Third party vs ACC

[Ozzie]

Not that I'm advocating privatisation of ACC, but, just as an exercise, compared my current car v's my current bike for Third Party insurance in Australia.

This was with no discounts other than no claims bonus, as both would have been impacted the same any way.

Interesting point to note is that the bike with all insurers is cheaper than the car.

Do you think that has something to do with the number of people hurt by bikes at fault Mr Smith?

Loaded them up as jpg, copy and paste didn't work, damn it.

Note: New law in NSW provides for lifetime care, similar to ACC.

[Laxi]

vague question. from what I understand your comparing 3rd party insurance in aussie which covers damage to other vehicle, party or property to a "compensation" sceme designed to cover injuries alone. you can consider ACC as paying for all parties involved but it also charges them each levies,
in aussie you also have medicare which covers public health system, this is paid with your taxes, if you get hit by a car and that person dosn't have insurance you're pretty well screwed unless you have full insurance youself, just like if your car gets hit here, I've never met an aussie who didn't prefer our system

[Ozzie]

vague question. from what I understand your comparing 3rd party insurance in aussie which covers damage to other vehicle, party or property to a "compensation" sceme designed to cover injuries alone. you can consider ACC as paying for all parties involved but it also charges them each levies,
in aussie you also have medicare which covers public health system, this is paid with your taxes, if you get hit by a car and that person dosn't have insurance you're pretty well screwed unless you have full insurance youself, just like if your car gets hit here, I've never met an aussie who didn't prefer our system

First let me say that I'm am arguing the price differencial between car and bike, not that ACC is bad or should be privatised. Mr Smith has it arse about face.

CTP insurance, or Green Slip (in parts of OZ) is compulary insurance to cover personal injury claims against you as the at fault driver. Basically for compensation. It is completely separate to 3rd party property.

(Kind of similar except reverse to ACC, which charges you insurance to cover your own injuries it would seem.)

Medicare is exactly that, it covers medical (all medical) not just injury.

With the CTP, unless you pay more, you as the "at fault" driver are not covered, unless you have your own income protection insurance, or you are catstophically injured.

This would be why I would rate ACC better on the surface. It includes income protection, as well as rehab and the medical, or at least some/most of it.

I am an aussie, and I live here, and would agree at a basic level that ACC is better. There are pro's and con's between the OZ way and the Kiwi way, but I'm not here to argue that.

[Ixion]

Do you think that has something to do with the number of people hurt by bikes at fault Mr Smith


yep. that's why

Third party , the insurer pays out for injuries you CAUSE. So, someone says, "that guy you've insured hurt me. give me money" And the insurance company has to pay out.

ACC , they pay for injuries you SUFFER. So you say "I'm hurt. Give me money". Other way round, see.

Now, in the nature of things, a bike is much less likely to hurt OTHER people in a crash than a car. Bike and car tangle, regardless of fault 9 times out of 10, it'll be the rider comes off (much) worse.

So, in an insurance model, bikes are cheap, because the insurer is not likely to get many people saying "That biker hurt me" . A few sure, but much less than a car.

ACC, it's the reverse. We get the worst of both worlds, because any accident, we're probably going to get hurt, and even if it's not our fault ACC still charge it against us.

[Ozzie]

however, that all comes unstuck when the car carries 5 or more people, hits the bike (or worse another car full of 5 or more people), then you have 10 injured or killed.

Take the pissed teenager on the weekend for example. Or the little kid killed today (GRHS).

The fact is, in the flavour of ACC there is no fault, but there sure as shit is a victim.

If victims should pay, there needs to be a re-write, if not, there needs to be a re-write.

Complete propaganda, sounds like a John Key version of the war against WMD's FFS.

[kwaka_crasher]

vague question. from what I understand your comparing 3rd party insurance in aussie which covers damage to other vehicle, party or property to a "compensation" sceme designed to cover injuries alone.

Common mistake but what Australians refer to as 3rd party (CTP or compulsory third party or green slip) is the personal injury insurance you're required to carry, not the 3rd party property damage insurance people in NZ call 3rd party.

[Clockwork]

So when ACC/Government/Stroppy motorists/AA say "its only fair, why should car drivers subsidise your injury costs?" we should reply "Just be thankfull we were riding a bike else they would be your injury costs too"

In fact, by riding bikes..... we are potentially saving ACC Money because whenever we're bowled and not at fault, the overall medical costs associated with the accident are probably lower!!