Rego fees

[peasea]

I hope all you good people made a submission regarding the proposed increase in rego fees (ACC levies) for bikes over 600cc mooted in the 'Safer Journeys;' discussion document that our lovely government released a while back.

October 2 is the cutoff date; that's this Friday.

If you can't be arsed writing your own I have one on file, PM me for a copy.

Don't be a tired cunt........:zzzz:

[rosie631]

Yep, done mine. Fuckin rude pricks. They need to stop just increasing the load on the easily taxed categories like road users and start collecting from e.g. rugby players, mountain bikers etc. They must cost the country heaps in ACC but they don't pay any direct contribution like we do. The whole systems fucked IMO.

[peasea]

Yep, done mine. Fuckin rude pricks. They need to stop just increasing the load on the easily taxed categories like road users and start collecting from e.g. rugby players, mountain bikers etc. They must cost the country heaps in ACC but they don't pay any direct contribution like we do. The whole systems fucked IMO.

This from the ACC forum:
In the past three years, the bill for injuries has been $105 million, with the increasing cost blamed on growing player numbers.

They should pay a levy to play or have their own insurance. Just like skiiers and everyone else who wants to partake in a 'dangerous' pastime. We pay, so should they.

[NOWOOL]

What difference does it make? Either we ride within the law and pay the dues or we claim "cultural status and ignore the law and the court throws out the fees when the get to the ridiculous point. Maybe one day the laws will be strict. Meanwhile whine like a baby and blame it on a liberal nanny state.

[peasea]

What difference does it make? Either we ride within the law and pay the dues or we claim "cultural status and ignore the law and the court throws out the fees when the get to the ridiculous point. Maybe one day the laws will be strict. Meanwhile whine like a baby and blame it on a liberal nanny state.

Whine like a baby? Do you call having your say whining? Do you call standing up and saying "enough's enough" whining?

Apathy and laziness appear to be quite common among kiwis. "Sit on your hands, let someone else do it" is the all-too-common mantra.

I'd rather try to nip draconian laws and bids to impose extortionate levies in the bud, thank you. No doubt we'll not be hearing any moans from your neck of the woods if levies and fees rise to (possibly) double what they are now.

eh?

[Molly]

I also don't understand why ACC levies are payable on every bike you own when you can only ride one at a time. I could own a million bikes but it wouldn't change my risk of injury by 1%.

Also, where's the evidence that 600cc+ bikes are more risky than sub 600cc? The kids I see twatting around on scooters are a sight more dangerous than your average middle-aged, pie eating Harley enthusiast.

[p.dath]

I also don't understand why ACC levies are payable on every bike you own when you can only ride one at a time. I could own a million bikes but it wouldn't change my risk of injury by 1%.

There has been some talk on here of adding ACC to petrol, instead of rego's.

The advantage is, the more you use your bike, the more ACC you pay. If you have multiple bikes and only ride one at a time, you pay less. It also catches off road users, and those people who don't register their bikes/vehicles.

[rosie631]

I read recently that in Victoria, Australia they have just bought in a new thing where if you own more than one bike, you can claim back the acc levy (or whatever their equivalent is) part of the rego on all but one bike. Seems logical. Oh, of course, that will be why it hasn't been brought in in NZ.

[rosie631]

There has been some talk on here of adding ACC to petrol, instead of rego's.

The advantage is, the more you use your bike, the more ACC you pay. If you have multiple bikes and only ride one at a time, you pay less. It also catches off road users, and those people who don't register their bikes/vehicles.

That sounds like a fairer way of doing it too.

[p.dath]

I read recently that in Victoria, Australia they have just bought in a new thing where if you own more than one bike, you can claim back the acc levy (or whatever their equivalent is) part of the rego on all but one bike. Seems logical. Oh, of course, that will be why it hasn't been brought in in NZ.

How do they handle companies that own lots of bikes like motorcycle couriers?

[peasea]

I also don't understand why ACC levies are payable on every bike you own when you can only ride one at a time. I could own a million bikes but it wouldn't change my risk of injury by 1%.

