Why CTP Insurers Change Assessors on the Central Coast
A threshold injury under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (NSW) includes a soft tissue injury and a psychological or psychiatric injury that is not a recognised psychiatric illness (adjustment disorder and acute stress disorder are the usual examples; s 1.6 and Motor Accident Guidelines Part 5).
Under NSW law, CTP insurers have discretion to select claims assessors, but this power is not unlimited. If an insurer replaces an assessor without valid reason, claimants may need to challenge the decision. The Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (MAIA) and SIRA guidelines govern this process. Insurers must provide written reasons for changes, and claimants can request a review if they believe the decision is unjustified.
Legal Framework for Assessor Changes
The MAIA gives CTP insurers authority to manage claims, including selecting assessors. However, Section 4.4 of the Act limits benefits for injuries that do not meet the 'threshold injury' definition, which may influence assessor decisions. SIRA’s guidelines clarify that insurers must act reasonably and transparently when changing assessors. For example, if an assessor’s report is incomplete or inconsistent, the insurer may replace them to ensure accurate evaluations.
How to Challenge an Assessor Change Decision
Claimants can dispute an assessor change by:
- Requesting a written explanation from the insurer, including the reason for the change
- Submitting evidence that the original assessor’s work was adequate (e.g., medical records, assessment reports)
- Applying to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) for a review if the insurer refuses to reconsider
SIRA’s Making a motor accident claim page outlines procedures for disputing decisions. Claimants should act promptly, as delays may weaken their case.
Evidence That Matters in Disputes
To challenge an assessor change, claimants must demonstrate the insurer acted unreasonably. Key evidence includes:
- Copies of all assessor reports and correspondence
- Medical records showing the injury’s severity
- Witness statements or expert opinions supporting the claim
- Proof of the insurer’s failure to follow SIRA guidelines
For example, if an insurer replaces an assessor after the original report was already submitted and reviewed by a doctor, this could indicate a legitimate reason for the change. However, if the insurer fails to provide a valid explanation, the claimant may have grounds to contest the decision.
Time Limits and When to Seek Advice
CTP insurers must respond to disputes within 28 days under the MAIA. If the insurer fails to act within this timeframe, claimants may need to escalate the matter to NCAT. Time limits also apply to disputing benefit calculations, but assessor changes are generally subject to a separate 28-day review period.
Claimants should seek legal advice if:
- The insurer refuses to provide written reasons for the change
- The assessor’s new report contradicts previous findings without justification
- The claimant believes the insurer is acting in bad faith
A Hypothetical Example
Imagine a claimant injured in a car accident on the Central Coast. The initial assessor concludes the injury meets the threshold injury definition, but the insurer replaces the assessor after the claimant submits additional medical evidence. The new assessor finds the injury does not meet the threshold. The claimant can challenge this by showing the original assessor’s report was accurate and the insurer acted unreasonably in replacing them.
Next Steps for Claimants
CTP insurers have the authority to change assessors, but this power is not absolute. Claimants should document all communications, gather evidence, and seek legal advice if the insurer’s actions seem unfair. Understanding the legal framework and procedural rules can help claimants protect their rights under NSW law.
Every claim depends on its own facts. To request contact about your circumstances, complete the quick, no obligation enquiry form.