Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

Third Party Insurance – At what cost, for who?

By cranky - 27 June 2012 10

The CT has an article describing the problems that Govco are having establishing a fair price for TPI for the forthcoming year. Seems NRMA (sole provider) has demanded a price Govco find excessive.

Mention is made of the opposition our local legal thieves put up to derail the attempt to widen the insurer field by limiting the payouts to injured victims.

Whilst reading this, I was regaled by a radio add, with some young lady telling of the unforseen, awesome payout she had received from her local legal team.

Can we get real, and persuade our local council to grow some backbone and limit these fairytale payouts? Bugger the legals, we are being robbed to pay for this system.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
10 Responses to
Third Party Insurance – At what cost, for who?
p1 1:13 pm 27 Jun 12

dtc said :

Much as I dislike judge bashing, the real problem in Canberra is that the courts are too generous for minor injuries.

This is kinda how I see it. There should not be need for any sort of cap, because people should be awarded a fair amount, so by definition any award reduced due to a cap would be unfair.

Keijidosha 1:05 pm 27 Jun 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

wow, i had this exact conversation this mornign with a workmate. Why does actew and nrma have a monopoly on these things?

NRMA don’t have a monopoly. As mentioned above, the CTP market in Canberra is open, its just that whatever Government framework/rules are in place have meant that NRMA are the only successful/willing supplier.

As for ActewAGL’s monopoly, again that isn’t exactly true. There are a few electricity/gas suppliers in the local market, its just that ActewAGL are a giant fish in a small pond and use their size to dominate.

dtc 12:54 pm 27 Jun 12

p1 said :

Do the other states have a cap on payouts to injured third parties?

NSW has a threshold (no payment below a certain level of injury) and a cap.

Like I said, these shift the risk and cost of an accident from the general car owning population (and, via them, from the insurer) to the injured person. And, to some extent, shift from the driver/insurer to the medical system (Medicare or medical insurance). You will notice that this means state governments allow drivers to pay lower CTP premiums and cost shift responsibility to the Federal govt for treating uninsured injured people.

If you have read about the proposed workers comp limitations the NSW govt is proposing to implement, its the same arguments.

Much as I dislike judge bashing, the real problem in Canberra is that the courts are too generous for minor injuries.

p1 12:38 pm 27 Jun 12

Do the other states have a cap on payouts to injured third parties?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 12:24 pm 27 Jun 12

neanderthalsis said :

Cheap said :

why is there only one in the first place? why can’t any insurer provide you with 3rd party personal insurance? I thought monopolies were meant to be bad for the economy

Welcome too the Peoples Republic of Canberra. Competition is bad and people can’t be trusted to choose energy retailers or CTP providers.

wow, i had this exact conversation this mornign with a workmate. Why does actew and nrma have a monopoly on these things?

neanderthalsis 11:36 am 27 Jun 12

Cheap said :

why is there only one in the first place? why can’t any insurer provide you with 3rd party personal insurance? I thought monopolies were meant to be bad for the economy

Welcome too the Peoples Republic of Canberra. Competition is bad and people can’t be trusted to choose energy retailers or CTP providers.

dtc 11:30 am 27 Jun 12

Cheap said :

why is there only one in the first place? why can’t any insurer provide you with 3rd party personal insurance? I thought monopolies were meant to be bad for the economy

Its an open market, any insurer can choose to compete.

“Mention is made of the opposition our local legal thieves put up to derail the attempt to widen the insurer field by limiting the payouts to injured victims.”

Could be read as ‘opposition to limiting payments to people who were injured and may in pain for the rest of their lives for no fault of their own – in return for reducing someones insurance premium by $100″

If you ever have a chronic injury caused by someone else, trust me when I say you will never think of the extra CTP insurance premium as being an impost.

FioBla 11:20 am 27 Jun 12

Cheap said :

why is there only one in the first place? why can’t any insurer provide you with 3rd party personal insurance? I thought monopolies were meant to be bad for the economy

Just passing along: https://twitter.com/ABarrMLA/status/212379567841751040

Cheap 11:02 am 27 Jun 12

why is there only one in the first place? why can’t any insurer provide you with 3rd party personal insurance? I thought monopolies were meant to be bad for the economy

bd84 10:28 am 27 Jun 12

Insurance companies being greedy thieves as usual. The cost of CTP payouts in the ACT has been massively below the fees they charge for many years and should be going down not up.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site