PDA

View Full Version : ACC bollocks



Paul in NZ
29th October 2013, 12:18
I have no way of knowing if this is for real or not but I'm gob smacked...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11148025

WTF?

Crasherfromwayback
29th October 2013, 12:21
I have no way of knowing if this is for real or not but I'm gob smacked...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11148025

WTF?

Heartless arseholes.

Paul in NZ
29th October 2013, 12:36
Heartless arseholes.

They couldnt be that heartless could they?? I mean jeeze the way this is presented is pretty grim and very un kiwi like...

Jeff Sichoe
29th October 2013, 12:54
"They just dropped me. My case manager told me if they said yes, it will cost the country thousands of dollars because it will open the door to other people.

Nice one ACC you fucken ugly fucks.


who? me?
http://static2.stuff.co.nz/1250466976/462/2759462.jpg

mashman
29th October 2013, 13:24
The money is more important, she should die with some dignity with the knowledge that she's doing her country a service. Give her a medal and some morphine.

SPman
29th October 2013, 13:38
They couldnt be that heartless could they?? I mean jeeze the way this is presented is pretty grim and very un kiwi like...

Welcome to the new Kiwi way.........

300weatherby
29th October 2013, 14:36
If you were an All Black or a politition, it would get sorted instantly, no questions asked. Get into your local MP's ear, and ask him/her the question, there is an election coming, and this is crap of the highest level.

yungatart
29th October 2013, 14:56
How sad.
ACC, (ie, the original ACC) has been eroded by successive governments tweaking, reforming and improving it, to the point where this woman is consigned to the scrap heap because it will cost...the very reason it was put in place in the first instance.

I'm disgusted....

blue rider
29th October 2013, 15:12
The pain was all in her head, until it wasn't :facepalm:

In any case, can't have a faulty device interfering with profit, really people going to ACC and expect help? What is the world coming too.

Poor woman.

SMOKEU
29th October 2013, 15:38
Money before the people. Who would've thought?

badlieutenant
29th October 2013, 16:00
Fuck it, Im broke and just signed up for the fred hollows foundation thing so may as well give this lady some money too.
The offender should have his assets and anything else like kidneys sold off to pay for this. Makes me cringe just thinking about what this poor woman went thru to do that much damage :/

Banditbandit
29th October 2013, 16:10
They're hoping that it will take so long to argue through the process that she will die .. and then the problem has gone away ..

Bastards ...

SPman
29th October 2013, 18:31
They're hoping that it will take so long to argue through the process that she will die .. and then the problem has gone away ..

Bastards ...
They're good at that.....

Akzle
29th October 2013, 18:56
isn't it about time there was a "governmentium uber-whinge" thread, and merger...

Thaeos
29th October 2013, 22:50
If ACC won't fund it then what recourse does she have, sue the hospital that performed the operations?? Nope probably can't, as that's what ACC is for right...
And as for the quote "if they said yes, it will cost the country thousands of dollars because it will open the door to other people".

Well so what? What is ACC for if not that?

mashman
30th October 2013, 17:34
Maybe this guy will pray for her (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9339479/Former-priest-gets-760-000-to-study-religion)

Mom
30th October 2013, 17:47
What an absolute disgrace! Since when should anyone have to put up with this sort of crap. This is clearly a treatment injury. Fuck the lot of them. I get so angry about this sort of penny pinching! It may not be able to be repaired, we don't have the talent in NZ at the moment, she needs to go overseas.

This surgical mesh was touted to be the salvation for anyone with a pelvic prolapse, easy to install and instant fix. So women complained about prolapse, they got treated. Then they complained about pain, they were then written off as complainers. They had been fixed up after all. Wankers the lot of them.

Winston001
30th October 2013, 19:29
If ACC won't fund it then what recourse does she have, sue the hospital that performed the operations?? Nope probably can't, as that's what ACC is for right...
And as for the quote "if they said yes, it will cost the country thousands of dollars because it will open the door to other people".

