Price-affordable BHS test in Wellington?

[Vic]

Hi,

I need to take the BHS test to get my NZ license. I've been driving with my International drive permit, but it is going to expire, and I can't convert it to a NZ license... So need to start from the beginning again.

I've been searching for BHS test in Welly, and prices goes from $120 to $180. I think that's annoying, and some instructors abuse on the fact that the BHS is mandatory to get the license.
I only need to take the exam, I've been riding more than 6.000km across NZ roads, so it should be no problem passing the exam.

Anyone knows an affordable instructor to pass my BHS test?.

Thanks!

[Tricia1000]

Yep, get in touch with Andrew Templeton of Roadsafe riding techniques. But the BHS changed late last year, and now it is not so easy to pass, if you just rock up for the test.... There is still lots to learn..
Tricia1000
RoADA (Dip)
Consultant to NZTA


Hi,

I need to take the BHS test to get my NZ license. I've been driving with my International drive permit, but it is going to expire, and I can't convert it to a NZ license... So need to start from the beginning again.

I've been searching for BHS test in Welly, and prices goes from $120 to $180. I think that's annoying, and some instructors abuse on the fact that the BHS is mandatory to get the license.
I only need to take the exam, I've been riding more than 6.000km across NZ roads, so it should be no problem passing the exam.

Anyone knows an affordable instructor to pass my BHS test?.

Thanks!

[FJRider]

I've been searching for BHS test in Welly, and prices goes from $120 to $180. I think that's annoying, and some instructors abuse on the fact that the BHS is mandatory to get the license.


If you think that's annoying ... wait until you see the Registration costs.

Quit winging ... and do the test.

The International permit lasts a year I think ... you've had plenty of time ...

[Erelyes]

BHS itself I found not too difficult. The main thing is to fully understand what you have to do in each of the tests.

Study this until you can recite each stage from memory. Practice in a parking lot too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqpT2cbTfx8

Mine was an 'extra' $60 on top of a $90 lesson, but for just a BHST $120 sounds about right. Bear in mind your instructor has to organise a venue, drive to wherever you're doing it, lay out the course, etc etc

[Vic]

Thanks for the advice. I'll try to take the course on Roadsafe.
Are the instructors friendly and clear?, because I'm from overseas and for us is very hard to undersand kiwi english.

thanks!

[sinfull]

Thanks for the advice. I'll try to take the course on Roadsafe.
Are the instructors friendly and clear?, because I'm from overseas and for us is very hard to undersand kiwi english.

thanks!
Bloody poms

It aint rocket science, you can either drive or ya caint !

Stop freekin winging !

[Tricia1000]

Yep, they are excellent. They know their stuff, unlike some others who wing it a bit

Tricia1000
RoADA (Dip)
Consultant to NZTA


Thanks for the advice. I'll try to take the course on Roadsafe.
Are the instructors friendly and clear?, because I'm from overseas and for us is very hard to undersand kiwi english.

thanks!

[Vic]

I've booked for April 1st on Lower Hutt!!. If other new KB members have booked, we can meet there!.

[blackdog]

I've booked for April 1st on Lower Hutt!!. If other new KB members have booked, we can meet there!.

Good luck Vic. They do not come any more highly recommended than Andrew, he is a master rider and a good bloke too!

[davereid]

Yep, get in touch with Andrew Templeton of Roadsafe riding techniques.

Andrew Templeton should be avoided at all costs.

He is very much pro ACC and is pushing hard for compulsory hi-viz, ATGATT etc.

Safety Nazis like Mr. Templeton will end motorcycling, while convinced they are saving it.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10871305

[GTRMAN]

Andrew Templeton should be avoided at all costs.

He is very much pro ACC and is pushing hard for compulsory hi-viz, ATGATT etc.

Safety Nazis like Mr. Templeton will end motorcycling, while convinced they are saving it.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10871305


Load of absolute shite. Know Andrew well do you?

[davereid]

Load of absolute shite. Know Andrew well do you?

He may be a nice guy. Doesn't change his politics.

"Additional legal safety standards and compulsory safety training were desperately needed, said Roadsafe Motorcycle Riding Techniques chief instructor Andrew Templeton......The only existing legally-required safety gear for motorcyclists is a helmet......As with most things, unless it's made into law they won't do it. We've got no law, we can't enforce it so we have no standard,'' said Mr Templeton.

[GTRMAN]

He may be a nice guy. Doesn't change his politics.

"Additional legal safety standards and compulsory safety training were desperately needed, said Roadsafe Motorcycle Riding Techniques chief instructor Andrew Templeton......The only existing legally-required safety gear for motorcyclists is a helmet......As with most things, unless it's made into law they won't do it. We've got no law, we can't enforce it so we have no standard,'' said Mr Templeton.

