How the PIC Assesses Social Media Evidence in CTP Disputes
Where a person's only injuries resulting from the accident are threshold injuries, weekly benefits and treatment and care generally cease after 52 weeks (ss 3.11 and 3.28).
In New South Wales, the Personal Injury Commission (PIC) evaluates social media evidence as part of motor accident claims, particularly when disputes arise. Social media posts, photos, and videos may be used to support or challenge a claimant’s injury severity, recovery timeline, or adherence to medical advice. However, the PIC has specific expectations for how such evidence must be presented to be considered credible.
Key Legal Framework for Social Media Evidence
Under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017, the PIC assesses claims based on the evidence provided. Social media content is treated as any other form of digital evidence, requiring authenticity, relevance, and proper context. The PIC may question posts that appear inconsistent with medical records or fail to demonstrate a clear link to the injury. For example, a claimant’s social media activity showing physical activity inconsistent with reported injuries may be scrutinized.
SIRA’s guidelines emphasize that evidence must be 'genuine, relevant, and properly explained.' This means social media content must be dated, contextualized, and corroborated by other records like medical reports or accident statements. The PIC also considers whether the evidence was shared publicly or privately, as private posts may be harder to verify.
Practical Steps for Presenting Social Media Evidence
Claimants should ensure social media evidence is:
- Clearly dated and time-stamped to establish relevance to the injury timeline.
- Contextualized with explanations of how the content relates to the claim (e.g., a photo of a bruise with a note about its location).
- Corroborated by other evidence, such as medical records or witness statements.
For example, a claimant might share a photo of a swollen ankle with a caption noting the injury date, but the PIC may require a doctor’s confirmation that the injury matches the description. Without this, the evidence risks being dismissed as speculative.
Time Limits and Dispute Resolution
CTP claims must be submitted within 52 weeks of the accident under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017. If a dispute arises, claimants should seek advice before the 52-week deadline to avoid losing benefits. The PIC’s internal review process allows for challenges to decisions, but it does not guarantee a change. Claimants must provide new evidence or demonstrate errors in the initial assessment.
If a dispute involves medical evidence, the PIC may refer the case to a medical expert for review. However, the claimant must first exhaust the internal review process before escalating to external mediation.
Example: Social Media in a CTP Dispute
Consider a claimant who posts a video of themselves walking 10 days after an accident. The PIC may question whether the activity is consistent with a reported knee injury. To address this, the claimant must provide medical evidence confirming their mobility limitations and explain how the video reflects their recovery progress. Without such evidence, the PIC may conclude the social media post lacks credibility.
When to Seek Legal Advice
If social media evidence is central to your claim or dispute, consult a solicitor before submitting it to the PIC. A lawyer can help ensure the evidence meets the PIC’s standards and is presented effectively. Time limits and procedural requirements mean delays can jeopardize your ability to claim benefits.
Next Steps
CTP claims depend on the specific facts of each case. To request contact about your circumstances, complete the quick, no obligation enquiry form.