The full Boag email released

NZ Herald

Adam Bennett has published the text of the full Michelle Boag email to Judith Collins. In the text of the email you can clearly see that Boag was party to a “deal” to return the data…that is returning the data in consideration for cash and that Boag and Pullar were not happy at how that transpired:

5. At that meeting in December Bronwyn advised the ACC managers that a serious breach of privacy had occurred. As she says in her email which follows, it was verbally agreed in that meeting that on agreement on the way forward, Bronwyn would return that document. We walked away from that meeting thinking we had an agreement which Mr Murch would put in writing. When it was received 8 days later, it did not reflect our discussions, including the fact that it only allowed her one year to re-establish her business rather than two years, which she did not regard as sufficient.

Boag also admits to Collins that Pullar was monitoring electronically emails and correspondence with ACC. It really does remove any doubt as to what was really going on here:

7. You should also be aware that Bronwyn has an email tracking device that allows her to know when her emails are opened. Following the meeting in December, the email where she was inadvertently sent the unauthorised data was not opened until 12 March 2012. If ACC had been serious about getting the data returned and investigating the breach, then surely the first thing they would have done on returning to the office would have been to go through all emails to her to see what material had been inadvertently sent. As I said, this was not in fact done until the story had appeared in the Dominion Post.

In point seven above, she is clearly linking the damaging release to the actions of Pullar. To date the DomPost and Phil Kitchin are the only news outlet to have followed Pullar’s version of events.

8. It is also important to note that the email sent to the Dominion Post journalist contained no names, no contact details or identifiers. Bronwyn blacked out all this information and only left undeleted summary statistics of review data, review dates and branch statistics. Therefore she has not breached the personal privacy of anyone on that spreadsheet.

If the email to Phil Kitchin contained none of the data that he has written about then how could he have even printed what he did and scare many thousands of ACC claimants about the extent of the data released by mistake to Bronwyn Pullar. I thought Phil Kitchin’s was supposed to be New Zealand’s best investigative journalist…from the looks of this it may be that he is in fact a churnalist, regurgitating spin from Bronwyn Pullar and Michelle Boag.

Boag repeats the extortion demand in her final paragraph:

10. This saga is one of extensive incompetent handling and privacy breaches, no doubt consuming thousands of hours of ACC management time. Since the meeting in December Bronwyn has been asked to undergo further assessments. It would be good to reach an agreement with Bronwyn on the way forward so that the issue can be put to bed, she can get on with trying to reduce her dependence on ACC in the future by rebuilding her consultancy business and the ACC can get on with more productive tasks.

This is astonishing stuff and seen in full is more damning than when David Fisher first wrote about Michelle Boag’s involvement two weeks ago.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Adybombs

    Point 7 makes no sense, I can understand how she can follow an email that she sent without doing anything illegal but how can she know if someone opened the email that was sent to her.  She cannot have put anything in the original “sent item” to tell her if the attachment was opened. Simple logic says she never has it until after it was sent so she could not have planted the 1 pixel image in it as was earlier suggested.  

     Either Boag is outright lying and the tracker doesn’t exist, which is a good chance, or the email tracking device is something resident in ACCs server 

    • pidge

      Pular’s e-mails contained web bugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_bug).  To avoid problems with those, read your e-mail in plain text.  Or at least with downloadable images disabled.  Any sufficiently paranoid/security concious (delete applicable) outfit would have the that enforced as a policy.

  • Drhill

    “You should also be aware that Bronwyn has an email tracking device that allows her to know when her emails are opened.”

    You mean she ticked the box on her e-mail which says ” E-mail me back when the message is opened”?
    Say for example that MS Outlook was used, if the preview panel was turned on it would indicate the e-mail was opened (doesn’t mean it was read) – just opened.

    • pidge

      Something a bit more cunning – web bugs (see above)

  • Nolocontendere

    If the tracking device was the usual one — a single pixel image which the email recipient has to agree to download (unless image downloading is automatically enabled) — then the email could have been opened many times at ACC without triggering the tracking (if those who opened the email did not enable image downloading). As a spy tool, it’s not quite up to ‘News of the World’ standards.