Also, where's the evidence that 600cc+ bikes are more risky than sub 600cc? The kids I see twatting around on scooters are a sight more dangerous than your average middle-aged, pie eating Harley enthusiast.

Surely that would depend on how clumsy you are in the garage?

(And who are you calling a pie-eater?)

[p.dath]

...
Also, where's the evidence that 600cc+ bikes are more risky than sub 600cc? The kids I see twatting around on scooters are a sight more dangerous than your average middle-aged, pie eating Harley enthusiast.

I can't quite remember the details behind this one when I read it, but I think accidents on 600cc and above bikes tended to be more severe (probably because higher speed was involved) as opposed to the number of accidents being higher.

[ukusa]

How do they handle companies that own lots of bikes like motorcycle couriers?

I would say that most, if not all courier bikes are well under 600cc. Can't think of many other types of business that would run big bikes other than the cops & bike rental/hire places.

[firefighter]

Seems logical. Oh, of course, that will be why it hasn't been brought in in NZ.

You would be able to register two vehicles under one name, yet two different drivers = ACC missing out on $.........


How do they handle companies that own lots of bikes like motorcycle couriers?

This is a typical meathead N.Zer problem creating rather than problem solving response which stops sensible things like the forementioned idea and GST being removed from fruit and veges......

Easy workable solution.....buisinesses don't get the refund.....

Is that just too easy or should I get into politics?

[NighthawkNZ]

You would be able to register two vehicles under one name, yet two different drivers = ACC missing out on $.........

Not if ACC was done via the petrol at the pump

[firefighter]

Not if ACC was done via the petrol at the pump

Holy shit another solution!

That would be my choice too.

[rosie631]

And mine.

10 char

[peasea]

Not if ACC was done via the petrol at the pump

I have to agree in principle. ACC is 'supposed' to be a no-fault accident insurance scheme, right? If that's the case then we should all pay equally and for those who operate motor vehicles then surely the easiest way to gather the revenue is at the pump?

The fact that they continually point the finger at motorcycles and say "they are a greater risk" flies in the face of their own philosophy.

Forget road deaths for a moment. Let's line up all the sporting injuries like rugby injuries, skiing injuries, tramping, hockey, netball et al, add home injuries etc and count the cost. These are injuries incurred by folk who don't pay ACC levies. I'd like to see the figures stacked up against motorcycle accident injuries (forget deaths) and see how they compare.

Anyone got such figures?

[dmouse]

Dear Miss Wong, Mr. Smith

I am totally disappointed in you and your views on charges for ACC, especially on motorcycles. it would be fair to say that myself as a motorcycle rider of a larger motorcycle, to be charged over $700 for one year`s registration is totally unfair and biased towards all motorcyclists. if we are to be charged according to engine size, then to make things fair, cars should also be charged by engine size and if a turbo is fitted.

Then main problem that i see is that all motorcyclist`s, scooter riders, and push cyclists are listed in the same category in land transport figures for accidents, so that it looks like motorcyclist`s have the highest accident rate. i have been riding motorcycles for over 35 years, and i have had three accidents two of which were caused by drivers that broke the law and knocked me off of my bike, and caused serious injuries to me and a lot of damage to my bike, which was off of the road in the first accident for 7 months, and the second accident for 5 months. the first accident was caused by a driver who ran a red light and hit me in the back at 60 plus kmph, and was witnessed, the second accident was a driver who did a u-turn in font of me who, stated that he did not see me but he saw the car behind me ?, this accident was witnessed by the police.

i suffer from mental problems as a result of an accident and i can no longer drive a car or van as i suffer from severe claustrophobia and i am physically sick, this cost of over $700 a year is going to take my only transport away, i will not be able to sell my bike as no one will want to pay the high costs of registration that will go with it. i beg that you reconsider the costs that you are about o put on us as motorcyclists as it is really excessive.

i look forward to your reply

David O`Neill

[Molly]

I'd like to submit a letter of my own. Exactly who are we addressing this to? Maybe I'll ask in 'General'.

Edit. Sent this:


Good morning.

