Never let it be said that I don’t give credit where it’s due. UIt seems that things in Victoria are getting so bad that even the normally supine MRA Vic is developing some backbone. Here’s a press release they’ve put together, and a good one it is.


Disturbing reports have emerged that the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) is penalising some seriously injured riders with serious injury payouts automatically reduced by up to 50% for "contributory negligence" – even though they have not committed any offences. The concept of "no fault" appears to be inappropriate, with riders presumed by the TAC to be negligent simply for riding a motorcycle or scooter.

MRA President John Karmouche today called on the TAC to tell the truth about its treatment of seriously injured motorcycle and scooter riders.

Mr Karmouche stated, "we recently became aware of an allegation that the TAC was attempting to reduce compensation to riders where they determine the clothing being worn is not meeting TAC standards. We are aware of incidents where the protective clothing was highly unlikely to reduce injuries. The TAC representative on the Victorian Motorcycle Advisory Council (VMAC) stated that she was not aware of this."

"Since that time, information has emerged to confirm that although the individual concerned may not have been aware of this, the TAC is indeed regarding a lack of “protective clothing” as contributory negligence – despite the absence of any standard stating exactly what protective clothing is. The incidents uncovered appear to be merely the tip of the iceberg. Using the same principle we must now ask whether drivers of older cars that lack modern safety features and bicycle riders wearing Lycra and bicycle shoes will also be penalised?

Mr Karmouche went on to say it appears that riders are seeing a pattern of secrecy and misinformation again emerging from the TAC.

“Riders have engaged in consultation with the TAC in good faith. It appears that the TAC have chosen to withhold information and misdirect questions”, said Karmouche.

There is a reasonable provision for the TAC to deny loss of income claims where a serious offence has been proven. However, reducing compensation to injured riders when no offence has been alleged is reprehensible.

Well, it’s a pity they couldn’t have picked this up earlier – this story was actually broken in the Ulysses club magazine “Riding On” – but I quite agree. Now, what are you going to do about it, MRA Vic?

Peter “The Bear” Thoeming