Add Category
Years after they lost their teenage son in a horrific car accident, Gary and Janice Seary are still battling to claim compensation.
WARNING: This story contains graphic car crash details and a reference to suicide.
They have described the compensation system as "re-traumatising" and "triggering", as well as full of "jargon".
They say navigating the system through grief has been a nightmare.
Lachlan Seary, 19, was hit from behind in a car accident on the Monaro Highway in 2021.
He was the designated driver for his friends that night — the same night Peter Loeschnauer, who had also been out partying, climbed behind the wheel with alcohol and MDMA in his system.
Loeschnauer's Honda Civic was recorded travelling at 149 kilometres per hour by a speed camera before slamming into the back of Lachlan's Toyota Corolla.
Lachlan suffered catastrophic head injuries and died at the scene.
Mr Seary told the court in 2022 his life had been divided in two since his son's death.
Part of navigating the latter half has been claiming compensation through the ACT's Motor Accident Injuries insurance (MAI) scheme, which replaced the territory's Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurance scheme in 2019.
Mr Seary said the weeks following Lachlan's death had been a blur.
He believed he and his wife were both still in shock for weeks, if not months.
"Something triggered in my mind ... that there's got to be somebody we can reach out to," he said.
An internet search revealed a "multitude" of information, including the MAI scheme, which provides compensation to people involved in car accidents and those impacted, whether at fault or not.
To be eligible, you have to apply within 13 weeks.
Mr Seary said they weren't even aware of its existence until 10 weeks after Lachlan's death.
They sought advice from solicitors, who advised them it was up to them to deal with insurance companies.
In hindsight, Mr Seary believed that "exacerbated the imbalance of power" between the big companies and victims.
"It wasn't an easy process," he said.
"We had to fill so many forms out, which was triggering and extremely difficult.
"We had to relive much of the nightmare and trauma that we went through, through that process."
'Mental scars last forever'
The Searys found the MAI website complicated, full of jargon and painful to complete.
Every form required extensive information and later receipts for treatment.
But they pushed on, and their claims for support were accepted.
As a result, they have since received support for ongoing medical appointments, treatment and other financial assistance like partial income replacement.
But three years on, the fact they are still engaging with the system and the insurer has become extremely frustrating.
They would like to be able to move on.
But the system requires a person's injuries to be deemed "stable" before a quality-of-life or whole of person impairment (WPI) test can be done and longer-term compensation sorted out.
Mr Seary has been through one assessment, which must be completed with an appointed provider, rather than his own medical team of a GP, psychologist and psychiatrist who have been monitoring and treating him over the past few years.
"You have to disclose and bear your soul again, to a complete stranger, who is assessing every word you say, every emotion, every expression on your face," he said.
For the grieving father, it was like "reliving a nightmare".
The issue is, psychological "injuries" can take much longer to stabilise than physical ones.
And although the MAI scheme offers support for five years, the WPI test has to be done to take it further or to receive a payout.
The Searys say they appreciate the assistance the system has been able to provide them so far, but they acknowledge the ongoing appointments and reduced incomes due to reduced work hours won't be ending anytime soon.
"Mental exhaustion is a prominent part of my life, that's perhaps why I can't work at the same capacity as I did prior to Lachlan's accident," Mr Seary said.
"Our journey and our trauma is going to be lifelong, and it's not a matter of, a part of my body is broken it just needs rehabilitation and healing.
"Mental scars last forever."
What kind of support might be provided beyond that five-year timeframe is still unclear for the Searys — a prospect which only adds to their mental anguish.
Other crash victims face similarly lengthy fights
The Searys are not alone in their fight.
Kieren Hunt, 34, was rear-ended in a car accident late last year.
As a result of that crash, he's been left with an uncommon condition called complex regional pain syndrome.
It's not known exactly why that condition has developed but Mr Hunt says his doctors think it likely developed because his neck and wrist moved at sharp angles upon impact and damaged the nerves in his shoulder.
The impact of that "debilitating" pain has been immense.
Mr Hunt has had to reduce his working hours and pass up promotions, he also can't drive and is spending less time with his children.
Even the simple task of cleaning his house has become too much for him to manage and a friendly pat on the shoulder from a work colleague reduced him to screaming tears.
He has even — in his darkest moments — considered suicide.
"I am constantly in agony, no matter what I do," he said.
"It is exhausting."
On top of that, he spends a lot of time dealing with lengthy forms and insurance companies.
Mr Hunt has been warned by his doctors that if he doesn't begin to respond to treatment within the next year, he's likely to live with the syndrome forever.
Compensation involves a lot of back-and-forth
Mr Hunt has received compensation for medical bills and transport to and from work, as well as some income replacement at about 80 per cent for the days he's not working.
He's also received support with fortnightly cleaning.
