I have raised this before, Multi-bike Registration

[Coldrider]

If ACC were serious about reducing accidents though they would charge higher premiums to drivers and riders who have a history of causing crashes rather than just single out all motorcyclists as being responsible for causing more crashes than anyone else.

We are all tared with the same brush, us hooligans and the antics we get up to on our motorcycles in full display of the public, we are the biggest law breakers in the land. Even the meek and mild want overly loud exhausts to feel 'bad ass'.

[Berries]

Without attribution or any other hint for context it is difficult to know what you're on about, but if it's about only paying one ACC charge per person then your comment is plain idiotic. Registration is for the vehicle. A person, in most cases, can only drive one vehicle at a time and is the person that incurs the charges for hospital care. Thus, it is reasonable in a society whose Government is not just about revenue collecting, to attribute the costs to the person, perhaps as part of the driving licence.

This makes much more sense to me, but you seem to like straw man type arguments that make little sense.

Yes. I only own one bike and get fucked off at the ACC component of rego after never claiming on ACC for a motorbike crash. A few sporting claims where I contributed a big fat zero but nothing on two wheels. I don't know how anyone can say that if you have two bikes you should pay twice the amount. Absolute shit. You can only ride one bike at a time so if you own one bike or 500, the risk of you having a crash and having a claim is based on your exposure. This has absolutely nothing to do with the number of bikes you own/ride.

To be honest ACC appears a bit Russian to me. I grew up in the UK where you had to get insurance and it was based on risk - age, experience, model of bike, number of points, where you live etc etc. I do think that whatever you get charged should be based on your true risk, not some made up shit based on the size of the engine but a combination of all the other factors that influence the chance of you becoming a smear on the road. Past history seems to be a big one which is totally ignored.

And conversely, I would probably have a second bike if it was not for this bullshit. It would undoubtedly be less likely to be involved in a fatal crash than my current wheels but I am fucked if I am paying those bastards 2x whatever it is. So my risk of claiming is actually higher than if I had two bikes. Nice one. But then I realise I joined KB because of the ACC bullshit and there is no point whatsoever ranting on here.

[Coldrider]

I have three bikes, 2 rego ed one at a time, and a dirt bike, BTW I thought 'Russian' was a titty fuck /pearl necklace.

[Voltaire]

If ACC were serious about reducing accidents though they would charge higher premiums to drivers and riders who have a history of causing crashes rather than just single out all motorcyclists as being responsible for causing more crashes than anyone else.

They are serious about reducing accidents by pricing motorcycles off the road. From the sounds of it plan is working well.

[pritch]

Do ACC lump all accidents/incidents involving bikes on public roads, quads, and all off road riding in the one basket?

Dunno but I'd guess so.

What I was referring to is that it was explained at the time that ACC had come up with a figure that motorcycle accidents were costing nationally. They then formulated a plan to recover that figure from motorcyclists.

When it was suggested that we can only ride one bike at a time so we should only pay one fee, it was Nick Smith (IIRC) replied that was not acceptable because the amount collected on that basis would not meet ACCs budgeted figure.

So forget everything else, the bottom line is the bottom line. Everything else is irrelevant.

[old slider]

Dunno but I'd guess so.

What I was referring to is that it was explained at the time that ACC had come up with a figure that motorcycle accidents were costing nationally. They then formulated a plan to recover that figure from motorcyclists.

When it was suggested that we can only ride one bike at a time so we should only pay one fee, it was Nick Smith (IIRC) replied that was not acceptable because the amount collected on that basis would not meet ACCs budgeted figure.

So forget everything else, the bottom line is the bottom line. Everything else is irrelevant.

Thanks. Probably be difficult to determine actual Reg motorcycle accidents costs alone, rather than having all classes of motorcycle accidents lumped together, The costs of the "too many" Quad accidents and deaths along with all other off public roads use must be quite high.

[Voltaire]

Thanks. Probably be difficult to determine actual Reg motorcycle accidents costs alone, rather than having all classes of motorcycle accidents lumped together, The costs of the "too many" Quad accidents and deaths along with all other off public roads use must be quite high.

some stats to mull over from the Govt.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/researc...clecrashfacts/

ACC

http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/

As Pritch points out its down to numbers.

I bet they would like to do away with " Rego on Hold"

[Paul in NZ]

The register the rider and not the bike argument falls down when a pillion gets on the back. Not any more risk of an accident but a lot more expensive if the unthinkable happens.

We ride 2 up a lot. ACC makes it a reasonable deal.

[Voltaire]

In the case of cars a hell of a lot more injury can be done if they are carrying passengers too. I feel it is us that are funding cheap car reg rather than the other way around that they claim.

read the link I posted, takes the 'feeling' out and gives numbers.

20 time more likely to die on a motorcycle than a car may have some bearing on it, also the number of cars on the road Vs the number of motorcycles.

I get the whole " can only ride one at a time" and so on but that's how it is and no one cares....actually ACC do.

http://www.rideforever.co.nz/

They even have a doc on Lanesplitting

http://www.rideforever.co.nz/news-ar...ane-splitting/

[old slider]

some stats to mull over from the Govt.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/researc...clecrashfacts/

ACC

http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/

As Pritch points out its down to numbers.

I bet they would like to do away with " Rego on Hold"

Shite, that is pretty sobering. I wonder what caused the big surge in the over 40 stats starting from the mid 2000s when comparing to the 80s.

[swarfie]

Shite, that is pretty sobering. I wonder what caused the big surge in the over 40 stats starting from the mid 2000s when comparing to the 80s.

Most likely loads of born again 40 & 50 something "bikers" returning to the fold and riding bikes that make four times the horsepower than the ones they rode "back in the day".

[Paul in NZ]

Most likely loads of born again 40 & 50 something "bikers" returning to the fold and riding bikes that make four times the horsepower than the ones they rode "back in the day".

Well that and the bikes are really different to ride. My old big wheeled Triumph TR6C is a natural handler - you dont actually need to over think it - it just happens and the weight is low. The ST1050 is totally different and much more technical to ride if you want to get a wriggle (more a wobble really) on. Weight is carried high and you need to think about apex's, weight transfer and being effing careful at low speed. Yes its a lardy old thing but it can go from yippee to oh feck in the blink of an eye.

[Voltaire]

Could that explain the bikes I have seen at Star Auctions that were single vehicle 'accidents"?

They guy there pointed out a few and said " they should have trusted the traction control and ABS instead of crashing"

Can't be that many Born Again Bikers coming thru as Jap imports killed of bikes in the early 90's

[SPman]

20 time more likely to die on a motorcycle than a car may have some bearing on it,

Well - iff'n you're dead, they aren't paying out large for ongoing treatment, are they, so that should be an advantage, not a liability!

[jasonu]

The register the rider and not the bike argument falls down when a pillion gets on the back. Not any more risk of an accident but a lot more expensive if the unthinkable happens.

We ride 2 up a lot. ACC makes it a reasonable deal.

Like these pricks???