Whether he is a nice guy or not has nothing to do with it. Someone advocating additional training and the wearing of safety gear (gloves, jacket etc) makes them a safety nazi?

Just perhaps he has helped mop up the remains of too many muppets who think shorts and a t shirt are good enough.

[davereid]

Whether he is a nice guy or not has nothing to do with it. Someone advocating additional training and the wearing of safety gear (gloves, jacket etc) makes them a safety nazi?

Just perhaps he has helped mop up the remains of too many muppets who think shorts and a t shirt are good enough.

He not advocating additional training and ATGATT.

He advocating law changes to make it compulsory.

That's what makes him a safety nazi.

[GTRMAN]

He not advocating additional training and ATGATT.

He advocating law changes to make it compulsory.

That's what makes him a safety nazi.

And the problem with making it compulsory is?

Are you saying that if it were not compulsory you wouldn't wear a helmet?

[FJRider]

And the problem with making it compulsory is?[

Fewer chances for Darwins theory applicants to prove/disprove their case for continued existence ...


Are you saying that if it were not compulsory you wouldn't wear a helmet?

It would depend entirely on how it is written into legislation ... and its requirements. And it may not be a motorcyclist writing the legislation.

[davereid]

And the problem with making it compulsory is?

Are you saying that if it were not compulsory you wouldn't wear a helmet?

Thats what safety nazis do. They use compulsion to make other people safer. Right now, we are looking at a safety nazi wanting to make motorcycling safer by forcing safety on everyone. It will work too. It will make motorcycling a little safer.

But eventually, we embolden the next nazi. Who wont be trying to make motorcycling safer. He will want to make transport safer.

So he will want me in a volvo, not on a suzuki.

And yes, for what its worth, I often do things that are not best health and safety practice for fun. I may drink a beer more than I need, have unprotected sex, or go for a quiet ride down a country lane helmetless.

Its my life see, my head, my belly, my liver and my cock. I want some choice in how I use them.

[Karl08]

Twas once upon a time that seat belts were not compulsory....I wonder how many people those have saved?

Or should that have been left optional?

Am I equating hi-vis vests to seat belts? No.

Am I wanting to drive a volvo instead of ride the Bandit? No.

Should I consider options that lessen the chance of my daughters seeing me buried? Yes.

Good on anyone who advocates for safety.

[GTRMAN]

Thats what safety nazis do. They use compulsion to make other people safer. Right now, we are looking at a safety nazi wanting to make motorcycling safer by forcing safety on everyone. It will work too. It will make motorcycling a little safer.

But eventually, we embolden the next nazi. Who wont be trying to make motorcycling safer. He will want to make transport safer.

So he will want me in a volvo, not on a suzuki.

And yes, for what its worth, I often do things that are not best health and safety practice for fun. I may drink a beer more than I need, have unprotected sex, or go for a quiet ride down a country lane helmetless.

Its my life see, my head, my belly, my liver and my cock. I want some choice in how I use them.


Yes it is your choice. But if one of your children were to take up riding, would you want them to be the safest they could be when on the road? If you were to come off your bike on that quiet country lane and grind half your face off would you expect to have the resultant medical care funded by the tax payer?

You see personal choice is fantastic and a God given right, but it goes hand in hand with personal responsibility. So if you exercise your choice, why should that be at the expense of someone else?

I don't think there is any argument that wearing a helmet lessons the chances of head injury, the same for bike specific clothing like armoured jackets,gloves, pants and boots etc. People sometimes choose not to wear the right gear.... 'no worries she'll be right' And sometimes the unthinkable happens... and she's not right.

Again, it's your choice, but don't bag someone who spends most of their time trying to train people to be safe, maybe they know a thing or two.

[davereid]

Yes it is your choice. But if one of your children were to take up riding, would you want them to be the safest they could be when on the road? If you were to come off your bike on that quiet country lane and grind half your face off would you expect to have the resultant medical care funded by the tax payer?

You see personal choice is fantastic and a God given right, but it goes hand in hand with personal responsibility. So if you exercise your choice, why should that be at the expense of someone else?

I don't think there is any argument that wearing a helmet lessons the chances of head injury, the same for bike specific clothing like armoured jackets,gloves, pants and boots etc. People sometimes choose not to wear the right gear.... 'no worries she'll be right' And sometimes the unthinkable happens... and she's not right.

Again, it's your choice, but don't bag someone who spends most of their time trying to train people to be safe, maybe they know a thing or two.

Andrew doesn't want it to be my choice. He wants everything to be compulsory. Im not bagging the man by the way, simply his attitude that we require compulsion.

Wearing a helmet is a great safety aid. Depending on what you read, it increases my chance of surviving a crash by two, possibly two and a half times. (Not thats its a binary. Survival doesn't mean not brain injured, it just means alive.)

