September 2, 2011

ACC Saga -In Pursuit of Truth

Someone once told me that you can eat an elephant one mouthful at a time. I'm using this analogy for the likes of ACC. It's an analogy folks, not an accusation - we all know how sensitive those ACC people are but last I heard, analogies weren't illegal or defamatory or ...the list goes on.

So while my requests for information pertaining to me specifically from ACC have resulted in my file being sent (albeit to my workplace and into the hands of my boss), nothing much has resulted in my further requests for details. For example:

  1. How is it that my file was closed on September 9, 2010 and yet on the morning that the News broke of Dr Peter Jansen suing me, there was a flurry of ACC people prizing open the contents of my historical sexual abuse file.  
  2. On the day the News broke on April 14th 2011 and up to May 20th 2011, there have been 55 separate accesses to my "confidential file." Some as nonchalant as a "Applications Support Analyst from the Business Technology Group" and an "Audit Manager from the Information Technology Department."  
  3. The News reported Jansen's legal action after Carmel Sepuloni demanded answers from Hon Tony Ryall (at 3pm) on behalf of ACC Court case brought up in Parliament and yet some "secretary" from the Corporate Office in ACC, accessed my file at 13:40, along with a "Government services senior adviser" at 14:37 - wonder who that could be.
  4. I know of one particular "senior adviser" who would have had a vested interest in perusing my file. The same one who went onto to claim he had no idea I was a ACC client of his despite an email being sent to him from another ACC adviser stating: Are you aware she is an ACC sexual abuse claimant. Silly fools forgot to omit that from my file copy.
  5. Another question would be why the Relapse Panel said on April 7th, 2010, that I should continue with my current counselor and yet I received a letter two days later from ACC saying the most appropriate form of treatment at this time was 10 sessions with a Clinical Psychologist and that ACC would refer me - which, as we all know, just didn't happen. What is the purpose of a Relapse Panel if ACC don't even take into account their recommendations? And what of all those emails from not only me but my current counselor asking whether we could, in fact, continue with our sessions? And who, pray tell, vetoed that decision? Anyone want a bet as to who is was?
Yes, so there are more questions now that I have been prying into my own "confidential file" and the latest is an email from Denise Cosgrove:

Thanks for your request received 12 August 2011.  You’ve asked for the reasons for access to your ACC file during specific times by way of a detailed timeline, an updated printout of those who have accessed your file since your last request, and a complete electronic sweep of personal information which references yourself up to July 2011. 
You’ve also asked for an explanation as to why ACC adopted a specific course of action in respect of your claim file in April 2010.  I’ve arranged for Selena XXXXXXX to address this aspect of your request and to provide an updated copy of your claim file.  
You can expect to hear from Selena shortly.In respect to your other requests, I have arranged for Gabby Boag, ACC’s Privacy Officer to respond to this.  Gabby will respond to you directly by 12 September 2011.  Please call Gabby on XXXXXXXXX if you would like to talk about this part of your request.

Kind regards, Denise

That elephant must be positively thin by now.

September 18th, 2011: I have emailed Denise AGAIN asking her when is going to "do" any of the suggestions above. I have STILL NOT RECEIVED A REPLY nor an answer to my subsequent emails. Is this woman really capable? What is her "word" worth - as meaningless as those apologies I'd say - how hard can it be to simply reply to an email or to keep promises made to clients? Moreover, if it's as hard as it seems to be for poor old Denise, then maybe it's time someone else, more efficient, takes her place - and yes, that is in my HONEST OPINION, based on my personal experience and the facts, as published on this blog - so no, there is no defamation case here Denise.  


  1. Dear Government Departments. I know you think you actually work "for" your department, but the reality is you do not. You work for the Greater General Public of Aotearoa, so get your Ostrich Heads out of the Sand (read Mud) and start working for the people that actually pay you through taxes.


    Did you see this? Not sure why ACC are refusing some sensitive claimants the access they gave you? I hope these claimants go to the Privacy Commissioner as ACC don't have a leg to start on here. Who the fuck does this Lynne Flood, Team Manager, ACC Counties Manukau think she is, she can't deny someone that!!

    ACC need to read this....

    "In discussions with the Office of the Ombudsmen we decided that the names of employees who may have accessed the woman's file were personal information about her. A record of the employee's name only existed because they had contact with, or a possible interest in, the woman. The woman's request for this information was therefore a request for personal information under principle 6 of the Privacy Act."

    By the way, you go Jax! Though I suspect a can on worms will unfold here. Did Dr. Peter (lying arsewipe) Jansen ever tell you how he got your address? All this can of worms is due to he not disclosing to you! The microscope up ACC's butt and all the Privacy Commissioners investigations etc is all on him. Either to much of a peacock to tell you or he did do something mighty dodgy or illegal.

  3. Jax, well done. You have stated the obvious so well and yet the dimwitted Denise Cosgrove just seems not to see the truths - even when it's right in front of her long poky nose (IMHO).

    I am appreciative of the 'open' similarities here Jax. All helpful and interesting. Thinking of you.

  4. The doors are closing on ACC.

    Jansen, Cosgrove etc have been there too long and have become corrupted by power.

    They should be considerating their positions as once all is revealed it will be untenable they remain employed by the Corporation.

    But who will employ them?

    Jansen will get employed by his bros at the tribe.

    But missed out on the CEO job...again. Twice now. No future for you doll at ACC.

    I doubt anyone will touch you with a bargepole Denise. No organization with any concern for their public perception would go near Denise Cosgrove.


For troubleshooting, email: