ACC for millionaires
September 26th, 2004 at 9:06 am by David FarrarThe SST reports on Jeff Page who gets around $40,000 a year (grossed up) from ACC. Jeff:
* has a life-time guarantee of ACC, due to a prescription drug addicition when he was 21
* earns $124,000 a year from his rental properties
* lives in a $720,000 home
* is in the top third of Auckland Tennis players
This welfare safety net we have gets better every day.
No tag for this post.
September 26th, 2004 at 12:58 pm
As is so often the case you have it wrong again.
ACC IS INSURANCE NOT A (MEANS TESTED) BENEFIT
The insurance is for “accidents” , but not illness which can be insured for separeately, and their are 3 components, employers liability for accidents at work,motor vechicle for accidents from vehicles and personal injury, outside of these two.
You may validly dispute the process where NZ has a regulated benefits (everybody gets the same as a % of their pre accident income) and a state monopoly on buying insurance , plus a prevention on the right for negligence but its what we do have.
Vote:But to describe it as a benefit, it is a fully funded scheme by those insured and pays out ACCORDING TO YOUR INCOME not your need. End of story. You would get 80% of your last years income.not some mythical ‘ he has plenty of money so doesnt need ACC’
Lets hope you dont have an aciident while in the US so you get to experience the wonders of their system, or maybe not since you could strike the jackpot a get a couple of million , reduced by lawyers fees to about half, and have to manage on that for the rest of your life with ALL medical bills coming out of it as well. Interestingly the same rule will apply, its your lost income that is paid plus expenses not your present net worth.
September 26th, 2004 at 1:51 pm
ACC is not insurance as it is a state monopoly system. It is effectively the accident equivalent of the sickness benefit, but in a different form.
The original concept was noble – that if you have an accident at work which means you can not work for a while, you are not without income. I don’t think paying lump sums for alleged unsubstantiated sexual abuse, or for drug addiction is the same thing.
This guy is managing twelve rental properties, and to suggest he is unable to work at all is inane. He is rorting the system, and I am paying both as an employee and an employer.
As for something happening to me in the US – well that is why before I left I got overseas medical insurance. Therefore my premiums pay for any accident, not all employers.
Vote:September 26th, 2004 at 5:36 pm
My understanding was that ACC was a legislated replacement for court ordered damages, and in that sense is equivalent to nation-wide insurance coverage. Those are the rules that applied at the time of claim (and possibly still apply). The implication is that there is something wrong with such a settlement – would you means test ACC benefits David?
Vote:September 27th, 2004 at 9:37 am
Rich, of course there is something wrong!!! It is not just for some wealthy pillock to work the system and benefit from the hard work of others.
He developed a prescription drug addiction, so what?! There are thousands of people in far worse situations than Page, who are not so slick and actually pay their way through life. Means test ACC! (& bring back means-testing for National Super as well).
This culture of selfish laziness, bred by easy welfarism, must be lanced like a festering pustule on the arse of hard working New Zealanders!
Vote:September 27th, 2004 at 10:44 am
I think you should check your “insurance” details. Yes your medical bills will be paid for sickness or injury. BUT your loss of income from accident probably has a cap, maybe as low as $100,000.( NZ ACC doesnt cover accidents overseas for loss of income)Then this may have to be paid back AFTER you win damages against the cause of your accident, or anyone remotely connected who might have deeper pockets, the lawyer will have a list. That is why they sue the car company not the driver.
But just as a favour do check out what it would cost to fully insure a young healthy male like yourself
Include: home liability, injury caused by you , or just even occuring in your home, this probably comes with the standard household fire theft stuff,
Your own income protection if you fall ill plus cover of medical bills.
The car policy for your liability for injury to others this is covered in NZ by most of the registration fee and is a flate rate, being a young male US insurance companies will rate you higher, much higher
Since you employ others as well, get a feel of what it would cost for both employers liabilty ( our ACC) PLUS full illness cover for your employees, ( virtually nonexistant in NZ since SX generally only cover non acute and exclude lots of basics)
Then and only then you could say the ACC is generous
Vote:September 27th, 2004 at 10:56 am
Why do I have to fact check your stuff ??
You are not paying as an employee and as an employer for this tennis playing landlord.
His addiction sound like a ‘treatment injury’ (yes it sounds absurd)so would come out of the individuals account paid by everbody in addition to income tax .
You dont pay twice as an employer since it wasnt work related ( this is where the undercover cops who become addicts might claim)
These accounts are all treated separately by ACC who adjust the premiums accordingly as claims rise or fall, just like a real insurance company would. Im not sure which funds are treated for pay as you go or are fully funded. The pay as you go isnt really an option for a private insurer . But going bust is . I used to work for the bankrupt HIH in Australia some years ago, one of their main lines was workers compensation, but in retrospect they were on a very slow pay as you go and eventually the money ran out
Vote:September 27th, 2004 at 4:47 pm
ztev, an astute person like Mr Farrar would have taken his own personal Income Protection policy with a reliable and preferably NZ owned private insurer. Then he would be covered for an accident or an illness incured while travelling overseas.
What intriques me is why you lefties place so much importance on semantics and ignore the obvious rort which is going on.
Vote:September 27th, 2004 at 6:45 pm
The cost of all he ‘extra ‘ insurance that is covered by a small premium as ACC payments in NZ would be interesting.
Yes of course the landlord has landed himself a good deal that loophole has been closed, probably he got ACC to pay by taking them to court, so legislation and new rules cant overturn a court ruling.
Vote:But essentailly he has a legal right to the payments, and like a property right why should it be taken away
Typical of the right, wanting to take away compensation, but suddenly find their principles when its got a ‘land title’ attached to it.
Laws are for everyone , not just business(the biggest blockers using the RMA)and property owners
September 27th, 2004 at 9:38 pm
Adolf – and yes of course I have income protection insurance.
In fact it is quite funny when insurance people try to sell me more insurance. I rattle off that I have life ins, superannuation, med ins, income protection ins, car ins, house ins, directors insurance, public liability insurance, professional indemnity insurance etc and they soon relaise there is not much left to sell me
Vote: