This is not a news story you'll find in mainstream media, probably because it's possesses a "feel good" factor and, sadly, that doesn't sell papers. Still, it doesn't deter from that fact that, yes, there are some (admittedly a small group) of people rallying against ACC and winning.
It's a shame that it took "Rachel" and her husband to exhaust "their savings, default on their rent many times, [become] indebted to utility providers, [and finding themselves having to sell] furniture to pay their bills while fighting [ACC for] weekly compensation" but, unfortunately, most times, that's what it takes. And no, Rachel was not one of those complacent people. She did everything possible to assist in the evaluation of her claim, even paying for psychiatric assessments herself - you know, cause they're the all encompassing reasoning behind whether a claim should even be looked at let alone granted.
The upshot, from an independent review found ACC "unreasonably delayed" processing her claim for 10 months. They were ordered to accept her claim and give her those 10 months backdated in weekly compensation. It's a win for the client but, yet again, at an extraordinarily high price. The irony is the awarded cost of $1985 to Rachel to cover "case preparation, travel costs and a psychiatric assessment. I say ironic because if a little unknown Joe Bloggs, like Rachel, can do all that for less that two grand, how is it those other assessors, attributed to ACC, charge, on average $10,000?
Maybe they should go ask Rachel how she managed to do just that if money is such an "issue" with ACC.
Whakatane Beacon: Abuse victim ‘vindicated’ by win over ACC