  • Canvasfilms

    Interesting spin Blubber.

    Personally I think ACC tried to cover up any evidence of a leak and who may have attempted to buy Pullar’s silence.  Afterall it’s ACC style – to lie and deny.   Even Denise Cosgroves head of ACC claims got caught out lying yesterday and then described her own lying as “cute”.  If that is the attitude within ACC to lying then god forbid.  So maybe the managers of ACC describe their lying in a report about Pullar’s meeting is “cute” also?  

    Apparently ACC are happy to go behind Pullar’s back and corrupt assessments to remove her from claim.  So who is lying here?  Pullar or ACC.  Without a doubt ACC, as Pullar wouldn’t not make such claims without evidence.

    Pullar apparently had made extensive complaints about privacy breaches  – and this one was beyond belief.   It would appear the Privacy Commissioner and others have records to these.  
    Pullar & Boag were obviously concerned enough about ACC’s protocols to impress upon the two Manager that the privacy breach along with the 45 other issues needs to be addressed by the CEO, Board and Minister.  These were reported as being systemic failure.

    The strictly confidential sensitive claims names were being broadcast every month by ACC to every office and manager   Then when Pullar made the ACC managers aware of the problem in December, ACC continued to breach privacy for a further 3 months and did’t investigate the breach!

    From what we now know the two ACC nuppties apparently did nothing after meeting.  When the breach went public no one at ACC even knew about it!  That is, the ACC managers didn’t disclose it to the CEO, the Board or the Minister.  In fact ACC covered it up.

    Pullar is on record as saying she didn’t threaten in relation to the file, or anything else, nor did she make demands for money or payments.  Why would you not believe her?  Obviously she has been quite transparent to you in her communications, thus why would you assume that she lies?

    Boag said the meeting related to effective rehabilitation – something which ACC has a legally obligation to provide – and obviously wasn’t providing it to Pullar which presumably was one of the reasons for the meeting.

    Quite clearly the ACC managers are trying to cover there arse and Pullar was not prepared to be bribed, nor cover up wrong doing.  She’d clearly had enough of the bullshit after 10 years.  

    Pullar does have a reputation for having integrity by all accounts by anyone I’ve spoken to – something Blubber which you are not exactly known for.

    Pullar choose to go public to expose the incompetence of ACC.    

    Your spin Blubber which serves only yourself and Minister Collin’s. 

    • You might find yourself taken a little more seriously if you didn’t resort to conspiracy theories and abusing the host. 

      I’m glad to see that you think there is nothing wrong with stand over tactics to get what you want.anyone I speak to about Pullar tells me that she has a history of blackmail, standover and deceit going back to the mid 90s.

  • Leaping Jimmy

    WTF is the matter with you people who give a fuck about the particular tracking technology she used, that was covered last week either here or on Number 2 (KB) IIRC, but who gives a shit since THAT’S NOT THE POINT OF THIS POST YOU DUMBFUCKS BIG SILLIES.

    • Leaping Jimmy

      I mean, crikey.

      • Adybombs

        Still doesn’t explain how she can “track” an email she received.

      • Leaping Jimmy

        Adybombs this was discussed on weekend on KB, someone mentioned a website which can do it. A transparent single pixel gif is another, given corporate default settings will almost never be set to “never download graphics” but like I said, the technology used is peripheral.

      • Adybombs

        You are still missing my point Leaping Jimmy.  Agreed it is a very simple matter to do this stuff with an email you have sent but you can’t do it with an email you have received.
        The nearest Pullar could know was that if the breach email was a reply to an email she had planted tracking in then she could identify that one of either the email that the breach was a reply to or the email that included the breach was opened.  If the the email including the breach was an new email that was originated by the sender then she could not possibly have implanted anything in it.

      • Callum

         Adybombs, possibly able to track it if she was sent the file by someone replying to an e-mail she had sent. Makes little sense though to attach that file to a reply that would have nothing to do with it.