Well so what? What is ACC for if not that?

Poor woman, what an awful situation. I can't imagine what it was like for her to be raped at 53 and to then suffer medical misadventure on top of that...tragic.

The problem for ACC is that noone in NZ can do the procedure. I've never heard of ACC sending patients overseas for surgery. That's probably too much to expect from a broad rehabilitation organisation.

Bear in mind that our public health system doesn't send patients to America for operations either.

There are limits to medicine. There is no bottomless bank account. Sometimes, hard as it is to come to terms with, we have to accept a remedy is not possible.

Edbear
30th October 2013, 19:31
What an absolute disgrace! Since when should anyone have to put up with this sort of crap. This is clearly a treatment injury. Fuck the lot of them. I get so angry about this sort of penny pinching! It may not be able to be repaired, we don't have the talent in NZ at the moment, she needs to go overseas.

This surgical mesh was touted to be the salvation for anyone with a pelvic prolapse, easy to install and instant fix. So women complained about prolapse, they got treated. Then they complained about pain, they were then written off as complainers. They had been fixed up after all. Wankers the lot of them.

Now don't hold back love, tell us what you really think. ..:mad:

jasonu
30th October 2013, 20:33
Sometimes, hard as it is to come to terms with, we have to accept a remedy is not possible.

A remedy is possible, the problem is no one wants to pay for it.

badlieutenant
30th October 2013, 20:56
How much did it cost to prosecute and jail the person responsible for the rape ?
There are limits to the spending on this sort of thing I spose. Kind of like the hard decisions pharmac has to make for drug purchases.
ACC making the comment that if they did get the surgery performed then it would open the flood gates to more people requesting the surgery. But she was the only one that had this surgery?. So im guessing there are other people with complications from smaller mesh implants. If there is enough people for the "flood gates to open" wouldn't it be possible to get either a qualified someone on a list over here to perform the surgery or get someone trained to do it ?.
Just really sad :/ I did donate in the end. And will again if I can. Dollar for Dollar my fred hollows donation probably has more impact for more people but meh. I hope she gets her funding and gets to live long enough that rape wasnt what defined her life
Funding has reached 32,000. http://www.givealittle.co.nz/cause/jacqui

Ocean1
30th October 2013, 22:49
Notwithstanding the inevitable shock/horror reporting inaccuracies I'd say her case manager will already understand that his career is toast. Her case will likely fall under a "special considerations" provision, and I'd be surprised if she doesn't get the funding from some one or another such sources.

As it happens I've recently been having my ear bent by an Aussie specialist, according to him NZ's ACC system is considered the gold standard by which all other national accident funding systems are measured. I'd heard that from quite a few off-shore industry insiders over the years, but apparently it's as true now as it once was.

Winston001
30th October 2013, 23:13
A remedy is possible, the problem is no one wants to pay for it.

We need to be honest. The only reason the Herald published this story is because ACC is a sensitive trigger point for readers.

This lady can be treated by public health hospitals but you'll see there is no mention of that because blaming ACC is a much easier story.

However its a rare condition so public hospitals don't have the expert surgeons. Honestly, what do you expect medical managers to do? Experiment? Give it a shot?

As for ACC being cold hearted, what about the Los Angeles surgeon? Why can't he operate and recover the cost from the manufactures of the pelvic net? Apparently they are liable so that shouldn't be a problem. Or he could do it for free. Pretend she is one of the 40 million who have no health insurance - if she was in the USA there might be no operation for her anyway.

NZ is not nirvana but we are better off than most of the world. Worth remembering.

Paul in NZ
31st October 2013, 06:43
NZ is not nirvana but we are better off than most of the world. Worth remembering.

Very true and also worth remembering is that ACC has a large surplus.