Re: ACC increases

I own several motorcycles and ride for relaxation. My favourite of these is a large and somewhat lumbering Harley Davidson. The bikes are my passion I suppose and the three-thousand or so kilometres per year I do are confined to sunny weekends, occasional summer evenings and social events. Indeed, I would recommend riding as a welcome distraction from the sometimes stressful working day.

Though I can think of no less a risk to themselves or others than my forty-something frame pootling around the countryside I today find these three-thousand kilometres are about to cost me an additional $500 per year in ACC fees per bike owned. By any measure this is an unfair, unbalanced and ill-considered increase. I might point out that I am only able to ride one bike at a time so my risk is no greater if I own one or twenty bikes (though, quite unfairly, my ACC contribution varies proportionately).

Could I ask you to please use your position to voice the anger felt today by thousands of motorcyclists who feel this increase is grossly unfair? Today we feel like a minority group who have been bullied and attacked by an oafish and ignorant authority.

Thank you.

[duckonin]

I can't quite remember the details behind this one when I read it, but I think accidents on 600cc and above bikes tended to be more severe (probably because higher speed was involved) as opposed to the number of accidents being higher.

Mine is 800 but not that fast, so why me?? one would say!!, the other point is it goes fast enough to kill, but then doesn't have to be fast at all...:rolleyes:

[DMCD]

I can't quite remember the details behind this one when I read it, but I think accidents on 600cc and above bikes tended to be more severe (probably because higher speed was involved) as opposed to the number of accidents being higher.

Hang on..

An RS250 has the same power as my 790cc and about 120 less kg's wouldnt that make it a faster bike?

[StoneY]

DMOUSE I wont 'quote' ya mate as it would blow this out

Bloody well said my man - nicely written and great pionts
Bling for you bro

[StoneY]

I can't quite remember the details behind this one when I read it, but I think accidents on 600cc and above bikes tended to be more severe (probably because higher speed was involved) as opposed to the number of accidents being higher.

Godamn man, just when I think I super hate your dribble, you actually say something worthwhile!!!!

Thats the shit bro- its that the injuries are worse, often coz the 'off' occurs on a major highway at speed
Big bikes actually crash LESS - just ruin more bodies:(

[DMCD]

Its another example of the ill-informed ignorant scattergun approach government often takes and they can in this case because bikers are not a big enough community for them to be concerned about.

Its the stupid assumption that cc rating = speed that gets me, we see the same kind of nonsense and ignorance in the telecommunications industry, some narrow minded twat who knows nothing about the subject gets an idea into there heads and it becomes law.

[Rhubarb]

Not if ACC was done via the petrol at the pump

What about purchasing ACC miles? (Similar to Road User Charges for diesel vehicles).

Those of us who are fair weather weekend riders would be charged for the miles we ride.

The more you ride, the more you pay. SIMPLE and FAIR !

[p.dath]

...
This is a typical meathead N.Zer problem creating rather than problem solving response which stops sensible things like the forementioned idea and GST being removed from fruit and veges......

Easy workable solution.....buisinesses don't get the refund.....

Is that just too easy or should I get into politics?

It is easy to say, but how easy is it to implement. What defines a company?

Is a 3 man entity operating from home with 2 bikes trading commercially with no company registrarion going to get the refund?
Is a 10 man entity operating from a premise with 4 bikes trading commercially with no company registration going to get the refund?
What about a partnership?
What about sole traders?
What about holding companies that don't trade?
What about commercial trusts (as opposed to person trusts - which look the same to an external entity)?

Can you see how complex the legislation would start becoming?

[Molly]

(And who are you calling a pie-eater?)

You've not met me, have you... ?

[MarkyMark]

Not if ACC was done by petrol at the pump

This would unfairly penalise drivers of big fuel inefficient vehicles and let bikes continue to be subsidised by other road users.

Personally, I think this would be a great idea :p but you can see why it's going to meet a lot of resistance.

[peasea]

[QUOTE=Molly;1129457577]I'd like to submit a letter of my own. Exactly who are we addressing this to? Maybe I'll ask in 'General'.

Edit. Sent this:


QUOTE]

I put this together today, I thought the date for submissions was October 2nd, but that was to the Minister of Transport, not ACC. This is for ACC, see how we go. Anyone is welcome to cut and paste it, add your own details at the top etc...

