A Simple Bus Ride Ends in Injury
On 5 June 2024, Michael Scattergood boarded a public bus in New South Wales expecting a routine ride. Instead, he was left injured and forced to fight for the compensation he was entitled to under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017.
Mr Scattergood, who suffers from a pre-existing spinal condition known as thoracic spinal cord neuralgia, uses a walking stick to assist with mobility. After stepping onto the bus, he made his way toward a seat at the back, choosing it to avoid discomfort caused by the nearest empty seat directly behind the bus driver which was situated over the front axle of the bus. However, before he could sit down, the driver accelerated and drove the bus forward. This sudden motion caused Mr Scattergood to lose his balance and fall heavily to the floor.
What the Insurer Argued
The insurer, Allianz Australia, claimed Mr Scattergood was wholly or mostly at fault for his own injuries. They argued that he had bypassed an available seat at the front of the bus—designed for passengers with mobility challenges—and failed to use handrails or his walking stick properly. He was also holding a mobile phone in one hand and not gripping any support rails with the other.
On the basis of these arguments, Allianz intended to stop his statutory benefits (payments which are made for reasonable and necessary medical treatment and income loss, if applicable) after 52 weeks. This is permitted under the Act if the Claimant is found to be mostly at fault.
The Commission Steps In
Mr Scattergood challenged this decision, and the matter was heard by the Personal Injury Commission. Even though he was self-represented, the Commission took a thorough look at all the evidence—including CCTV footage from the bus.
The footage showed Mr Scattergood using his walking stick properly and walking at a steady pace toward his preferred seat. Importantly, the driver looked in the rearview mirror and would have seen Mr Scattergood still walking down the aisle. Despite this, the driver pulled away from the stop, knowing that Mr Scattergood was not yet seated.
Who Was Really at Fault?
The Commission found that while Mr Scattergood could have used the handrails or chosen a closer seat, the driver also had a duty of care to ensure all passengers—especially those with visible disabilities—were seated before the bus moved.
The driver only needed to wait a few more seconds. Given that Mr Scattergood was walking steadily and using a walking aid, the Commission concluded that the driver’s actions were negligent.
Understanding Contributory Negligence
Even though Mr Scattergood may have contributed to his fall by not using available handrails or carrying a phone, the Commission ruled he was not wholly or mostly at fault. That means he is still entitled to ongoing statutory benefits under the law.
This case is a classic example of contributory negligence, where both the Claimant and another party (in this case, the bus driver) played a role in an accident. However, just because someone is partly at fault does not mean they lose all rights to compensation.
Why This Matters for Other Passengers
This decision reinforces the importance of the duty of care in operating public transport. Drivers must take reasonable steps to ensure passenger safety—especially for people with mobility issues or visible impairments. It also shows that insurers do not have the final say when it comes to fault and entitlements.
If you’ve suffered an injury while a passenger on a bus, or if an insurer is trying to stop your benefits because they say you were at fault, please contact us. Our experienced personal injury lawyers can help assess your case, fight for your rights, and support you through every step of the claims process.
DISCLAIMER
This article reflects the current law at the time of publication. It is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The actual decisions in each case are summarised for general understanding. For specific legal guidance in relation to your situation, please consult with a qualified legal professional.