But he said he was still thousands of dollars out of pocket.
Some of that is due to additional spending on power bills, non-work-related transport because he cannot drive, and food delivery because cooking is simply too painful.
He also admits he has been spending more money than he usually would on hobbies, using them as a distraction from the pain and panic attacks he's experiencing.
His insurer has also yet to decide whether they will approve further treatment for pain mitigation.
"I'm at $5,000 for an accident that wasn't my fault," he explained.
Like the Searys, he found the online application process confusing and overly-complicated.
And, he said the information wasn't easy to either find or understand and there wasn't anyone who could explain what was going on to him.
"It's a terrible system and I don't know what's going to happen to me," he said.
"Without seeing a light at the end of the tunnel, it's very hard to keep going."
Mr Hunt doesn't know when he will eligible for a WPI test, or if it will allow him to access a lump sum payout.
Controversy about scheme is 'nothing new'
In 2017, the ACT government decided it needed to replace its existing Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurance scheme because it was becoming increasingly expensive and wasn't covering every accident victim.
Under the CTP scheme, a person could only be compensated if they could prove they were not at fault.
It meant, for example, that a person could not be compensated if they hit a kangaroo and injured themselves.
In 2017, a 50-person strong citizens' jury was tasked with coming up with the best possible model for a CTP scheme, based on a range of options presented to them by experts.
But at least one juror quit, calling it a "grossly corrupted" process and saying a key element of the laws, the WPI test, had not been explained to them until late in the process.
The jury ultimately opted for the most radical option presented to them — one which would cover everyone, regardless of fault.
It was 2019, after a lengthy consultation process in the ACT Legislative Assembly, by the time the laws passed and a hybrid defined benefits scheme was ready.
The scheme came into effect in February 2020.
Chief Minister Andrew Barr promised in 2019 the new scheme would allow for "fairer, faster and more comprehensive support".
But lawyers feared the new scheme would reduce the rights of innocently injured people to seek compensation at the expense of all people who were injured in accidents.
That's exactly what James Treloar, a partner at legal firm Maliganis Edwards Johnson, believes has happened.
He described it as a "bureaucratic behemoth of legislation" which had taken bits of different states' laws and amalgamated them into a kind of "Frankenstein".
"It's leaving many people out of pocket and frustrated," he said.
"There's no ability for a claimant to commute their entitlements, they simply go cap in hand to an insurance company and ask for the insurance company to pay receipts for treatment or medication on a case by case and receipt by receipt basis."
Maliganis Edwards Johnson receives around one to two enquiries a day from people who would like support from lawyers and the "autonomy" to make their own decisions about treatment, work and care.
But in most cases, they can't be helped, and Mr Treloar has only settled three matters since the scheme came into existence.
He said many people just give up when they get tired of the constant engagement with the insurers.
Some decisions have been taken to the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT), but in many cases the legal fees were more than the cost of the treatment being disputed, Mr Treloar said.
A lawyer can act for a client following a whole of person impairment test, particularly if a person is assessed at 10 per cent or more.
But Mr Treloar said most of the people — including the Searys — were frustrated and angry well before that point.
Some review recommendations taken on board
The MAI scheme is required to be reviewed every three years and the first of those reviews was quietly released earlier this year.
It found the scheme was working well but acknowledged several parts of it had yet to be tested, given its relative infancy.
More than $33 million in compensation has been paid out since it came into operation.
Some recommendations, including creating a mechanism by which to measure the profits of insurance companies and better share information about the scheme, have been accepted by its regulatory body, the MAI Commission.
It will also conduct an audit of forms to try and simplify them.
ACT Special Minister of State Chris Steel did not accept an interview with the ABC on the topic.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the government said 97 per cent of applications had been successful.
"Support has been delivered faster under this scheme than its predecessor with treatment and care provided quicker than before," the statement read.
It said 1,600 Canberrans had now accessed the scheme.
ACT MAI Commissioner Lisa Holmes wasn't able to comment on government policy decisions, saying in response to the drip-feeding criticism "that was how the scheme was set up".
Ms Holmes said the old scheme had also taken time, an average of three years, for a claim to be settled.
She believed personal injury lawyers had an obvious personal interest in advocating a return to a common law scheme.
"It was essentially ... a legal process. It's a negotiation, usually between an insurer and a lawyer," she explained.
"During that time, the injured person was receiving no income replacement, and usually only limited treatment and care."
At least one of the scheme's main aims — cheaper car insurance premiums — does appear to have succeeded.
The review of the scheme said premiums were now in line with those being paid in other jurisdictions and they have reduced by around $53 since 2020.
To fund the MAI Commission, $14 is collected from every insurance policy.
The most recent ACT budget acknowledged there were financial risks regarding the adequacy of the commission's funding as its revenue was dependent on the number of new registrations.