ACC is doing my head in!

[Usarka]

A colleague of mine tripped over a football (he was warming up, they weren't even playing)... ripped his tendon, broke 2 bones in his leg, ligaments etc... the Doc couldn't believe the cause of the injuries because it was so innocuous... My colleague is stunned himself... he didn't think anything of what he was doing and BANG broken leg... At the moment he IS BEING DEALT WITH BY ACC... ACC where also here in the office last week and he only did his leg 10 days ago... Something wrong somewhere me thinks...

I might have read this wrong but are you saying the accident insurance shouldn't pay up for accidents?

Accident doesn't = sports.

[Robert Taylor]

Robert, you seem to be trotting out the old "government bad, privatise good, lower taxes..." lines, but how do you see this actually working? Example: I have a buggered back, from a sporting injury. ACC have covered me (sorta) and continue to look after it (increasingly poorly, as National tries to break ACC and public faith therein by cutting everything they can). Let's say your dream comes true, and we privatise ACC. What happens to poor buggers like me? No hope of getting reasonably priced cover for a pre-existing condition, if I can get private cover at all. But I've already paid my premiums through tax. If you privatise I assume you woud not propose handing the private insurers a bunch of taxpayer money? Good luck with that!

If you force the private insurers to cover pre-existing conditions you actually have to regulate that over the lifetime of the population that get grandfathered over, or those dodgy buggers will cut cover as soon as they can. Don't believe that? Have a close look at the US medical insurance systems. So if you do successfully force pre-existing cover, you've gained nothing financially.

If you don't, people like me go either untreated (and end up unable to work, so labour productivity drops further), or on the public health system - remember no private co is insane enough to cover us - so public cost for private gain. And you have to find room for a profit in there somewhere...

And if your claim is that governments are sooooo terrily inefficient that there will be heaps of money saved from privatising, I'll challenge you to prove that with hard data and facts. Good luck with that too.

Sorry, but your way sounds stupid to me. Which is the general problem with neoliberal bullshit generally. It sounds lovely in theory, but doesn't work in practice. Unless you're the private insurer, getting rich(er) at the rest of our expense, of course.

You are not going to like me for saying this but Ive always felt that discretional activities such as sporting injuries should not be funded by the taxpayer, but by private insurance. The country is too small for comprehensive taxpayer funded cover. We need a seachange of attitude in this country where the state is not looked to for everyones needs.

[mashman]

I might have read this wrong but are you saying the accident insurance shouldn't pay up for accidents?

Accident doesn't = sports.

Not at all. quite the opposite. There person Mom quoted sounds like she had very similar injuries to my colleague. My colleague is now receiving ACC and for some reason Moms quoted chick didn't. There's no real difference between the 2 in my eyes. Or does it matter that he had a ball at his feet?

One thing I will say though. My colleague has a rather famous uncle... wonder if that has anything to do with it?

[Ixion]

(b) caused by treatment; and “(c) not a necessary part, or ordinary consequence , of the treatment, taking into account all the circumstances of the treatment, including— “(i) the person's underlying health condition at the time of the treatment; and “(ii) the clinical knowledge at the time of the treatment.

This is the bit they will get you on. If there is any reference , in the really really fine print on the information leaflet, to "may cause blah blah" then they will claim that it is an 'ordinary consequence'. Albeit a rare one.

Some drugs are known to cause such allergic reactions. In that case they will deem the reaction an 'ordinary consequence'. Not saying that's right, just that's how they will try to shaft you.

[Swoop]

Either my doctor knowingly prescribed pills that she knew would almost kill me
They used to call my sort of claim "medical misadventure"...

Just glad that you are still around.

The fuckwits at North Shore hospital murdered my grandfather years ago, by prescribing the wrong pills.
I regard it as murder.

[yungatart]

Good luck, Mom, keep at the bastards.
Whether the claim is approved or denied is not actually the issue...the issue is, nobody (ACC) has bothered to communicate with Mom and let her know what is happening with regard to her claim. After this length of time, that is appalling!

