The " Greenslip " Enigma !

In the far distant past the government realised it had a problem with the ever falling price of used cars.  Vast numbers of second hand cars were being used by low income owners who needed this method of personal transport but could not afford to cover them with insurance.   When they did damage to property or another vehicle any debt that accrued was virtually unrecoverable.

Unfortunately, exactly this same lack of compensation applied to damage the uninsured car may inflict on other humans with which it may come into contact.   We were seeing innocent men, women and children suffering life debilitating injuries such as Paraplegia denied any form of compensation.

The answer was to require a universal indemnity against human damage by way of insurance cover as a requirement of legally registering vehicles for road use.   It was named a " Greenslip Insurance Policy " and was available from most insurance companies.

The public is becoming alarmed at ever rising premiums.   Greenslips have been very profitable to the insurance industry and they have gained $ 2.9 million profits from it over the past fifteen years. There are predictions that the average minimum premium for Greenslips will slip past the six hundred dollar mark for the first time next year unless something is done to stem the growing industry of false insurance claims.    This is now inflicting a $ 400 million loss on insurers.

Staged accidents are becoming an art form.   In some cases they are choreographed by experts and two cars packed with victims come together in a low speed crash which will result in a number of insurance claims - all of which are hard to medically verify.   Some sections of the legal industry now specialise in representing such claimants.

The New South Wales government is aware that this state has the highest Greenslip premiums and is proposing draconian measures to reign in increases.   One of those proposals is to slap a five year limit on all forms of compensation, and another is to exclude specific injuries which feature heavily on suspicious insurance claims.

Injuries that form less than ten percent of bodily function may be excluded from cover and these would include whiplash, muscular back injuries, spinal disc protrusion, shinbone fracture - and post traumatic stress disorder resulting in inability to work !

Controversially, it is also proposed that litigants be refused the aid of legal representation in presenting their claim and that any form of appeal against the compensation handed down be barred.

This proposed solution  is causing alarm.  The likely outcome will leave genuine cases at a disadvantage and if the insurance industry decides to play hardball the courts will lean heavily on the side of the insurers.  If ordinary people are denied legal representation the scales of justice are weighed against them.

The main objective in restoring Green Slip insurance to affordability is to eliminate this burgeoning fake claim industry, and by removing the majority of hard to prove injuries from the covering legislation the fraudsters are going to be disadvantaged.   At the same time, the police need to pay special attention to all forms of road trauma with the aim of identifying false claims.   The widespread cctv network and the fact that most citizens now have a mobile phone with camera capacity makes fraud a risk.

The danger is that if the government persists with the plan it has suggested those genuinely suffering major industry as a result of car accidents will face a barrier to just compensation.   If the insurance industry is allowed to be represented legally in court, then the public must have similar protection.

Anything less is a denial of justice  !