If someone is the victim of a crime then I believe that they should recieve all possible assistance.

sgtp
31st October 2013, 08:12
.....and kiwi's wonder why 'mericans get all pissy when the govt wants to run their healthcare :weird:

Paul in NZ
31st October 2013, 08:19
.....and kiwi's wonder why 'mericans get all pissy when the govt wants to run their healthcare :weird:

Erm - well its not that simple. In the USA she would be able to sue someone for remedy which would probably be her only option. It that company went bust however that could easily be no remedy at all.

jasonu
31st October 2013, 08:59
We need to be honest. The only reason the Herald published this story is because ACC is a sensitive trigger point for readers.

This lady can be treated by public health hospitals but you'll see there is no mention of that because blaming ACC is a much easier story.
Are you sure about this. The story says otherwise

However its a rare condition so public hospitals don't have the expert surgeons. Honestly, what do you expect medical managers to do? Experiment? Give it a shot?
Your previous statement says she can be treated in NZ, now you say we don't have the properly trained staff so which is it? Give it a shot, of course not.
As for ACC being cold hearted, what about the Los Angeles surgeon? Why can't he operate and recover the cost from the manufactures of the pelvic net? Apparently they are liable so that shouldn't be a problem. Or he could do it for free. Pretend she is one of the 40 million who have no health insurance - if she was in the USA there might be no operation for her anyway.
It is not the surgeons decision. The hospital he works in would make that decision. Really though why should a foreign hospital do it for free?

NZ is not nirvana but we are better off than most of the world. Worth remembering.
Maybe not nirvana but one might expect the system that one has paid taxes and fees into for many years in the belief/expectation that if/when something does go wrong one might be properly looked after.
I am actually in NZ right now for family medical issues and the more I delve into the NZ system the more cracks and holes I find and that is backed up by several medical professionals I have receintly dealt with. The yank system is far from perfect but as long as you have insurance it does a fair job.

Ocean1
31st October 2013, 09:30
The yank system is far from perfect but as long as you have insurance it does a fair job.

I hear that healthcare in general in the US costs over twice what NZ's does and provides just 40% of the service value.

Such numerical comparisons are usually flawed by the differences in services supplied, but those are from a recent American survey and every American doctor I've ever met in NZ, (and there's a few) has compared our funding model favourably.

There's always going to be those that fall through the cracks, some that probably should be funded, some that simply fall outside the cover's intent. And no matter how you spin it we can't afford to supply everything for everyone.

badlieutenant
31st October 2013, 22:02
I hear that healthcare in general in the US costs over twice what NZ's does and provides just 40% of the service value.

Such numerical comparisons are usually flawed by the differences in services supplied, but those are from a recent American survey and every American doctor I've ever met in NZ, (and there's a few) has compared our funding model favourably.

There's always going to be those that fall through the cracks, some that probably should be funded, some that simply fall outside the cover's intent. And no matter how you spin it we can't afford to supply everything for everyone.

Its easy to bitch about ACC, Im not a fan but the thought of private insurance like in the US gives me the shits. Everyone thinks the grass is greener on the other side but look a little closer.
By the sounds of it Ocean you would be able to confirm something I read a while ago.
For private insurers to have a competitive market in nz, that was worthwhile for their investment, and they were competing with ACC for market share (a system where you might op out of ACC cover and go private) ACC would have to increase their levies so that they didn't undercut the prices private insurers would need to charge.
ACC shouldn't be making a huge profit, that Im assuming gets feed into the govt coffers and makes which ever political party look good on the books. I have no idea if this is what happens. It would be nice to think it goes towards new hospital equipment or some such thing :D
As an example someone I know in the states was involved in a car crash. Not her fault. Rear ended along with about 3 or 4 other cars. The person responsible for the accident ran out of insurance, lost all of their assets and then my friend had to find 7000$ U.S for the hospital stay and helicopter flights.
As shit as ACC is its not as bad as it can get, at least in my opinion (and yes Im a builder, and I have been F*&%^$d over by ACC)

Winston001
1st November 2013, 01:16
For private insurers to have a competitive market in nz, that was worthwhile for their investment, and they were competing with ACC for market share (a system where you might op out of ACC cover and go private) ACC would have to increase their levies so that they didn't undercut the prices private insurers would need to charge.

Correct but the competition idea hasn't been mentioned for 18 months. Looks like its died which is good.



ACC shouldn't be making a huge profit, that Im assuming gets feed into the govt coffers and makes which ever political party look good on the books. I have no idea if this is what happens. It would be nice to think it goes towards new hospital equipment or some such thing :D


Actually it should - that is how insurance schemes survive. If they don't build up a big enough reserve they go under as we saw with AMI in Christchurch.

But anyway, ACC does not pay a dividend to the government. What they do is invest levies with the intention of building up a sufficent capital sum that all current claims can be paid into the future. ACC has built up a fund of $16 billion and aims to be fully funded by 2019. They are surprisingly good investment managers.

What I don't like is the current drop in levies which looks like a lolly for next years election.

Ocean1
1st November 2013, 10:28
By the sounds of it Ocean you would be able to confirm something I read a while ago.
For private insurers to have a competitive market in nz, that was worthwhile for their investment, and they were competing with ACC for market share (a system where you might op out of ACC cover)


Correct but the competition idea hasn't been mentioned for 18 months. Looks like its died which is good.

There's a lot of argument about who should be paying what, but the fact is that everyone gets pretty good value for their money. Especially those who contribute nothing, a situation no privately funded insurance would touch. The comparatively high bang for our buck comes mostly from the way litigation over accident fault drives both legal and medical costs elsewhere.

In most of the rest of the western world either the injured party or his insurance company will go after anyone supposedly causing or contributing to the accident. That process often costs more than the medical bill. Also, doctors in the US for example are hugely risk-averse in how they treat people. There's a good chance that if their patient isn't happy or suffers unforeseen downstream problems they'll end up in court too. So they'll order every test known to man so that if they end up in court they can say they did all that was possible for their patient. That over-treatment cost all adds in to the overall medical costs along with and the doctor’s medical insurance, of course, which effectively doubles the cost of treatment.

If private personal accident insurance were to be made available here it would cost far, far more than ACC currently does. The one big difference here, of course is the insurance companies current inability to recover costs from some alleged contributor to the damages. You can imagine what that would do to any private insurance prices here. I can’t see any way that private insurance can ever be competitive with our current ACC system without changing the laws surrounding damages litigation. American doctors beginning work here are initially amazed that they actually get to practice medicine, not law, and that their professional opinion should be what drives treatment. There's other factors, but that’s two reasons why lawyers need to be kept out of medicine, each of which doubles the cost of treatment.


As shit as ACC is its not as bad as it can get, at least in my opinion (and yes Im a builder, and I have been F*&%^$d over by ACC)


What I don't like is the current drop in levies which looks like a lolly for next years election.

Of course, politicians will always tweak shit to buy votes, (I’m amazed that the scheme has remained as unfucked with as it has for 30 odd years), which is why BL has learned to be wary of any benefits ACC might have for him as a self-employed builder. ACC has a shocking history of treating that group poorly and we don’t represent a particularly large voting block. I’ve heard some real horror stories about them dragging the chain with working out remuneration etc until the poor bastard is left with the choice of either going back to work or going hungry. There's enough discouragement for young tradies and business entrepreneurs as it is, without that hanging over your head. Indeed we're an endangered species, but that's another bitch...

badlieutenant
1st November 2013, 22:13
pretty much bang on there ocean. Injured at work. I had to go back to work because i had maxed out credit cards and savings on rent food etc.. It was at the end of 3 months that some payment came thru. Something like 520$. I could only work half days before the pain became so bad I had to go home. But it was a simple choice. Eat or not eat.
I would glady have beaten to a pulp the smarmy case manager. Once I was better that is ...
With ACC been so nasty so the self employed what it means for work place injury is that none get reported as such. They happened at home. Which means their data will be screwed.