Crimes act...
Me thinks this applies somewhat ?

258. Altering, concealing, destroying, or reproducing documents with intent to deceive

259. Using altered or reproduced document with intent to deceive

Is simply a tacit admission by the DR that she is aware that the reports she quotes from reference other reports and the request for services from additional professionals.. Such as an extremely comprehensive neuropsychological report completed by Kay Farrar (neuroneuropsychologist).

The Dr is no better than ACC's Team manager in that she failed to verify the "Accuracy etc of health information"

Sadly however because this report was produced "in house" for ACC by an ACC contractor who did not provide a "service" to the claimant the Privacy commissioner is unable to enforce the "[url=http://www.accfocus.org/knowledgebase/func-startdown/563.html]HEALTH INFORMATION PRIVACY CODE[/url]"

Still here Mark.
Latest events, complained to the Privacy Commissioner that ACC had destroyed my identity and replaced it with that of someone born in 1942 who had an accident fell over in a park and hit his head resulting in unspecified allergies in 1986.
I may have even suggested that ACC went to great lengths to track down and destroy any information which would show what has happened.

At the same time I suggested to a well known legal firm that the reply from ACC would be that two files for the same injury had been merged, note that they were of two different people would not be mentioned.

I mainly asked what our position was considering that we hold copies of material which ACC has destroyed and can show that the file used in my name cannot possibly be me, would if we acknowledged the claim number and details as used by ACC be committing a breach of the other persons privacy and possibly open at some stage for being set up for Fraud Charges.

The commissioner received information from ACC which as I predicted was simply a repeat of that set out by Mr Mallet Technical Claims Manager some time ago that ACC had simply merged two files and destroyed the original and basically it was up to the client to prove anything else ever happened.

On advice we did not send any further information to the commissioner and he found that there has been no breach of any Privacy.
he did not answer whether or not we were breaching anything if we acknowledged ACC use of the incorrect claim and identity details.

The Law Firm suggested a rather large payment be made in order for an opinion to be given us.

My thoughts on such and considering the apparent corruption which occurs in dealings with ACC was that I'd rather, if I had the amount, buy an equivalent amount in Lotto tickets and have in my view more chances of success.

Concurrently, as happens, two major discoveries of pertinent information have come to light which make things interesting.

A former employer, whom ACC seemingly spent a great deal trying to contact is once again helpful.

A far more interesting problem for ACC with the origin of the claim and identity details attached to that claim has seemingly arisen.

Someone once said to us that the best course of action is always to allow ACC to do their job according to the Law and the Legislation.

Added to that I am not a Doctor or a Buerocrat and have no wish to be either so it is entirely up to ACC to be aware of when corruption of identity and injury claim details occur and take action to correct such and not as far as I can see up to the claimant to "Prove" that ACC has altered destroyed or with held information.
As for
Is simply a tacit admission by the DR that she is aware that the reports she quotes from reference other reports and the request for services from additional professionals.. Such as an extremely comprehensive neuropsychological report completed by Kay Farrar (neuropsychologist).

I have had two such comprehensive neuropsychological reports completed by Kay Farrar, one called for by ACC and one follow up as an entitlement and also assessments by Gronwall, and others which as far as we can see have always simply been filed and forgotten with no recommendations made ever followed up.

Seemingly attempting to get any advice support or other action from the ACC is simply a complete waste of time and effort and can seemingly at times, from experience be darned right dangerous.

I note the Legal firm also said they understood our frustrations at the problems within ACC but it is very hard to Sue a Government Department especially ACC

Which at guess says that the Legal Profession considers ACC a Government Department under Law.

seemingly there is no right of reply in dealing with ACC.
ONE IS ALWAYS GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT (ACC may no longer hold such information and it is up to the client to prove they ever did)

Interestingly enough one seemingly also has to prove that information held by ACC may be correct.

She's all a huge whatever the Government touches turns to shit muck up

More interesting would be seeing just how far ACC will go in breach of International Human Rights agreements under the guise of doing good for the claimant

Incidentally, a wee while ago, through chance, we had the opportunity and were grateful to Ministry of Social Development Staff who searched for various records, claim and other numbers (Including 4 ird numbers used in my name by ACC) and did find there were and probably still are at least two of me in official records.

So here's an interesting thought. Always search sideways and avoid ACC when looking for information. Some people seem to get quite excited over the chance to explore ACC behind the scenes activities.
Be aware that personal information held in New Zealand seems across the board to be hugely inaccurate and muddled

Indeed Mr Justin Raffin Operations Analyst, Customer Service Technical Support has produced a document with the intent to defraud the claimant!