9 July 2010

Action Buses have no Insurance

| miracle
Join the conversation

Dear all, my car was hit from the rear by an Action Bus. At the time of the accident, I took the details of the Bus and the driver who agreed that it was his fault. The details were passed onto my insurance. This accident happened about two months ago.

There was lot of damage to the boot, bumper which I had to get it fixed. I even had to pay the excess – remember it is not my fault.

Since then my insurance premium has also gone up (unfortunately renewal came this month) as my insurance company has reduced my no claim bonus and added an accident to my records as the case has not been settled. It is among the lawyers to settle.

What happened to compulsory third party insurance for all vehicles especially for the public vehicles?

Does anyone know why Action Buses do not have Insurance??

Why are they exempt from comprehensive third party insurance?

Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
Felix the Cat4:11 pm 24 Dec 12

I think the OP has probaly sorted the problem out by now considering it happened in July 2010…

screaming banshee3:48 pm 24 Dec 12

Helpful advice 2.5 years on?

I was hit by a bus ( my car ) a few years ago, There were no hassles, methinks your insurance company is trying it on, get onto your local member of the legislative assembly, let them earn their keep

I’m wondering if the OP received one of those ‘you are required to pay’ type letters that the at-fault insurance company loves to send to not-at-fault parties in the hopes they will pay.

Heard of/seen a few of those, nice tactic for protecting the investors bottom line, but don’t ever pay one. Write back thanking them for the novelty toilet paper and suggest they deal with your insurance company instead.

JC said :

michcon said :

I can’t comment on what cover ACTION have, but I sympathise with you, I can’t imagine what circumstance someone can run up your back but not be held responsible.

Easy that one. Where someone cuts in front of said vehicle then brakes. Very very common, especial cars doing that in front of heavy vehicles like trucks and buses just before traffic lights.

While I agree with your comment, its not quite true. The law doesnt apply to ‘heavy vehicles’, it only applies to buses. The law isnt in-place for safety, its in-place so that buses have one less thing making them run late. A similar law exists for public-transport on the water, if a ferry hits your boat, the ferry is not responsible, probably a similar law for buses.

I suggest ring up free legal advice over the phone.

Felix the Cat8:35 pm 09 Jul 10

At last someone that correctly spells buses!

Woody Mann-Caruso6:44 pm 09 Jul 10

Thoroughly Smashed: Did you file a police report?


Thoroughly Smashed6:17 pm 09 Jul 10

Did you file a police report?

michcon said :

I can’t comment on what cover ACTION have, but I sympathise with you, I can’t imagine what circumstance someone can run up your back but not be held responsible.

Easy that one. Where someone cuts in front of said vehicle then brakes. Very very common, especial cars doing that in front of heavy vehicles like trucks and buses just before traffic lights.

caf said :


Lastly, why did you pay for the excess?

Probably because they wanted to get their car back from the repairer? In most cases the excess is payable directly to the repairer, and they’re not going to let you take your car away without paying.

True but the point is that there should be no excess if the person is NOT at fault hence my reasoning for the question. The insurance company, if you are not at fault, will arrange for full and complete payment to the repairer. It doesn’t matter where the money comes from to pay the repairer on the other side (ie. the other person who was at fault or their insurance company). You as the insuree escape the legal bickering.

I am with a very reputable insurer and I was involved in an incident that was not my fault. I paid nothing —I paid no excess and did not lose my no-claim bonus— and was given a courtesy car whilst my car was being repaired and so whatever happened between the two insurance companies (ie. who was paying etc etc) was out of my earshot and not my problem.

So I will reiterate the point that the OP is either missing some pretty important details, is with an appalling cheap-and-nasty insurance company, or has not made due diligence about their rights and the policy they hold.

While there are inconsistencies between what the OP has stated and the way insurance is supposed to work, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. While they are obviously a little confused concerning terminology (Compulsory Third-Party Personal insurance vrs Third Party Property Insurance), my experience with insurance companies is that they are perfectly willing to take which ever avenue results in the least work for them, regardless of cost too you. In the event that they can have you pay the excess, they will likely never get back to you about weather the claim was sorted out unless you bug them a lot. Likewise the other party’s (in this case ACTION’s) insurance people will be taking the same approach, ie doing as little as possible.


Lastly, why did you pay for the excess?

Probably because they wanted to get their car back from the repairer? In most cases the excess is payable directly to the repairer, and they’re not going to let you take your car away without paying.

Mia80 – “comprehensive car insurance” is not mandatory, never has been.

What is mandatory is CTP insurance – compulsory third party insurance. As others have said CTP covers the driver of the vehicle for claims against him in relation to injuries he causes to other persons, not himself, such as occupants or pedestrians that he might injure, as well as passengers in his own vehicle.

