BRONZ submission - draft

[Ixion]

Still needs checking, spelling etc. Definitely going to be some .

Open to review, especially if anyone wants to check the numbers - especially make sure I got them the right way round. My eyeballs are going in and out at the moment I'll review it tomorrow

I'll CONSIDER comments about content - removing or adding same . But only briefly it needs to go in tomorrow morning. Anything REALLY vital I've missed.

But I'm not getting into the Who causes the most crashes argument. Or the ones about the $77 etc. I don't really want to bat numbers about, they're not on our side. With the exception of the capacity thing where we can knock them down.

[yachtie10]

Well done


your table on page 9 needs some figures fixed

the table mentions 1988 twice i assume that the second should be 1998

the sentence above it
In fact the accident rate in 2008 was LOWER than that of 1998 and HALF that of 1998

should that be?
In fact the accident rate in 2008 was LOWER than that of 1998 and HALF that of 1988

mine will use some of your s if that is OK
Cheers

[NighthawkNZ]

Still needs checking, spelling etc. Definitely going to be some .

Main error I was was in one of the tables it had 1988 twice when the 2nd should 1998

but I not a proof reader

[Squiggles]

Education not legislation saves lives

[Jantar]

The 1988, 1998 error is in section 8. The other error i picked up was in section 10: "base don" should be "based on"

[riffer]

There's a number of grammatical and spelling errors. Give me ten minutes and I'll fix it up.

[Ronin]

I'm uncomfortable with the references to ACC managers driving big expensive flash cars. I personally feel that it detracts from what is otherwise a very well written, researched and presented document.

My 10 cents worth.

[riffer]

I'm not.

We've hear a lot lately about their large salaries. Let them know we ain't happy. :angry2:

Here's a new draft.

Grammar fixed, and laid out a bit nicer.

[MacD]

I'm uncomfortable with the references to ACC managers driving big expensive flash cars. I personally feel that it detracts from what is otherwise a very well written, researched and presented document.

My 10 cents worth.

Yes, I'd drop the ad hominem comments about flash cars as they too closely resemble the claims that "motorcycles are just toys" which you argue against.

I'd use the word "misrepresent" rather than "fudge and juggle" figures, as ACC can probably demonstrate how they calculate the figures. The issue is whether they are highly selective figures and used to misrepresent the situation to paint motorcyclists in a bad light to justify outrageous levy increases to other road users.

Otherwise thank you for putting together a well thought-out document.

[FastBikeGear]

Ixion some great points well made as always.

You make some comment on wanting the ACC to stop trying to be an insurance company and stick to the no fault Woodhouse principles and then you say....

"If I ride a Yamaha for 10000 kilometres a year I incur a certain risk of injury. And I, like every other motorcyclist am prepared to pay my fair contribution toward the cost of any injury consequent to that risk."

Do you want the Woodhouse principles or are you willing to accept and insurance style risk/premium business model for ACC? It seems a bit contradictory.

"Likewise again, failure to require diesel vehicles to have non return vales in their fuel lines" I think you could consider changing "fuel lines" "fuel filler necks".

Ixion, many thanks for the incredible efforts you have put into this campaign so far.

[phred]

SO - I also thought I would be helpful and fix up some formatting etc although I kept my hands off nearly all of the content. There were a couple of "ands" I couldn't leave alone.

Hope this was helpful or at least not irritating.

Well done Les. Next step Wellington.

[Squiggles]

The SMC submission is here (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1129505629#post1129505629)

[scissorhands]

Hooray for Bronz! Very impressive to see people with a passion and determination to fight for themselves and others. Hats off.

[FastBikeGear]

The SMC submission is here (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1129505629#post1129505629)

Brilliant and a grate rebutall to all the peeples who sed a unifersity edumication was a waist of time.

Seriously wonderful work guys!

[motorbyclist]

there are still a few typos here and there, but I do have a concern:


A levy based on driver’s licence would mean that risk was associated with the person and would lend itself to even more logical extensions, such as charging a higher levy for those with convictions or demerit points. This would be a very effective deterrent to unsafe driving


demerits can have little bearing on claim rate, which is the risk we refer to.

As soon as you introduce levies specific to the individual's history of claims, there is a fault assigned. No thanks, not without the right to sue, which is a process I'd like to avoid.

*amends my own one*

otherwise she looks good :niceone:

[candor]

Check e-ml. Send not sub in haste while tired... work more thru lunch then send on deadline! Impressive efforts KB.

[Pixie]

This submission should not just be wasted on ACC.
We should try to get it published as an article by in a major newspaper.
Can we get this done "as a right of reply" to the ACC ads

[Marmoot]

Saying that some users of the scheme must pay more than others because the former are “responsible” for costing the scheme more than the latter , is contrary to the foundation principles of the scheme and it also re-introduces the notion of fault into the scheme when it was set up in the first place to avoid it.

Thanks :) I see what you did there.
Let my name be in the anals of the history.

In a serious note, I assume copies will also be submitted to major newspapers and TV?

[Ixion]

Ixion some great points well made as always.

You make some comment on wanting the ACC to stop trying to be an insurance company and stick to the no fault Woodhouse principles and then you say....

"If I ride a Yamaha for 10000 kilometres a year I incur a certain risk of injury. And I, like every other motorcyclist am prepared to pay my fair contribution toward the cost of any injury consequent to that risk."

