National opens ACC to private sector

[riffer]

You're asking me to trust an organisation that plainly screwed up the calculations for mc rego charge?

You're confusing the compensation aspect of ACC with the legislative side.

No I'm not. All I've done is mention that we definitely don't back ACC's explanation. There is a lot of change ACC needs to embrace. I believe Cherry picking the most profitable aspects out of the organisation and leaving the less profitable parts (the "social promise stuff") to fall over so that we can emprofit overseas corporations is not the way to do it.

You're a typical NZer - you're so determined to get yourself the biggest bargain that you'll happily accept crap. Get out of your Warehouse mentality and figure out that privatisation and globalisation is going to screw the country in the end.

I don't have so much of a problem with the competition aspect - I just don't trust the insurance companies to play fair - they're not in business to accept risk.

[StoneY]

It's my recollection that the reason the last one scheme was abandoned was ‎ideological - i.e. the Labour Govt. killed it.‎

Your recollection is utter shit
'My Mate' is on here and posted in this thread, The_Dude is the username and you can head to the Dom Post archive for the figures and facts as reported at the time...I already know how it went down its you thats dribbling bullshit all over this thread

Labour didnt kill it, they booted the underperforming and overcharging asswipes from the insurance industry out and RESTORED it to the way our legislation stated we should be covered

And I speak from my experience being charged 1600 dollars a year to cover the one leg that ACC had never paid any claims on, because the insurance companies cross refferenced medical history and ACC claims history to 'exclude' prior injuries from cover

Again, when did you last sit on an ACC hosted Steering Committee?

I did this year over the MSL and how to govern it. To ensure we Motorcyclists dont get ripped off any further.
I can categorically state in total confidence I have a far better grasp on the current ACC situation than you appear to have

I bet you believe the spin from Nick that ACC is broke? Yet its public record, its yearly report clearly shows a mass profit margin well above it expenditure.
There is NO need for this 'competition' bullshit, its Key making his promises to Merril Lynch come true while the Kiwi public get shafted by the rich yet again

[Oscar]

Your recollection is utter shit
'My Mate' is on here and posted in this thread, The_Dude is the username nad head to the Dom Post archive for the figures and facts as reported at the time...I already know how it went down its you thats dribbling bullshit all over this thread

Labour didnt kill it, they booted the underperforming and overcharging asswipes from the insurance industry out and RESTORED it to the way our legislation stated we should be covered

And I speak from my experience being charged 1600 dollars a year to cover the one leg that ACC had never paid any claims on, because the insurance companies cross refferenced medical history and ACC claims history to 'exclude' prior injuries from cover

Again, when did you last sit on an ACC hosted Steering Committee?

I did this year over the MSL and how to govern it. To ensure we Motorcyclists dont get ripped off any further.
I can categorically state in total confidence I have a far better grasp on the current ACC situation than you appear to have

I bet you belkieve the spin from Nick that ACC is broke? Yet its public record, its yearly report clearly shows a mass profit margin well above it expenditure.
There is NO need for this 'competition' bullshit, its Key making his promises to Merril Lynch come true while the Kiwi public get shafted by the rich yet again

Another rant but no evidence.
I'm not dribbling anything - I'm simply asking the propagandists here to back up their claims with some facts and figures. For example you say that the insurance companies were overcharging last time, yet my experience was that they were generally cheaper than the ACC. However, you made the claim, so I have no doubt that you have some premium tables to back it up.

You see, you can "categorically state in total confidence" until you sprain your wrist and go blind, but I'd prefer to see something in writing if its all the same.

For the record I don't believe that ACC is broke either, but it is easy to look at the figures and see a profit without factoring future liabilities. It may not be broke, but I do think that it is inefficient and badly managed - at one stage it was fostering a child abuse industry in this country by paying on "recovered memories".

[MSTRS:Me]

And I speak from my experience being charged 1600 dollars a year to cover the one leg that ACC had never paid any claims on, because the insurance companies cross refferenced medical history and ACC claims history to 'exclude' prior injuries from cover

Just for the sake of balance...why did you opt to go private? ACC was still there for anyone who wanted to stay with it, as I recall it.

[Oscar]

You're a typical NZer - you're so determined to get yourself the biggest bargain that you'll happily accept crap. Get out of your Warehouse mentality and figure out that privatisation and globalisation is going to screw the country in the end.

I don't have so much of a problem with the competition aspect - I just don't trust the insurance companies to play fair - they're not in business to accept risk.

On the contrary - I won't accept crap, and I think that the ACC has been delivering crap for some time now.

If you think insurers are risk averse, you might be interested in Zurich's result in NZ last year - they lost $24m on $75m turnover.

[StoneY]

Just for the sake of balance...why did you opt to go private? ACC was still there for anyone who wanted to stay with it, as I recall it.

Company deal we had - all the contractors opted in to get a better rate...took 3 months and we bailed back to pure ACC

[Katman]

And it's not like the ACC have a spotless history of service and claims payment is it? The NZ Herald have been running feature stories on the ACC's propensity toward shitty claims service for several weeks now.

Hell, you don't even have to read the Herald.

KB is full of stories about how shitty the service ACC provide is.

[MSTRS:Me]

... it is inefficient and badly managed

Really? Everything I've ever seen on that subject extols how well they do in terms of overheads. Do you have some facts to the contrary?

...at one stage it was fostering a child abuse industry in this country by paying on "recovered memories".

And what a lovely little scam that was. Made a LOT of money for some. Fooled a lot of 'us'. And caused untold trouble for a few. Peter Ellis, for instance.

Company deal we had - all the contractors opted in to get a better rate...took 3 months and we bailed back to pure ACC

Ah! Thank you.
The premium was better. But eventually the facts of just what it covered showed that it wasn't so 'cheap' afterall?

[Oscar]

Really? Everything I've ever seen on that subject extols how well they do in terms of overheads. Do you have some facts to the contrary?

Why should i be the only one on this thread actually backing up what they're saying? I was actually referring to their claims processes - their habit of using distant and vaguely qualified "experts" when determining claims.

I had a guy with a head injury locally who had been going to a psychiatrist (i.e. ‎medical degree and PHD) for treatment, but the ACC rolled out a psychologist (no ‎medical training) to prove our boy was faking. ‎

[MSTRS:Me]

Ah! Yes, of course. They have a poor record on that score, at least in recent years. Private insurers surely can and will do the same...

[phill-k]

Why should i be the only one on this thread actually backing up what they're saying? I was actually referring to their claims processes - their habit of using distant and vaguely qualified "experts" when determining claims.

I had a guy with a head injury locally who had been going to a psychiatrist (i.e. ‎medical degree and PHD) for treatment, but the ACC rolled out a psychologist (no ‎medical training) to prove our boy was faking. ‎

And you think private companies who bottom line drives their existence will give better than your client has received. ACC have set in place via their act procedures to deal with your issue, private insurers will have to be sued to perform.
NZer's have been screwed by directors of financial organization's, who have shown no remorse are the insurance co's going to be any better.

Tell you have a client who under your preferred situation has a workplace accident, he can no longer work for the remaining 25yrs or so before he reaches his retirement, the insurer goes belly up or having feed at the trough just decides to withdraw from the market, who is going to pick up the poor guys compo ACC and don't tell this scenario won't happen.

ACC has its faults but NZer's can be assured they will always be there.

[Robert Taylor]

ACC has been partially privatised before. I remember it well and fondly when I was self-employed in the 1990s. My "ACC levies" were considerably lower prior to a Labour gummint nationalising everything again.

Exactly. Yet more taxpayer funded spending needs to be rolled back.

[Oscar]

And you think private companies who bottom line drives their existence will give better than your client has received. ACC have set in place via their act procedures to deal with your issue, private insurers will have to be sued to perform.
NZer's have been screwed by directors of financial organization's, who have shown no remorse are the insurance co's going to be any better.

Tell you have a client who under your preferred situation has a workplace accident, he can no longer work for the remaining 25yrs or so before he reaches his retirement, the insurer goes belly up or having feed at the trough just decides to withdraw from the market, who is going to pick up the poor guys compo ACC and don't tell this scenario won't happen.

ACC has its faults but NZer's can be assured they will always be there.

Erm - I was talking about a court case Grant v. Accident Compensation Corporation - last I heard, it went to appeal.

[Robert Taylor]

And you think private companies who bottom line drives their existence will give better than your client has received. ACC have set in place via their act procedures to deal with your issue, private insurers will have to be sued to perform.
NZer's have been screwed by directors of financial organization's, who have shown no remorse are the insurance co's going to be any better.

Tell you have a client who under your preferred situation has a workplace accident, he can no longer work for the remaining 25yrs or so before he reaches his retirement, the insurer goes belly up or having feed at the trough just decides to withdraw from the market, who is going to pick up the poor guys compo ACC and don't tell this scenario won't happen.

ACC has its faults but NZer's can be assured they will always be there.

Yes we have been screwed by directors of finance companies, but they are just one of many sectors of society that have had a rort over the years. How about lifestyle beneficiaries, how about politicians? The worst ones are the left wing politicians because they espouse equality but they are happy to be pigs at the feeding trough to suit their own pockets. Bloody hypocrites.

[phill-k]

Erm - I was talking about a court case Grant v. Accident Compensation Corporation - last I heard, it went to appeal.

So answer the rest of my questions / statements, you are very quick to state no one is giving you facts, so answer my questions don't just deflect on the one case you are bagging ACC on.