Repairing the divide in ACC access
Many people agree that ACC, New Zealand’s system of accident compensation and rehabilitation, needs further improvement. Dunedin researchers, including at ACC claimant support group Acclaim Otago, have produced several reports, highlighting access to just
PROBLEMS with poor transparency and inadequate access to justice must be fixed before ACC’s credibility with the public can be fully restored.
That point was made in a recent report on ‘‘Solving the Problem’’ with ACC, which was produced by the University of Otago’s Legal Issues Centre with the assistance of a $150,000 grant from the New Zealand Law Foundation.
The 92page document focuses on ‘‘causation, transparency and access to justice in New Zealand’s personal injury system’’.
The report strongly recommends establishing a personal injury commissioner and making other changes to help the many injured New Zealanders whose claims were declined each year by ACC.
The report’s first author, Warren Forster, of Dunedin, said ACC remained a ‘‘great’’ scheme.
But he warned that until ‘‘real action’’ and real changes occurred ‘‘we’re just going to have the same problems’’.
‘‘The public concern won’t stop until the cause of the problem is fixed, and what we’ve done [in the report] is to set out how it can be fixed.’’
Many people realised there was a big ‘‘divide’’ between what New Zealanders expected and what was delivered by ACC.
The health and disability commissioner model, with its system of health and disability advocates, had worked well, and a similar approach was needed by introducing a personal injury commissioner and claimant advocates at ACC, he said.
A review conducted for the State Services Commission and government agencies in 2014 had also highlighted the ‘‘pendulum effect’’ and the way ‘‘ACC seems to swing between a focus on claimant satisfaction and public trust and confidence in some periods and improving financial performance in others’’, the earlier review report said.
Mr Forster acknowledged the strong Dunedin flavour to much of the recent work to improve access to justice at ACC, and noted that ACC claimant support group Acclaim Otago was based in Dunedin, as were the authors of the latest report.
‘‘Dunedin [people] should be very proud of their contribution to change.’’
Mr Forster has helped produce reports, several for Acclaim Otago, since 2010.
He had also helped prepare submissions for a United
Nations committee which, in Geneva in 2014, had considered New Zealand’s ACCrelated performance over the rights of people with disabilities.
Over the years, that research work had been ‘‘challenging; it’s been heartbreaking,’’ he said.
Acclaim Otago spokeswoman Denise Powell said establishing a personal injury commissioner was crucial to ACC fully regaining its credibility with the public.
She had contributed to the ‘‘excellent’’ report, but was not one of its authors.
ACC was ‘‘only one part of a wider network of institutions’’ in this country that managed the impact and incidence of injury, including coroners, WorkSafe, police, criminal processes, district health boards and the medical council.
The proposed personal injury commissioner would ‘‘lead, monitor and coordinate’’ these institutions, and also act as an ‘‘accountability mechanism’’ over ACC in respect of everything other than decisions about cover and entitlements, which would be left to the courts.
Change was also urged over injury causation.
The ACC’s sometimes ‘‘narrow, legalistic’’ application of causation tests — which determine whether ACC will help someone — excluded many legitimate claimants, the report said.
Mr Forster’s research team estimated between 200,000 and 300,000 New Zealanders were denied ACC cover, treatment or support each year, more than three times ACC’s own estimate of 70,000.
Approached for comment, an ACC spokesman said ACC rejected as ‘‘simply incorrect’’ this estimate of how many ACC claims were declined in 2012.
‘‘We stand by our estimate of 70,000 declined claims (not individuals — that number would be fewer) for cover and for entitlements in 2012,’’ he said.
ACC could not comment on the commissioner proposal — ‘‘that is something for politicians to decide, not us’’.
In a statement, ACC chief executive Scott Pickering said the organisation dealt with about two million claims each year.
ACC’s ‘‘careful and considered estimate’’ given to the Miriam Dean QC Review last year was that ACC made 70,000 decisions declining cover or entitlements.
Mr Pickering disagreed that ACC was ‘‘applying the law narrowly’’.
‘‘We rely on expert medical advice to make decisions fairly and consistently for all New Zealanders.’’
Mr Pickering agreed with the report that ACC needed to improve customer service delivery and that ACC systems and processes were ‘‘complex and difficult to navigate for customers and our own staff’’.
‘‘That’s why we have been undergoing a comprehensive transformation of our business over the last three years to ensure our people, processes, technology and information are aligned to the needs of Kiwis.’’
Public trust and confidence in ACC was now at 65% a record for ACC and up from 45% in 2012, he said.
❛The public concern won’t stop until the cause of the problem is fixed, and what we’ve done [in the report] is to set out how it can be fixed❜
— Warren Forster