A woman who was involved in a car crash 16 years ago through no fault of her own says she has been denied help by the state's motor accident insurer.
Kathryn Kirk, who had been living in Launceston before the crash, launched action in the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (TASCAT) earlier this year, demanding to know why the Motor Accidents Insurance Board (MAIB) had not provided enough assistance.
Ms Kirk and her then 4-year-old son, Daniel, were injured on November 30, 2010, when their stationary car was hit from behind by a truck.
In her tribunal referral, Ms Kirk said the MAIB had failed in its statutory duty, forcing her parents to provide unpaid care and support for nearly 16 years.
"Kathryn Kirk and Daniel Kirk were never returned, through scheduled benefits, to the pre-injury condition," her application said.
"Why has MAIB not returned us to our pre-accident condition living independently or as close thereto as possible?"
Ms Kirk contended to the tribunal that she was suffering from the consequences of a head injury sustained in the crash, including cognitive problems, physical symptoms affecting her neck and arms. and ongoing headaches.
However, while she detailed these as symptoms of a traumatic brain injury, a report from clinical neuropsychologist Martin Jackson concluded there was no evidence of physical brain trauma and that her cognitive function was completely intact.
He determined her emotional and thinking difficulties were psychological in nature, and a functional neurological disorder, rather than a physical brain injury.
In a decision on the matter, TASCAT deputy president Richard Grueber acknowledged Ms Kirk's plight, but said the tribunal was legally powerless to act.
Under Tasmanian law, the MAIB does not issue blanket lump sums or manage personal recovery directly.
Instead, it pays scheduled benefits by reimbursing specific, reasonable medical expenses, therapies, or formal care costs once an invoice or treatment plan is submitted.
Mr Grueber said because Ms Kirk had not submitted claims for specific medical bills or therapies, the MAIB had never formally refused to pay a scheduled benefit.
He said without a formal refusal, TASCAT held it had no statutory jurisdiction to intervene.
Mr Grueber said the tribunal's dismissal of the case did not mean Ms Kirk or her son were uninjured or barred from future compensation.
"The applicant is free to pursue any treatment or therapy that she considers appropriate," he said.
According to the latest MAIB annual report, the insurer paid out $120.97 million in benefits to assist injured clients, which was up from $110.04 million in 2023-24 because of rising healthcare and future care costs.
There was $24.8 million specifically paid to fund attendant care, support, and treatment for 106 clients requiring lifetime care for catastrophic injuries, such as spinal cord or acquired brain injuries.