The ACT Government has been a self insurer for a number of years. I have some experience in this industry and I can tell you that it is much easier to get money out of an insurance company than the ACT Government. It almost seems that the ACT Government has a policy to vigorously defend all claims, even when it is clear that the ACT Government vehicle [or other entity] is clearly at fault.

The ACT Government will usually pay up when it is at fault, it just won’t happen very quickly. Some apparently simple claims, not unlike yours, can take a year or more before the ACT government will send you a cheque.

How frustrating…

However CTP Insurance (as listed on your rego) is for protecting vehicle owners and drivers who are legally liable for personal injury to any other party in the event of a personal injury claim made against them by other road users.
It has nothing to do with the vehicles themselves.

For that you’re looking at Comprehensive Car Insurance or Third Party Property Damage Insurance, which is supposed to be mandatory, but most State Governments operate under self insurance for a range of issues, which means they taken on the liability themselves, pay from their own coffers if something goes wrong.

That’s probably what’s taking so long… Regardless of the Bus Driver’s admission of fault, the lawyers (and the Gov’t) want to be 100% sure it was the Bus Driver and not you at fault… then negoitate the terms of settlement.

I used to work in this area for a law firm, many moons ago… and even I got frustrated for my clients.

Hang in there… it will all come good in the end.

Gentle correction – What is known as “Compulsory Third Party Insurance” only covers someone else for bodily injury, not property. That’s called “Third Party Property Insurance” and is not mandatory, but is an excellent idea even if you are driving a bomb, just in case you run up the back of a BMW.

I can’t comment on what cover ACTION have, but I sympathise with you, I can’t imagine what circumstance someone can run up your back but not be held responsible.

All ACT Government entities are insured via the ACT’s self-insurance scheme, administered by the Insurance Authority which dwells deep inside ACT Treasury from memory. There is no question that Action buses are insured.

Compulsory third party and third party property insurance are different things. CTPI is for personal injuries to a third party (you in this case, although you don’t seem to have been injured). TPPI covers dame to the third party’s property (your boot and bumper).

you need a new insurer – easy to swap around these days, and competitive enough that someone else will recognise your no-claim bonus.

georgesgenitals2:38 pm 09 Jul 10

This is your insurance company not behaving properly. You should be talking to them about this.

Which insurer is it?

They have insurance – but it is different to the normal CTP insurance. I believe it is managed by ACT Treasury. Given this is the ACT government bureaucracy you’re dealing with I expect your insurance company will eventually get a settlement out of them – in which case you’d hope (demand!) they reinstate your NCB and give you a premium refund.

AFAIK, CTP only covers damage to your person, not to your vehicle. Action would have insurance of some level on all their busses, it’s more likley their insurance company is slow, or has disputed the incident.

Did you file a police report, and did you get any witness statements when the accident happend?

Prediction: there is more to this than the OP is revealing.

Sounds like you should shop around for a new insurance company.

What happened to compulsory third party insurance for all vehicles especially for the public vehicles?

CTPI applies to injury to people, not damage to property. If you had incurred significant medical expenses the compulsory third party insurance is meant to cover it.

The Territory self-insures… Whether ACTION is included in this I am unsure. See:


However, from what I read it sounds like ACTION has disputed liability. Only I guess since we do not have all the information.

Also, no one has to take out third party insurance (property)… you would be pretty dumb not too though. Third party insurance(person) is compulsory and included in rego in the ACT.

This sounds like there is another story to this as what you have posted has holes bigger than swiss cheese. On initial take it seems that your insurance company ‘believe’ that you don’t have details that locate/identify the vehicle/driver and therefore whilst hte accident was not your fault there is no-one that the company can pursue money from.

Questions for you, how long have you had no-claim for (think about what the term no-claim means) and also did you have the correct details for processing the claim? Was the accident reported to the police? Was your car roadworthy afterwards? Could ACTION take claim that you were negligent in your driving, ie. brake suddenly for no reason etc. or not indicate etc. Lastly, why did you pay for the excess? That to me assumes you have taken part responsibility. It should have been all arranged through your insuracne company unless you didn’t read the fine print and went to a nonpreferred repairer or something.

re: premium increase, I think you will find it is just coincedence as most premiums increase in line with CPI (aka COLA).

Finally, I think you will find that public vehicles do have insurance.

Sounds like you need to fess up about a few things before rioters can accurately asist your dilemma.

RandomPoster1:49 pm 09 Jul 10

Compulsory third party doesn’t cover damage to your vehicle.


Check your policy disclosure statement from your insurer, you may find that you are not liable if you can provide details of the at fault party.

Woody Mann-Caruso1:41 pm 09 Jul 10

Sorry – could you explain why you believe Action buses aren’t insured?

