- Increase the proportion of benefits for most seriously injured road users
- Reduce the time it takes to resolve a claim
- Reduce opportunities for claims fraud
- Reduce the cost of green slip premiums.
- Insurer profit (19%)
- Insurer expenses (15%)
- Legal and investigation expenses (18%)
- Administering the scheme (3%).
Because insurers do not know how much a claim will cost so far into the future, they factor in uncertainty. This makes premiums higher in the short term. The long-term average profit for insurers is 19%, more than double what the insurers filed when setting prices.
Legal costs now exceed medical costs in the scheme. The fault-based process has led 83% of claims to use legal representation, compared to 71% in 2008. Up to 10% of claims could even be fraudulent or exaggerated.
Not all states and territories have a common law fault-based scheme. While NSW, Qld, WA and the ACT are mainly fault-based, Vic, Tas and NT have no-fault or hybrid systems.
- Retain fault-based scheme but improve processes with no change in benefits (NSW, ACT)
- Retain fault-based scheme but improve processes and adjust benefits (Qld, SA, WA)
- Move to a hybrid no-fault, defined benefits scheme for minor injuries with common law benefits for serious injuries (Vic, Tas)
- Move to a fully no-fault, defined benefits scheme with caps, thresholds and no common law (NT, NZ).