Do you want the Woodhouse principles or are you willing to accept and insurance style risk/premium business model for ACC? It seems a bit contradictory.

"Likewise again, failure to require diesel vehicles to have non return vales in their fuel lines" I think you could consider changing "fuel lines" "fuel filler necks".

Ixion, many thanks for the incredible efforts you have put into this campaign so far.


vales?

Yith. I anguished long over that phrase.

What I want to say is that motorcyclists are of course willing to pay their share. We are not intending to bludge off others. But we should not be specifically targeted to pay more.

Suggestions for revision are invited on that clause

[Marmoot]

And I, like every other motorcyclist , am prepared to pay my fair contribution toward the cost of any injury consequent to that risk.

I agree this sentence is contradictory to the intent of the letter, and it also would "give ACC guys ideas". You don't want to give them ideas.

I vote for deleting the sentence.

[motorbyclist]

remove it. I'm not prepared to pay my fair share if they reckon it's upwards of $500. The scooter population aren't even prepared to take basic safety measures such as wearing gloves, despite having a compartment to store them in.

[Ixion]

Final version, winging its way through cyberspace.

Various typos corrected, some comments amended, and a new (and potentially rather important ) section 11 added.

(nobody picked up the really bad error - where I said "there is correlation", but meant "there is no correlation" !)

[Ozzie]

nice mate, very well written.

[XP@]

Is there any reason why the submission does not include the "off-road" factor?
I understood that the off road bikes could not be extracted from their statistics.

Looking at the numbers it could explain why there is a really high cost for the 51 - 125cc class (after all who rides a bike that size on the road?) search on trademe and the answer is plain. The vast majority of bikes in this class are off roaders which are not registered for the road. The only genuine road bikes in this class are Japanese 1980's 125cc commuters.

Riders of these bikes will be young and untrained (or worse trained by family and friends: ref Hurt report). This would explain the accident rate double that of the highest class of road bikes.

[Ixion]

Because ACC simply deny it. We have our doubts but no explicit evidence to prove that off roaders end up in the wrong account.

If anyone can point me to such evidence I would be delighted to include it.

(there are quite a few 125cc and 80cc scooters)

[Squiggles]

section 11 added.

that theres' some good shit

[motorbyclist]

section 8

In fact the accident rate in 2008 was LOWER than that of 1998 and HALF that of 1998

the table also has two 1988s on it... and no 1998

I also made the point that as a proportion of crashes, the smaller bike component of the pre-1999 fleet will further throw the relativity figures.

[XP@]

Because ACC simply deny it. We have our doubts but no explicit evidence to prove that off roaders end up in the wrong account.

If anyone can point me to such evidence I would be delighted to include it.

(there are quite a few 125cc and 80cc scooters)

the 51-125 cc group is a stasticical anomily which should raise a question anyway

Do we have by engine size and age?
If we do and it shows riders < 15 year old then we have them.
If we do not have this informaiton then where the bloody hell is it?

[StoneY]

I said it before, and saying it again

Ixion for PM

The Angry Biker Party gets my vote!!!!!!! (just as legit as the Maori party I say)

Nice work Les, any dailies been asked to publish it yet?

:)

[Ixion]

section 8


the table also has two 1988s on it... and no 1998

I also made the point that as a proportion of crashes, the smaller bike component of the pre-1999 fleet will further throw the relativity figures.

Oops. Fixed

[motorbyclist]

Oops. Fixed

yep I just fixed that along with nearly ever green squiggly line (mostly pedantic crap about spaces being present before commas)

Very good work - now to get the public to read some of that, too.

[slofox]

The bikers of New Zealand owe you a huge vote of thanks Ixion. You have done well. Have a gold star from me...:sunny:

[FastBikeGear]

The bikers of New Zealand owe you a huge vote of thanks Ixion. You have done well. Have a gold star from me...:sunny:

+1 Many thanks Ixion.

[DidJit]

+1 Many thanks Ixion.

+1 again. :niceone:

[Reckless]

Hey Ixion

Just had a quick read should (Top of page 8)
To assign the 250cc learner machines into the same class as the powerful 60cc machines is silly, and will have a negative impact upon safety

Read Powerful 600cc machines?

A great effort thanks for your time and dedication Ixion!!!!

[Genestho]

Good work Les:yes:, check your email, sent a copy of our submissions your way. :) Completed just in time :sweatdrop

[Big Dave]

Do we have a non-draft copy yet Ix; foe of the Accs?

[motorbyclist]

Do we have a non-draft copy yet Ix; foe of the Accs?

the deadline was at 5pm today...

[Big Dave]

the deadline was at 5pm today...

Yeah - but which version do I publish.

[Ixion]

This one

Oh tits it won't let me upload it trwice. Stupid stupid stupid .

The one below dated 13:03.

[Big Dave]

Not with you - can you email it to me please.

[Ixion]

Sigh. You can tell he's Aussie, sho nuff.

Emailed

[Ixion]

The Intertubes say you do not exist !

And if it comes down to your word aginst the Intertubes , y'know who we gonna believe. You is dun wandered off reality again

Email me an email address for a you wot is in this reality.

(Or warp back to 1303 like I said in the first place)

[Big Dave]

OK - got it.

mail at davidcohen.co.nz is still good