It sounds like your claim is under dispute. I’m surprised that you had to pay an excess and have had your no claim bonus reduced if the crash wasn’t your fault. In my experience (rear ended twice – once while stationary at an intersection, the other in a car park) the insurance company simply took me at my word that I wasn’t at fault and proceeded accordingly; I assume that if it was determined I was actually at fault they’d simply bill / sue me for the rest. Does this change once the other party disputes the claim?

happened to me a couple of years ago. Got sideswiped by an action bus. Driver didn’t even stop! Got the bus number, location, rego and time. Nothing happened. My insurance went up too. I’d love an answer to your question. I was still a student so couldn’t afford to go to court…

probably because the government is ‘self insured’ – works at commonwealth level I think, assume also at territory level. ie they are big enough to carry any risk and therefore pay themselves. Any one else?

It amazes me that we let so many people drive around without a clue about insurance.

CTP insurance provides compensation for people injured or killed. Third party property insurance is optional, but I would have no quarms about taking those who do not have it to court to pay for the repairs to my car.

All ACTION buses are fully insured through the ACT Insurance Authority. The main issue here looks like a determination as to who was at fault for the accident, you will normally be required to pay the excess until the party at fault is determined and insurance companies like to take the longest time possible to do that. You should note that I believe that ACTION buses have CCTV cameras that record in front of the bus, if you have pulled in front of the bus and it has run into you, they are likely to be able to prove it.

It sees you are misinformed about insurance.

CTP insurance does not cover cars involved in accidents, it covers people involved in accidents.

If you have an accident with someone and it is their fault, you should not be out of pocket at all as you can sue them for the damage they’ve negligently caused to your car. The fact that you did have to pay your insurance company suggests either that there was existing damage to your car (so you were paying the excess on that damage) or the other party have not accepted liability.

The series of events you posted really don’t make much sense at all – and it certainly isn’t evidence that ACTION busses don’t have CTP insurance, let alone comprehensive insurance (and I would bet london to a brick that they do have both).

The compulsory third party is personal – ie. if someone get’s injured that insurance will cover them.

Your second question asking why they are exempt from comprehensive third party – it’s either comprehensive insurance – ie everything or it is third party insurance.

I’m guessing you are insured through NRMA who couldn’t find there arse with two hands and a search party. You shouldn’t have payed any excess to start off with if it was the other parties fault.

Last time I got ran into, went down to my insurance, they had the repairs done before they even contacted the other owner. You paying excess makes me believe the insurance company has treat you as being at fault, you should talk to them about that.

ACTION will have insurance, like any insurance company they just would not want to pay, good luck with it all.

Third party does not include third party property. Compulsory third party would be issuing the insurance companies a license to print money. Insurance distributes risk. If Action does not have insurance, it’s because it’s big enough to take its own risks. Insurance would not change things one iota – it would just be action’s insurance company’s lawyers instead of their lawyers.

CTP insurance=injury insurance.

That really is retarded. What insurance company are you with? So I know never to go with them.

Compulsory third party insurance is for personal, not property. But I’m still scratching my head as to why the buses aren’t covered.

CTP insurance applies only to personal injury, NOT to property damage. So that is not of any assistance to you anyway.

I think ACTION ‘self insures’ – in other words, if it liable then it pays the money out of its own assets rather than getting money from an insurance company (the existence or otherwise of an insurance company is totally irrelevant to determining who has to pay, the existence of an insurance company just means there is someone with the money to pay once liability is established).

In any event, if it was not your fault then your insurance company should not be treating it as a ‘fault’ claim, but that is a matter between you and the insurer, not ACTION (as is the increase in premiums).

You should be entitled to repayment of your no claim bonus – if your insurance company is not seeking that from ACTION (with a view to passing it back to you) then you are entitled to ask ACTION to pay it direct to you (after all, its a loss you have suffered due to its negligence, on the version you have given). You can even ask ACTION to cover your other (non insured expenses) such as taxi fares that you have incurred as a result of not having a car (or medical expenses for the whiplash…).

Ignore the insurance companies and ask yourself this question: ‘what costs have I directly incurred as a result of the accident?’. Then ‘what costs have I been re-imbursed?’ (by your insurers, health insurers etc). The balance is payable by ACTION

Er…just out of interest, which bit of that story proves they have no insurance? Just because lawyers are busy working through it doesn’t mean the bus has no insurance, it just means their insurance company is trying to avoid paying out – as pretty much any insurance company will try if they think they have a chance. Having to pay the excess for repairs before fault is finally determined is pretty standard (if not entirely desirable from our point of view). If it turns out it wasn’t your fault, the excess should be refunded and the accident is noted on your records as the other guy’s fault.

I don’t believe CTP covers vehicles, on people injured… have a look here for a handy FAQ


Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.