ACC levies submission

To Whom It May Concern:

The proposed increase in ACC levies for motorcycles is excessive and needs to be reviewed immediately.

While it is generally accepted that some sort of increase is necessary the amount suggested is unacceptable. Many accidents involving motorcycles are caused by operators of other vehicles and for motorcyclists to be called upon to pay for others’ mistakes is grossly unfair. The ACC scheme is touted as being a ‘no-fault’ system yet ACC singles out motorcyclists as being ‘high risk’. Motorists who are proven to cause motorcycle accidents should, in fact, have their levies increased.

Furthermore, many large displacement motorcycles are not used for commuting on a daily basis, greatly reducing their on-road time and therefore reducing their ‘risk factor’. Sports injuries cost New Zealand millions of dollars every year but there would appear to be little financial input from players who might need medical treatment and lengthy, costly rehabilitation.

Motorcycles relieve traffic congestion and produce a smaller carbon footprint than automobiles; in a time when it is important for people to make every effort to reduce emissions motorcycle usage should be encouraged, rather than having it discouraged through excessive levying. The proposal to increase the ACC levy to the level suggested could push many riders into automobiles, which would be a major leap backward in terms of traffic congestion and air quality.

If the New Zealand Government is serious about reducing emissions and relieving traffic congestion then its support for motorcycle usage is imperative. However, the ACC levy proposal is counter-productive to this and should be reviewed forthwith.

Yours etc………

[skidz]

Who the hell voted these idiots into parliament? They always class it as a Motorcycle accident, as with trucks getting blamed when it's usually those car drivers that don't know how to scan the road. I had a car pull out in front of me in Palmy the other day and had to brake heavy to avoid it. There was a cop two cars back from him and he took off after him. If I had of hit him, I suppose it would have been another bike accident to go on the record to boost the ACC levy.:finger:

[sasfmj]

come on every one sign the petition !!!!!

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/MRACCLPH

[sasfmj]

come on every one sign the petition !!!!!

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/MRACCLPH

and spread the work about it lets fill it up !!!!!!!

[sasfmj]

come on every one sign the petition !!!!!

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/MRACCLPH

and spread the work about it lets fill it up !!!!!!!

[NighthawkNZ]

This would unfairly penalise drivers of big fuel inefficient vehicles and let bikes continue to be subsidised by other road users.


We already pay a small ammount of ACC in petrol... but remember ACC is a no fault system, there will also be one group that subsides another...and we are all subsiding cyclists... you forget your rego is not the only ACC you pay, PAYE ACC have to be taken in to consideration, as it covers all you mishaps that you do no matter how dangerous or stupid, and also cover you riding your motorcycle and driving a car... So there is no way of knowing the true ammount of ACC bikers truly pay

Bikers also own cars and many own 2 or 3 cars and or 2 or 3 bikes which does not show on the car acc stats it lumps all registered vehicles together not seperating how many of those registered cars also own a registered bike and when you can only ride one at a time...

[carver]

some of you people are idiots.
you think its ok to presecute another group...
you already know how it feels!

oh, its ok, so long as it aint me!

[Coldrider]

some of you people are idiots.
you think its ok to presecute another group...
you already know how it feels!

oh, its ok, so long as it aint me!Prosecute, .....or Persecute, there is a difference.

[bru62]

hey this is my take it sucks we gotta pay 750 or what eva what evar we do they will charge someone because this is the amount of money they need.(acc)it being fair enough we all want the best healthcare right? the thing is the cost needs to be spread around everyone rugby,cycling,karate anyone that belongs to a club, that claim any kind of gov fund? and if you own more than one vechile the others you have should be on a sliding scale eg only drive weekends,weekly commuter etc...and at the petrol pump, if they take alittle from everyone we wouldnt notice it to much. take the taxcut back im sure no one really noticed

peace out

[peasea]

Prosecute, .....or Persecute, there is a difference.

He wrote 'presecute'. That's when you hassle the crap out of someone BEFORE you take them to court. (Cops do it all the time, it's an art form for them.)