Photo: Supplied
A cancer patient who is struggling to fund his recovery and life after a botched surgery is fighting for fairer compensation from ACC and wants government reform.
Ian Tollemache has been unable to work because of neuropathic pain resulting from the unnecessary removal of his left lung in September 2020.
The medical misadventure also means the cancer that’s since developed in his remaining lung, is inoperable.
He’s received a little more than $10,000 in total over two payments across nearly five years and said he’s had to battle for every cent.
“Something should happen but it should be at the political level,” he said.
“There could be dozens of people out there that are in this position since ACC where they’ve had a medical accident and they can’t get a lawyer or work.
“ACC was meant to catch people so that everybody could manage through an injury until they could work again or until they died if they couldn’t work again.
“I’d like to see ACC change their processes so they can support people instead of not supporting them.”
Tollemache said the government agency covered about 75 percent of his salary as a business software developer for two years before it stopped last year when he turned 65.
“They don’t pay for all the costs. I have to pay $30 to $50 if I want to see my physio on my $400 a week because I’m retired. That’s just not the support level that was intended and it’s a way you can live.
“I drew the lucky straw several times but the systems that are meant to support people just don’t work. I had to fight for all the things I’ve got out of ACC.
“I had to engage a lawyer who was an ACC specialist when they gave me paltry sum for permanent damage.
“I can’t believe we’re meant to exist in a system that does that as par for the course, they try minimise what they can do for you.”
RNZ contacted ACC about Tollemache’s case.
ACC deputy chief executive, service delivery Michael Frampton said he was sorry to read about the events that led to the unnecessary removal of part of Tollemache’s lung.
“We received Ian’s treatment injury claim on 29 September 2020, and accepted cover a week later. We funded travel, pain management services, follow-up appointments with specialists, and weekly compensation not long after. At the end of 2020, Ian’s GP said he was fit to return to work duties, however, his recovery was delayed by the pain he was experiencing,” Frampton said.
“Ian lodged an additional claim for pain syndrome resulting from the surgery. We initially declined this claim as the pain would have been considered an ordinary consequence of the procedure he needed to remove the cancerous growth on his lung.
“However, after getting additional medical information, we agreed the pain was connected to the first, unnecessary procedure.
“In December 2020, Ian asked for permanent injury compensation which was assessed once his injuries had stabilised in August 2023. The first assessment said Ian had a 10 percent whole person impairment, equating to a $4,162 payment. Ian reviewed this decision, and after receiving additional medical evidence, we revised his impairment rating to 19 percent, which equated to an additional $6,059 payment.”
Tollemache’s lawyer Phil Schmidt said his client hasn’t been fairly assessed by ACC since the medical accident and his initial 10 percent and later revised 19 percent impairment remain inaccurate.
“He’s effectively lost a good portion of his upper body function as a result of that neuropathic pain and that should have been assessed,” said Schmidt.
“Upper body exercise brings on really bad pain and it’s that same pain that prevented him from carrying on with work so the wider impact of pain on his ability to function in everyday activities that should have been assessed properly when the lump sum assessment was done, it wasn’t done properly and we’re going to ask for it to be reassessed.”
Schmidt said he was hopeful there’ll be another revised lump sum payment before the end of the year and was arguing for his client’s impairment percentage to be closer to 40 percent.
“That might generate another $10,000 or $15,000 but it’s not a lot of money to be frank and what this illustrates is that, the lump sum scheme in New Zealand simply doesn’t compensate people appropriately.
“People naturally understand that, that (Ian’s impairment compensation) doesn’t make sense, it’s obviously not fair and that should drive a desire for reform.
“There used to be compensation for pain and suffering under the 1972 and 1973 acts that recognised pain and suffering is a separate concept from whole person impairment. The pain chapter tries to recognise that but as Ian’s case illustrates it’s hard to get the right answer.”
He said there needed to be a government overhaul of ACC and a re-introduction of compensation for pain and suffering.
“The compensation system in New Zealand is just unfair, we’re really getting a bad deal but in Parliament they don’t want to recognise that because there’s a constant pressure from employers to keep levies down.
“It would be nice if our political parties could put their point scoring aside in terms of ACC and agree a cross-party reform of the scheme going forward because it is a good scheme but it needs to be robust… at the moment it is out of date and in the too hard basket.”
Tollemache’s children now care for him and their mother, who is also recovering from breast cancer in their Whangārei home.
His daughter, Dr Cherie Tollemache said the $10,000 hasn’t even covered the loss of 20 percent of his income.
“It’s not enough support to pay for his life insurance premiums, medications to manage his pain so he doesn’t want to die.
“It’s meant to cover your life, your food, medical costs, your living.
“We will be doing this (contesting ACC’s impairment assessment) for the rest of my father’s life and this is the only monetary support we have access to.”
Frampton said Tollemache continues to have a covered claim and encourage him to contact them if he needed additional support.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.