The Dom Post has published the list of grievances that Bronwyn Pullar has against ACC. They are:
- Repeated non disclosure of correspondence regarding Bronwyn’s claim when requested.
- Extensive disclosure of other claimant’s information to Bronwyn
- No ability to restrict unauthorised access by 2500+ ACC staff and contractors to files, or medical files
- Medical records (considered in law to be the most sensitive of personal information) are not given protection which is appropriate to their status and are treated as general documents.
- Lack of procedure around dealing with statements of correction to incorrect reports
- Threats of legal action against Bronwyn’s GP for refusing to disclosure non-injury information. Misuse of criminal provisions in ACC legislation.
- Collection of information for an unlawful purpose
- False written and oral statements by ACC staff with the purpose of unlawfully procuring medical reports for pecuniary purposes.
- Defamatory statements by ACC employees
- Exceeding lawful powers by investigating injuries for which no claim has been made.
- Derogatory emails by ACC staff
- Excessive Access to Bronwyn’s files – 1948 accesses within 3 ½ years, by about 150 different individuals, of which 1100 were in a single one year period.
- Staff accessing files against management instructions
- ACC167 Consent – used to coerce claimant’s into authorising otherwise unlawful collections of information.
- Collection of personal information without claimant’s knowledge &/or attempted collection without knowledge
- Collection and attempts to collect information unrelated to injury/claim
- Imbalanced and biased decision making by Corporation
- Covert/inappropriate communication to assessors which bias & negatively influence outcomes against claimants
- Decision making without reviewing EOS
- Lack of workability of electronic medical file for lawfully compliant decision making
- Coercion, Harassment & Bullying, Unreasonable approach in management of claims. Use of threats of disentitlement to coerce
- Dictatorial approach of Case Managers, failure to make reasonable accommodations for claimant needs.
- “cherry picking” of unfavourable phrases from medical reports which contradict the ultimate conclusion.
- ACC abusing its monopoly position by limiting the pool of qualified medical assessors to a select group (some individuals assessors are paid up in excess of $1 million annually for services), leading to the appearance of bias and unfair market practises.
- Failure to demand adherence of staff to State Services Code of Conduct and to take appropriate action for breach
- Failure of Office of Complaints Investigator to independently investigate complaints
- Failure of Office of Complaints Investigator to follow a reasonable process when conducting investigations
- Failure of Office of Complaints Investigator to validate the responses provided by ACC with the claimant for accuracy
- ACC’s case management approach to Bronwyn is disruptive and destructive of her ability to rehabilitate/work part-time
- ACC staff deliberately lying and writing false reports
- ACC staff making clinical decisions without appropriate qualification
- ACC staff making clinical assessments without medical competency
- Deliberate interference in independent medical assessments
- Prejudicial correspondence with independent assessors prior to assessments communicating ACC’s desired outcome – that injuries are spent &/or due to non-injury causes
- Provision of unqualified, non-specialist opinions, by ACC internal medical advisors, contradicting existing specialist advice, prejudicing independent assessors and compromising their independence
- Branches/Units having Case Managers who made an initial decision then conduct an administrative review of a matter before being sent to DRSL for review
- Taking advantage of disabled claimants for actuarial/financial gain
- Poor decision making which adds cost to the Corporation
- Poor OCI processes which adds cost to the Corporation
- Lack of flexibility over assessments/appointments/referrals
- Lack of reasonable consultation and flexibility over assessments/ appointments/referrals
- Unreasonable referrals/assessments processes which are exploitative e.g., chaperones, multi-party assessments, lack of privacy & dignity;
- Focus on avoiding liability at the expense of effective early rehabilitation
- ‘Silo’ culture where case managers are unaware of ACC’s own research into rehabilitation best practice
- Constant churn of case managers – each new case manager is unaware of the medical evidence on file leading to poor decision making and is unaware of claimant’s issues; Avoidance strategy for accountability of actions.
In a related story, the Dom Post notes:
ACC’S computer storage of its clients’ confidential medical records is “so primitive” the records can be viewed by virtually every employee from a mailroom assistant up.
The corporation relies on reminding its staff they should not look at files they are not supposed to view on its EOS claims management system as one way of protecting privacy.
It seems they can not prevent access to confidential medical records.Tags: ACC, Bronwyn Pullar