What Changed for Stolen Vehicle Crashes After the 2017 CTP Reforms?
Since the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (MAIA) came into effect on 1 December 2017, claims for injuries sustained in crashes involving stolen or unlawfully used vehicles in NSW have been governed by a new legal framework. The key change is that eligibility for compensation under the Compulsory Third Party (CTP) scheme now depends on whether the person injured was a lawful user of the vehicle at the time of the accident. If the vehicle was stolen or being used without permission, and the injured person was not a driver, passenger, or authorised user, they may not be entitled to CTP benefits. This shift from the previous scheme means that individuals who were not in a position to control or legally operate the vehicle may face greater challenges in obtaining compensation.
Who Is Covered Under the CTP Scheme After the 2017 Reforms?
Under the current CTP scheme, a person may be eligible for benefits if they were a lawful user of the vehicle at the time of the accident. This includes drivers, passengers, and pedestrians who were in a motor vehicle that was being used lawfully. However, if the vehicle was stolen or being used without the owner’s consent, and the injured person had no authority to be in or on it, they may not qualify for treatment and care benefits, weekly income payments, or damages. For example, a pedestrian struck by a stolen car in Greater Sydney may still be eligible for some benefits if they were in a lawful location and not involved in the theft. But a person who was a passenger in a stolen vehicle, not the driver, may not be entitled to benefits unless they can prove they were not involved in the unlawful use.
What Evidence Is Needed to Support a Claim?
To establish eligibility, the injured person must provide evidence that they were not involved in or responsible for the unlawful use of the vehicle. This includes medical records showing the nature and extent of injuries, a police report detailing the theft and crash, witness statements, and any available surveillance footage. Photographs of the scene, including damage to the vehicle and surrounding area, can also support the claim. It is important to preserve all documentation and contact the insurer as soon as possible after the accident. The insurer will assess whether the injury occurred during a lawful use of a motor vehicle, as defined under the MAIA.
Time Limits and Procedural Requirements
There are time limits for making a claim under the CTP scheme. A claim for treatment and care benefits must generally be made within 12 months of the accident. For weekly income payments and damages, the time limit is 12 months from the date of the accident. If the claim is not made within this period, the right to compensation may be lost unless an extension is granted by the Supreme Court of NSW. It is essential to act promptly and seek advice if there is any uncertainty about the deadline.
When to Seek Legal Advice
The 2017 reforms have introduced a more complex framework for determining eligibility in stolen vehicle crashes. Because the outcome depends on whether the injured person was a lawful user, and because the burden of proof lies with the claimant, it is advisable to seek independent legal advice. A solicitor can help assess whether the claim meets the legal criteria, review the evidence, and assist in preparing the application. In some cases, a claim may be disputed by the insurer, particularly if there is evidence that the injured person had knowledge of or involvement in the unlawful use of the vehicle.
Hypothetical Example: A Pedestrian Injured in a Stolen Car Crash
A 34-year-old woman was walking on a footpath in Sydney’s inner west when she was struck by a car that had been stolen from a nearby car park. The vehicle was not registered to her, and she had no connection to the theft. She sustained a fractured wrist and concussion. She sought medical treatment immediately and reported the incident to the police. Her claim for treatment and care benefits was accepted because she was a lawful user of a motor vehicle (as a pedestrian in a public space) and not involved in the theft. However, if she had been a passenger in the stolen vehicle, her claim might have been denied unless she could prove she was unaware of the theft and had not consented to being in the vehicle.
Next Steps: What You Should Do Now
Every claim depends on its own facts. To request contact about your circumstances, complete the quick, no obligation enquiry form.