[oldrider]

A private insurance company would use every trick at its disposal to avoid paying out. Just like ACC.

Well, at least you would have a "choice and other options", just like we have for bike insurance! (that's the theory anyway)

I prefer ACC "in it's purest form" actually rather than this politically influenced shit that we have got now!

[The Pastor]

Can't offer you any help, but beer always helps

[MSTRS:Me]

You are not going to like me for saying this but Ive always felt that discretional activities such as sporting injuries should not be funded by the taxpayer, but by private insurance. The country is too small for comprehensive taxpayer funded cover. .

The earner levy (and the govt contribution) covers any and all injuries not occuring at work or a vehicle accident. It is demonstrably UNfair that vehicle type attract different risk ratings, but someone who does not play any sport or risky pastime pays the same rate as someone who does. So to a degree, I agree with what you say EXCEPT what happened to the No Fault thing?

[Mom]

Good luck, Mom, keep at the bastards.
Whether the claim is approved or denied is not actually the issue...the issue is, nobody (ACC) has bothered to communicate with Mom and let her know what is happening with regard to her claim. After this length of time, that is appalling!

Well the complaints department at ACC certainly agreed that it was an unacceptable delay anyway. They have a very robust complaints process, I will have some resolution in 4 working days. Have been back to the doctors today and have a medical certificate till the end of the month. Hopefully by then I will actually feel a bit more back to my old self instead of the absolute train wreck I am now

[rainman]

You are not going to like me for saying this but Ive always felt that discretional activities such as sporting injuries should not be funded by the taxpayer, but by private insurance. The country is too small for comprehensive taxpayer funded cover. We need a seachange of attitude in this country where the state is not looked to for everyones needs.

That may be as it may be (it was a foreign concept to me too when I arrived here 15 years ago), but still doesn't answer my question. How does privatising ACC now address the issues, and how do you do it without completely screwing over people like me? Answer: It doesn't, all it does is hand over more of our cash to insurance companies.

BTW, I assume you include motorcycling as a discretionary activity? If so, do you have private accident insurance to cover injuries you might sustain while riding?

[Fatt Max]

I'm sorry but that is just so fecking wrong I cannot find the words......mate, that 'kin sucks.....

What do you have to do these days for fuck sake...!!

So sorry for your trouble here mate

Arrrrgghh....

[Mom]

I'm sorry but that is just so fecking wrong I cannot find the words......mate, that 'kin sucks.....

What do you have to do these days for fuck sake...!!

So sorry for your trouble here mate

Arrrrgghh....

Good speech fodder though

[steve_t]

I talked to a chick yesterday that broke her Archillies Tendon. She was playing chasey with her kids in the back yard and it just went bang.

ACC did not accept liability for her claim! Was not an accident apparently, she was not playing sport when it happened, it must have been a congenital weakness if you please. Any reason, any excuse. SHe battled them for months and eventually actually gave up as it was affecting her mental health to be battling them on an almost daily basis.

I'd heard of someone who was going to be hit by a car so they jumped out of the way into a ditch and broke their ankle. They got refused cover because there was "no external force". Basically, the story was that if the car had hit her and broken her leg, she would have been covered, but as it was ankle vs ground, she was denied cover!!! Retarded!!

You are not going to like me for saying this but Ive always felt that discretional activities such as sporting injuries should not be funded by the taxpayer, but by private insurance. The country is too small for comprehensive taxpayer funded cover. We need a seachange of attitude in this country where the state is not looked to for everyones needs.

I don't mind sports injuries getting covered so long as people playing organised sport with high risk of injury pay levies. Someone said rugby club fees contain an ACC component. I'm not sure if this is true though...

[MSTRS:Me]

Belonging to a sports club does attract a small amount of ACC levy in the club fees. Or in the fee paid to enter a sports event. But where rugby is concerned, that levy nowhere near covers the injury costs. FFS rugby costs only slightly less than m/c accidents, but we don't see their levies at levels like ours.