Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

VIC TAC injury payouts hit $200M

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by mainstage, May 30, 2014.

  1. Bike injury payouts soar to more than $200m a year
    May 30, 2014
    • 14 reading now
    • Read later
    Craig Butt
    Motorcyclist Heather Ellis was involved in a crash last year. Photo: Angela Wylie

    An increase in the number of motorcyclists and cyclists injured on Victorian roads during the past decade has led to the amount of compensation being paid out more than tripling to $203 million a year.

    An analysis of Transport Accident Commission data found the number of injuries to people on motor and push bikes has risen significantly - from 1009 in 2000-01 to a high of 1337 in 2011-12.

    The number of compensation claims by motorcyclists and cyclists has increased over that time at a greater rate than by other road-accident victims. At the turn of the century, one in seven claims was by a motorcyclist or cyclist. Now it is one in five.


    This means the amount paid to people injured on two-wheeled transport has soared from $56 million to $203 million a year.

    Experts say the increase is driven by the growing popularity of these modes of transport. The number of cyclists admitted to hospital has more than doubled among people aged 26 to 59 and the number of middle-aged male motorcyclists being injured is also up, as is the number of motorcyclist deaths.

    The commission's road-safety manager, Samantha Cockfield, said the rises were linked to an increase in the popularity of recreational cycling and motorcycling among people in those age groups.

    Monash Accident Research Centre associate director Stuart Newstead said cyclist injuries could be reduced through changes to roads - including more dedicated bike lanes - but that preventing motorcyclist injuries was ''a very difficult question''.

    He said improved protective clothing, anti-lock brakes and stability control would reduce injuries, but riders had been reluctant to embrace new safety technology.

    Independent Riders Group spokesman Damien Codognotto urged the implementation of a 2012 parliamentary inquiry into motorcycle casualties.

    Motorcyclist Heather Ellis said she was ''extremely lucky'' not to have sustained serious injuries after she was involved in a crash last year.

    The 50-year-old from Healesville stopped at traffic lights in Reservoir when a car slammed into the back of her. She was taken to hospital with bruising. She said protective clothing saved her.

    Ms Ellis was critical of the state government's rejection of a proposal on Monday to allow motorbike riders to weave or "filter" through slow-moving or stationary traffic and said her crash would have been avoided if filtering was allowed.

    The increase in compensation to injured motorcyclists also reflects the ongoing nature of many of their injuries. Ms Cockfield said that, on average, motorcyclists and pedestrians tended to have the longest claims.

    As of June 2013, 14 per cent of motorcyclist claims had been active for more than four years, she said, compared with around 10 per cent for drivers and passengers, 16 per cent for pedestrians and 7 per cent for cyclists.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/b...200m-a-year-20140529-397dh.html#ixzz339qBTVt5
  2. I'll bet that new story didn't quite work out the way TAC and MUARC intended...
  3. #3 mainstage, May 30, 2014
    Last edited: May 30, 2014
    The TAC comparing motorcyclists who pay registration with an increasing TAC component . To cyclists who pay northing for the same insurance cover well done ,, even Samantha cockfield gets a mention surprised she still as a job after the parliamentary equiary in to mc safety.
  4. Monash Accident Research Centre associate director Stuart Newstead said cyclist injuries could be reduced through changes to roads - including more dedicated bike lanes - but that preventing motorcyclist injuries was ''a very difficult question''.

    WTF. Separation of cyclists from cars will reduce injuries, but separating motorcyclists from cars won't. Might have his blinkers on.
    This is why VMC is arguing for single track vehicle lanes so both cyclists and motorbikes can be separated from cars.
  5. As stated, cyclists are nudging $50 million per year in claims, with no TAC premium contribution. Motorcycling numbers have just about doubled in the 12 year period yet claims are 'only' up by threefold despite the increased medical costs in that period. Our TAC annual premium has also almost doubled in that 12 years, along with our $70 pa 'motorcycle safety levy' contributing SFA to genuine motorcycle issues (IMO).

    Every bit of roadspace given over to 'protect' cyclists serves to increase the risk of accident to motorcyclists. For example, Elizabeth Street coming into the city has angle parking with nil risk of car dooring to motorcyclists or cyclists. The planned Copenhagen bike lane, with parallel car parking alongside the inbound traffic lane, will expose every motorcyclist to car dooring since all parked cars will have a driver exiting into the traffic lane. Cyclists, meanwhile, with a 1 metre pavement between them and the parked cars, will have no risk at all despite only ~20% of parked cars having passengers exiting onto that pavement.

    CoM engineers recognise this problem and are on our side, but the elected councillors cannot always see the wood for the trees and often dictate policy that puts motorcyclists into danger.
    • Agree Agree x 1

  6. No we embrace new safety technology readily, we just don't care for it being forced upon us through law.
  7. It would be interesting to see how many of those motorcycle accidents were single vehicle & how many involved.

    With the new HiVis laws coming into play, I don't expect that number to drop anytime soon.
  8. so the number of injuries has risen by ~30% in that period, yet the cost has risen by 400%. That doesn't stack up, even including inflation.
  9. The (true) cost of medical care has exploded in that time - far beyond inflation.
    A lot of that has to do with the extraordinary advances in technology, but the R&D is not cheap.
  10. A single titanium screw used in spinal surgery can cost several thousand dollars, so it adds up pretty quick I'd imagine.

    Why do motorcycles and pushbikes get lumped in together when it suits them, and split when it doesn't (filtering, bike lanes, etc)? Seems like they're trying to set the scene for imposing their new rules on us (for our own good, of course), and softening up the general public by telling them how much we're costing them to fix when we recklessly and selfishly injure ourselves.
  11. so where's the comparative data for other road users then? This article is meaningless hype without that.
  12. A major annoyance I've got with this article is that it is attributing the cost to the victim. That's kind of fcuked. Lets say a car driver hits a rider and the rider is given $50000. That $50k should be attributed to the driver. Putting it the other way, like this article does, is kind of offensive.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. It's attributing it to the victims choice of transport. They're arguing if the victim was in a car instead of a nasty bike, it would cost them a lot less, irrespective of who caused the accident.
  14. Yep which is fcuked up blame the victim mentality. It's not at all acceptable and while I won't discuss a sensitive social issue I think we can all see some similarities to some other unacceptable comments that have been made several years back.
  15. All part of the plan guys. "The road to Zero" fatalities means no motorcycles. The propaganda machine we're paying for is insisting that the community has a "conversation" about letting people choose to ride motorcycles which everybody is then paying for. Roll on the hate. Give it ten more years and we'll be regulated off the roads.
  16. I you read the story you'll see that the highest costs are attributed to motorcyclists and pedestrians, and yet there is not the slightest suggestion from anywhere that people should stop walking.
    Nor is there any suggestion in the article that people stop riding bicycles. Nor motorcycles in this case.
    You're swinging at shadows. I know I'm a culprit but the paranoia is getting too much even for me.
  17. Read the Victorian road safety strategy on their website.