  • Leaping Jimmy

    4. Addressing the issue of the major privacy breach – I am sending you under separate cover an email from Bronwyn enclosing the details of the meeting held in December, at which I was present, where, after years of extensive mishandling of Bronwyn’s claim and after she had approached a board member, senior management (Phil Murch and Hans Verbene) met with us to attempt to come to a reasonable settlement on the way forward. The documents in the email I am forwarding to you represent the objectives Bronwyn had for the meeting, which included recognition that she was unable to work a full time week , but allowed her some space (two years) to get on with trying to re-establish her consultancy business. Bronwyn also asked for the privacy breach to be investigated.

    This is where it turned to shit. No-one in any govt system which claims to treat all equally, should be permitted any special treatment whatsoever. Same thing happened in EQC with the various relatives being contract assessor jobs. Should never happen. Whenever this is discovered standard penalties should be levied against both the employees of the organisation and the customer of it, in that, the employees should be fired, even if they are at board level and the customer should automatically be returned to the back of the queue, period. No matter what.

    • Brucey69

      Of course there is special treatment in ACC, just look at the recent development where ACC have a VIP catagory for people putting in claims, high profile people including judges, sports people, ACC staff get a VIP status and their claim is managed by more senior staff. I bet these VIP people dont get the same bullshit that everyday people of NZ get when having a claim with ACC.

      • Leaping Jimmy

        Yeah but it’s OK Brucey when it’s only the poor people that suffer since that’s within the normal karmic framework. They’re the ones who should so the general balance isn’t upset. I’m talking about fair treatment amongst all the wealthy, a.k.a. “real” people. We’re the only ones that matter, after all. It’s when you upset this balance by giving some bint with connections priority over all the rest of us wealthy net tax-paying people that things really turn to crap, as we have seen by this whole lamentable episode.

          

  • Steve (North Shore)

    I suggest that this ’email tracking’ is nothing more than a ‘read receipt’ Media are using usual bullshit.
    But the ‘read receipt’ was sent by someone inside ACC who was under instructions to do so. My opinion of course. A read receipt can always be denied

    • Steve (North Shore)

      Fucked that up.
      The read receipt was sent to* someone inside ACC

  • Peter Wilson

    Clearly, this reflects very poorly on ACC.

    ACC management have been caught out trying to extract themselves from a difficult situation by means which is at best manipulation, and at worst, well, you figure it the correct phrase.

    • Actually the emails shows Pullar and Boag tried to extort ACC…I ind it very strange that you seem to be wanting to stick up for two standover merchants.

      • Balanced View

        The ACC should not have ever entertained the idea of “buying” this information back. This is the real issue.
        The Pullar/Boag extortion is bad, but only a sideshow.

  • jay cee

    the whole “i know when you have opened my emails and who is reading them” line sounds like a paranoid delusional personality disorder.
    to quote mr t from the a team ” i pity the fool”

  • mark christopher
  • David

    WHY has non-one suggested that perhaps Pullar’s accident has affected her judgement and decision-making abilities?  It could explain (at least in part) her paranioa about ACC

    • It didn’t affect her enough to stop her going out drinking again the night after her “accident”

  • Mihalku

    Instead of speculating which email tracking device Pullar used, why are we not all clamouring for Pullar to be charged with “demanding money with menaces” or whatever euphemism the law uses for blackmail/extortion these days.

    Ten years post-accident and she still wants 2 years on ACC to rebuild her business? Perhaps its her poisonous personality that is holding that business back, or perhaps if she had put the time effort so far used against Sovereign Insurance and ACC, into her business, it would already be flying? 

    The woman has a dishonest bent and should be reigned in legally. 

    I can’t believe she worked for  the National Party. Her attitude is pure Labour-voter.

    • joe bloggs

      “Ten years post-accident and she still wants 2 years on ACC to rebuild her business?”
      very good point. Pullar is clearly a capable and resourceful person.

48%