Tail Enders) Case Management contracts around 1998 / 1999 time frame I would like to hear from you.

 

Just sign-up and join me here to discus AON

Edited by Blurb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Quote

Not Leanne Mac Donnell, on 12 January 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

ACC should investigate the above claimants injury file management

He seems to have a lot of damming evidence, not only against Leanne Mac Donnell, but against quite a number of ACC staff and representatives - including AON and Catalyst and LTCU

It doesn't take long to figure out the reasons why they (AON and ACC) have destroyed his integrity

The man has a STRONG case against ACC which could be worth millions of $ if he were to take civil action. In my opinion.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Quotes from Aon Discussion Paper on Private Sector Competition for Accident Compensation Insurance August 2004"

"Aon was very successful in exiting claims
In the 12 months to 30 June 2003, ACC only managed to exit 256 long-term tail claims, despite a target of 1,500 planned exits"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Posted by BLURB 25 April 2014 - 12:54 PM

On the 19 January 2014 - 01:36 PM 'Jocko' wrote:
 

"Misinformation. Labour exited 17600 on to WINZ benefits alone between 1999 and 2004.We do not know the total. But Labour reduced the long term claimants from app 33,000 to app 14,000. From 2004 until National came back in it, the tail, rose to over 17,000.
But National reduced the total number of long term claimants to its current level of 10,300. Not many left now and no more cash in the cow.
This report ignores these simple mathematical truths. ALL parties, the entire new Zealand government. No what ACC does. The media knows. We all know. But for years it gets ignored. Any enquiry ever held has been a whitewash"

 

From the wayback machine as like the quote in the previous post.

 

I never did like AON

 

Aon NZ Ltd (WorkAon) was a very successful 3rd party case management service provider contractor to the ACC between 1998 and 2003-4

 

By early 2003 AON NZ Ltd (WorkAon) had successfully exited their long term claimants (Tail enders) injury file quota and wanted ACC to transfer more files to case manage.

 

ACC declined to give them more long term claim injury files.

 

I'm guessing too many questions were starting to be asked and complaints made about their case management style/practices!

 

Does anyone want to know how they were so successful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any ACC claimants out there who were exited by either Catalyst or AON between 1999 and 2004ish but have since had their rightful ERC etc reinstated and been paid loads and loads of money by either AON and/or Catalyst and/or ACC to keep quite and not tell anyone/media?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

AON and the three other companies involved with the case management of long term claimants did not come under the jurisdiction of the Auditor General (So we were led to believe by the AG at the time, a Mr Brady) regardless of all the complaints against them and their UNUM style case management practices that were adopted during that time.

From the wayback machine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

I quote the following from documents received from DRS in November 2002, <snip>:

� THE PRIMARY OBJECTION RELATES TO THE UNINATERAL CONTACT FROM DR PERCIVAL WITH DR CHEW WHO SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED HIS REPORT. THE REVEIWER WENT ON TO SAY �THAT IS AN INAPPROPIATE ACTION AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE�.




Re: Work Rehabilitation Assessment: Final quality check and decision

= Was Co-Signed & Dated by Val Jamieson AND Dr ROBERT PERCIVAL on 1st July 2002.


The "Work Rehabilitation Assessment: Final quality check and decision" document that was Co-Signed & Dated by Val Jamieson AND Dr ROBERT PERCIVAL on 1st July 2002 was missing/not included within the "Bundle of File Documents" Ms Sandra Mechen had given to us moments before J Caddenhead entered the Chamber.

 

From the wayback machine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Following on from previous post
 

BLURB, on 15 June 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

The following letter was mailed to Sandra Mechen on Wednesday 1st March 2006

No response has ever been received.

================

Wednesday 01 March 2006

Ms Sandra Mechen
ACC Case Manager / ACC Legal Advisor
PO Box 5343
Wellesley Street
Auckland

Dear Ms Mechen

You are well aware that had Leanne MacDonnell and Dr Robert Percival been removed from having further involvement in the management of my ACC Injury Case File, then the Capacity to Work 30 or 35 hours decision made by the ACC on 12 July 2002 would not have been substantiated and my Rehabilitation continued until such time further ongoing assessments from time to time may identify my real, not perceived, Capacity to Work.

1. Fact is that: Dr Robert Percival and Leanne MacDonnell both interfered with Dr Tony Chews 1st report and subsequent amended report.
2. Alleged is that: Dr Tim Sprott had already been contacted �for/with advice� when the original referral was made and Leanne MacDonnell did in fact contact Dr Tim Sprott again just before I arrived at enviromedix on the morning of that particular assessment.
3. Fact is that: Dr Robert Percival co-signed the WRAP Team sign-off form.
4. Fact is that my Advocate and myself did not get a copy of the ACC�s �Bundle of File Documents� until just prior to the last Appeal Hearing.
5. Fact is that we should have been forwarded a copy of that Bundle before the Hearing date.
6. Fact is that the Bundle of File Documents given to us in the Court Room, and a copy Submitted to Judge Cadenhead at the commencement of that Appeal Hearing moments later by Sandra Mechen, failed to contain the �WRAP Team Sign-Off� form that Dr Robert Percival had apparently signed.
7. Fact is that staff at Catalyst (now LTCU), including Leanne MacDonnell (formally with AON, then Catalyst, currently LTCU), continued to inappropriately contact those professional Medical Providers who I consulted with and trusted, to ensure I did not gather any Medical opinion that would add weight to my argument contradicting the ACC�s 12 July Decision.

I am sure that my persistence on the above issues is becoming extremely frustrating for you and all others concerned. Not even all the false allegations of abusive phone calls etc made against me by Aon and ACC staff will deviate me from my objective, and that is to get both fair Justice and compensation for what I have had to endure from you and your employers, the ACC!

Yours sincerely


Fran Van Helmond
RD 4
Waiuku 1852

================

What part of our above argument centered around was the fact Dr Robert Pervival (ACC-AON-CATALYST-LTCU BMA) was involved in the whole process, and as he had been caught out interfering with one assessment, who was to say that he wasn't interfering with the others - Dr Walls and Dr Sprotts assessments to name but two

We believe that was the reason ACC Legal Representitive, SANDRA MECHEN, intentionally failed to provide the "WRAP Team Sign-Off" document within the Bundle of File Documents

Sandra Mechen - ACC Auckland Legal advisor
http://accforum


Another point also

Dr Robert Percival was the Branch Medical Advisor at AON and Catalyst during that time.

He should not have been involved with the WRAP Team Sign-off

Is this a conflict of interest?

Thats like being an ACC case manager, complaints investigator, reviewer and appeal Judge all rolled into one person


Within the Review Hearing judgement the DRSL Reviewer, MJ Dunn, wrote:

"THE PRIMARY OBJECTION RELATES TO THE UNINATERAL CONTACT FROM DR PERCIVAL WITH DR CHEW WHO SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED HIS REPORT".

"THAT IS AN INAPPROPRIATE ACTION AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE".

 

 

They did the same thing to hundreds of Long Term Claimants.

 

They contact the specialist/s and under the pretense of seeking advice they, Leanne and Rob, give advice on what should be recorded in the claimants medical report to ensure a speedy exit onto a waiting winz benefit!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers screwed.


 

Quote

 

Warren Forster, on 30 January 2007 - 07:48 PM, said:

<snip>

<snip>

ANNEX 😧 Note on file from AON

The National Manager of AON risk services, writing to the case manager. The background to this document was that Mr Van Helmond had complained about his case manager. The Complaint went to ACC who drafted a response and sent it to the National Manager of AON for his "Approval". He approved a final copy, which stated to Mr Van Helmond that his case was being properly managed and therefore AON would not change the case manager and would not return the case to ACC.

The National Manager wrote to the case manager:
Leeanne, lets discuss tommorrow, another door closes!!!!!!! Liam

Suggest we present this as a "sucess story" when exit achieved, your perserverance will pay off. Liam

9 months later, with a significant more interference from AON and others, Mr Van Helmond was exited.


<snip>

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Found in the ODT. Dated Tuesday, 14-December 1999

 

Posted by BLURB on 02 July 2014 - 03:40 AM

Wellington: Some private ACC companies might escape the Government's plans to nationalise the accident insurance scheme.

The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation (ACC) might not be stopped from contracting out management of long-term claims to private companies, new ACC Minister Michael Cullen said.

He said some of his caucus colleagues might oppose the contracts.

"No doubt some people in the caucus will have concerns and will want to discuss it further with ACC."

ACC confirmed last week it had contracted out the management of 4000 long-term claims.

The bulk of the claims, 2000, went to ACC subsidiary Catalyst. The rest went to four private groups: Aon Risk Services; CRM Group; Willis Coroon offshoot Injury Management; and Te Runanganui o Taranaki Whanui ki te Upoko o Te Ika a Maui.

The one-year contracts covered case management and rehabilitation and did not affect entitlements, ACC chief executive Garry Wilson said.

Labour wants to repeal the legislation and make ACC the sole provider of workplace insurance. A Bill may go before Parliament by March. - NZPA


Found in the ODT. Dated Tuesday, 14-December 1999

==========>

Re: The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation (ACC) might not be stopped from contracting out management of long-term claims to private companies, new ACC Minister Michael Cullen said.

He said some of his caucus colleagues might oppose the contracts.

"No doubt some people in the caucus will have concerns and will want to discuss it further with ACC."

Does anyone know whether it is possible to request information from ACC under the Official Information Act (OIA) asking if any Caucus members did indeed contact them (the ACC) and what the concerns raised were and answers provided to them?

re: The bulk of the claims, 2000, went to ACC subsidiary Catalyst. The rest went to four private groups: Aon Risk Services; CRM Group; Willis Coroon offshoot Injury Management; and Te Runanganui o Taranaki Whanui ki te Upoko o Te Ika a Maui.

Has anyone any information that they wish to share concerning any or all of the following companies

CRM Group
Willis Coroon offshoot Injury Management
Te Runanganui o Taranaki Whanui ki te Upoko o Te Ika a Maui.

<snip>

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×