Dierckx & Associates

Risk Management, Legal & Financial Investigations, Forensic Services, Christchurch New Zealand

The ACC case

		Monday, 10 September 07 - 05:15 AM (GMT) By John ML Dierckx in Alternative Justice

The ACC in New Zealand has had a lot of bad press recently:

ACC Contractor Admits Fraud Charges
$8000 for ACC Worker Sacked Over Sick Father

There are more stories that never made the news. In this story I would like to highlight that notwithstanding the bad press recently, the allegations like "all they are after is trying to dump me of the scheme" there are also people working within the ACC that have a true heart and are willing to go the extra mile for those that really need it. Sadly enough these stories do not make the news headlines, most likely because they don't sell.

I was recently approached by one of the Dad’s at my son’s school. He had a serious problem with the organisation that provided him a workman’s compensation benefit or as it is labeled in New Zealand “Accident Compensation” (ACC)

In the recent past a decision had been made that this person’s medical condition was not the result of an accident or incident but instead of degeneration which is not covered under this scheme. As a result this person was no longer receiving workman’s compensation but instead, he was referred back to social welfare leading to an additional $600 decline in income per week.

After trying to fight this decision through mediation to no avail, he tapped me on the shoulder and asked me if I would be able to help him. I said that I would look at his file and asked him what he exactly hoped to achieve with my involvement.  I mean I am not a practicing lawyer. He told me that he felt he felt he had been treated unfair and that based own his own assessment of his file he was of the opinion that the decision was incorrect.

I was faced with a considerable difficulty since I came in after the fact and realizing that I advised him that I could most likely not turn over any decision because the agency would be bound by its own procedural rules meaning that he would had to appeal the decision. That would lead to considerable legal costs and he was in no position to spend any money. He showed me a proposal from his lawyer. I asked him if he was kidding me. The proposal was formulated such that regardless of the outcome, he would neither win or lose money that he felt he was entitled to since any proceeds would end up with the lawyer as legal fees anyway.

I told him I would do what I could, no promises and no costs. Just to help out someone that was against the wall with no one to help him. A bad business decision maybe but on the other hand, as a fellow human that was the only thing I could think of. Those that know me, know that having this liberty is what made me set up my own business in the first place. 

A meeting was arranged with the agency’s management to discuss the case. It was an emotional meeting and I ultimately had to send out the same person I was trying to help. I was just trying to understand the file and getting equal in the information decision. I asked a lot of questions and could see the doubts slowly coming up in the eyes of the person representing the organization. He insisted that he too would like to be of more assistance but was bound in his actions by the same decision. When I asked, what can we do to resolve this, he could not answer. So, perhaps we needed to reconsider the option of appeal and since no formal legal representation was required I had to think over whether I might go as far as that. First I needed a file, and that’s what I insisted on receiving, after that I would make up my mind on the where from here.

We agreed that the file would be copied completely and I was to receive it a few days later. We agreed that the management of the organisation did not provide me wit any information or documents that could substantiate the decision and I advised that I would look further in the file to find this information expecting that to be in there somewhere.

When I came outside I advised my “client” what had eventuated. “I have been asking for a file for a year almost” so he was happy with this step forward in any event. I further briefed him on my views and what had eventuated in his absence. We went for a coffee to calm him down and discuss further proceedings.
 

The day after, Saturday, my friend got a call from the organisation’s management with a request to call back. Too late to call back he invited me to come over the next Monday and we tried again together.

In this conversation the previously impossible was laid out before him: the decision was overturned, he would receive back pay and he would be admitted into a renewed assessment and treatment program to get him in a work condition again. My friend broke out in tears, months of fighting against what he perceived as windmills and now this fantastic result.

The next day, I received a phone call from the organisation’s management. Turned out they wanted to thank me for getting everything settled in such a constructive way. I told them that they should applaud themselves for being so brave as to overturn their own decision whilst that was previously not an actual option.

It takes a big person to admit a mistake and set the record straight.

So let me take this opportunity in between all the negative press that ACC has been getting lately to say that there are reasonable people in there that do truly care about your well being and are willing to go the extra mile. Emotions sometimes stand in the way of getting your points across and this is exactly what happened to my "client".

This is the point where you might want to consider "employing" a party like  Dierckx & Associates. It is my firm viewpoint that if the management of ACC had made more sense I would have told the person I was helping out. On the other hand if there were substantive and relevant questions that need to be answered there is plenty of room for further action in whatever way.

Most importantly, bu asking the right questions instead of making accusations you open up the conflict to constructive dialogue. In this case it worked out for the best for all parties involved. Sometimes right or wrong is not the issue, the issue is where to from here and a objective third party may just be what is required here: a negotiator or conciliator or just someone that can ask the right questions to help out the other party in reconsidering their previous choices.

If you need assistance in your case. Contact me

Alternative Justice and Conflict Resolution

		Monday, 10 September 07 - 04:48 AM (GMT) By John ML Dierckx in Alternative Justice

I have decided to start a new category called Alternative Justice in which I will explore ideas and experiences that relate to "out of court" solutions to conflicts. More and more I see how litigious our societies are becoming. More and more I see how disappointed people are with their actual outcomes. I am not the one to say that there is no longer a place in our society for a court system. What I do seem to see is that people, when they enter into those procedures find out the hard way what the costs of such an approach are.

All over the world court systems are reaching the point of over expansion. In part it is my belief that is because people are using their legal options to lightly. Ultimately we are dealing with humans that have a conflict. But do we really always need a court to sort out who is right or wrong?

More importantly, is there something of a hospitalization effect going on as a result of our ever increasing possibilities to get what we think of as justice through the courts? I sometimes have the feeling that we are slowly stopping to think about what is actually happening and what the real costs of such an approach are. Of course you lawyer will tell you a different story. And in some cases this reality is being blurred by notions such as courts requiring MEDIATION"  before you are allowed in court.

But what I seem to miss in all this is that ultimately we are dealing with humans. Should we not first try to solve our problems ourselves, or perhaps consider CONCILIATION instead of mediation? Just see if we can sort out our problems ourselves before filling the pockets of expensive law firms and courts. ( And those who went to mediation know that this is no exception to this question it is just a pressure relief option for the courts and a easy to pick orchard for the law firms.)

Use your lawyer where he is really needed, use the courts and mediators where there seem to be no alternative, but first see if we can sort our problems and conflicts ourselves. Perhaps we shgopuld start realizing that it is not always about "justice" in the sense of retaliation, no we could start thinking more along the lines of an acceptable , win-win outcome for all involved, look at ways in which we can solve or resolve our own conflicts without letting someone else do that for us. Use professionals where they can shine best, but most of all, take conflicts back in our own hands. You will be surprised what NEGOTIATION and CONCILIATION can deliver for a fraction of the costs of mediation and court proceedings.

Best of all, we are leaving the option of a future together open because it is no longer about winning and losing but about reaching out and finding a way forward together.

I have been lucky to have been engaged on several occasions as either a go in between where parties had a hard time facing each other or as a negotiator and conciliator present where parties where trying to find a way forward. I can but say that the results have been satisfactory for all parties involved.

... More items are available in our News Archive