A 74-year-old man using a motorised mobility scooter was struck by a motor vehicle at a T-intersection in Rye, Victoria. He sustained a severe head injury with right subdural haemorrhage and bilateral subarachnoid haemorrhage. Despite emergency decompressive craniotomy and evacuation of subdural haematoma, repeat imaging showed extensive brain injury deemed non-survivable. He died after comfort care was provided. The coroner found the driver had severely limited vision to the left due to the stop line location, road curvature, embankment and foliage, compounded by vehicle design. The coroner did not make findings regarding driver culpability but recommended moving the stop line forward 1.5-2 metres to improve visibility for drivers turning left.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.
motor vehicle collision with mobility scooter at T-intersection
severely limited visibility to the left from driver's position at stop line
road curvature and embankment limiting sight lines
foliage obscuring view
vehicle A-pillar obstructing view
driver attention directed to right where oncoming traffic expected
mobility scooter user travelling on paved shoulder as pedestrian
Coroner's recommendations
VicRoads and Mornington Peninsula Shire should consider moving the stop line at the intersection of Melbourne Road and Liesma Street, Rye forward 1.5-2 metres to provide better vision of approaching traffic, especially from the driver's left
This page reproduces or summarises information from publicly available findings published by Australian coroners' courts. Coronial is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any coronial court or government body.
Content may be incomplete, reformatted, or summarised. All court orders for redaction and non-publication are respected; documents with technically defective redaction have been excluded from the database entirely. Always refer to the original court publication for the authoritative record.
Copyright in original materials remains with the relevant government jurisdiction. AI-generated summaries and tagging are for educational purposes only, may contain inaccuracies, and must not be treated as legal documents. We welcome feedback for correction —