But if Andrew has the "right" to make me wear safety gear for a two and a half time improvement in survival rates, he will be way out of his league when the next safety nazi wants to ban motorcycles for a 22 times improvement.

Cos thats what safety nazis do. They ban the most dangerous thing. And once its banned its not the most dangerous thing anymore. Something else is. So they try to ban that too.

[GTRMAN]

Andrew doesn't want it to be my choice. He wants everything to be compulsory. Im not bagging the man by the way, simply his attitude that we require compulsion.

Wearing a helmet is a great safety aid. Depending on what you read, it increases my chance of surviving a crash by two, possibly two and a half times. (Not thats its a binary. Survival doesn't mean not brain injured, it just means alive.)

But if Andrew has the "right" to make me wear safety gear for a two and a half time improvement in survival rates, he will be way out of his league when the next safety nazi wants to ban motorcycles for a 22 times improvement.

Cos thats what safety nazis do. They ban the most dangerous thing. And once its banned its not the most dangerous thing anymore. Something else is. So they try to ban that too.

Sorry I must have missed the part that pronounced him emperor. Seems like you are reading a lot into a single line quote on an article.

So why, in your opinion, was the wearing of a helmet made compulsory?

[Tricia1000]

Well said. and as I was quoted in the same newspaper article, that Andrew spoke in, I started teaching people how to be safer motorcyclists, because I have seen, (during my other life, as a nurse in the Operating Theatre) all too often, the injuries that occur, when proper gear isn't worn, and riders are somewhat unskilled in motorcycle best practice (for want of a better word)

Yes, it is your own choice, but if you have just slid down the road on your arse for 100 metres, not only will you end up looking forward to 10-15 years worth of very painful skin grafts, (if your only injury is severe road rash) but you will probably require a whole heap of blood, that scores of people have donated, so that we (medical staff) get a better chance to save your life.... And whilst you are recovering ACC is paying out huge amounts of money to keep you fed, housed, cared for, medical bills etc., as well as impact on your family, and all because you thought it was safe to ride in an irresponsible manner, with irresponsible values.

The worst injury that I have ever seen, was on a guy about 19 or 20. He was just wearing normal clothes on his bike, and so was his pillion. They had both been drinking. The rider thought it was safe to overtake the car that he was following....

He misjudged the gap between the car he wanted to overtake, and the on coming vehicle...
as his handle bars connected with the back of the vehicle in front, he was propelled over the handlebars, and completely DEGLOVED his entire groin and scrotal area on the handlebars!!!

He was left without any skin, from just under his belly button, to the top of his thighs.
His penis was stripped of 70% of it's skin, his scrotal sac was so badly mangled, it needed to be removed (what was left of it). When we had done all we could for him, for that day, he had just two testes dangling at the bottom of his vas....
He became a frequent flyer in theatre, for 6 monthly skin grafts, that went on for another 5 years, until I left that hospital.. (so, obviously he was unable to work, huge impact on close family)
He would never be a father.....
His pillion was killed......

The rider would have escaped from serious injury, if he had been wearing motorcycle gear...

Finally, although you (davereid) may think that it is your business alone, whether you ride with or without gear, or ride with or without training or safety in mind, then it is a reasonably selfish view. Someone somewhere, (your Mother, Father, Sister, Brother, SO, other relatives and friends love you. You have a responsibility, to them, to come home in the same condition that you went out in..
Motorcycling IS DANGEROUS in the wrong hands, or even in the right hands, but the wrong frame of mind.. Once you respect the motorcycle for it's risks, then riding it is an exciting and much anticipated event..
*Steps down from soap box, and ducks for cover, in anticipation of the expected canned worms *

Tricia1000
RoADA (Dip)
Consultant to NZTA


Yes it is your choice. But if one of your children were to take up riding, would you want them to be the safest they could be when on the road? If you were to come off your bike on that quiet country lane and grind half your face off would you expect to have the resultant medical care funded by the tax payer?

You see personal choice is fantastic and a God given right, but it goes hand in hand with personal responsibility. So if you exercise your choice, why should that be at the expense of someone else?

I don't think there is any argument that wearing a helmet lessons the chances of head injury, the same for bike specific clothing like armoured jackets,gloves, pants and boots etc. People sometimes choose not to wear the right gear.... 'no worries she'll be right' And sometimes the unthinkable happens... and she's not right.

Again, it's your choice, but don't bag someone who spends most of their time trying to train people to be safe, maybe they know a thing or two.

[davereid]

Sorry I must have missed the part that pronounced him emperor. Seems like you are reading a lot into a single line quote on an article. So why, in your opinion, was the wearing of a helmet made compulsory?

I am most certainly not bagging the man, I get the feeling he has a genuine and well focused belief that compulsory safety gear will help motorcycling survive.

Sadly I see it as the beginning of the end.

Americans will still be fighting helmet laws and riding, while we will have had helmets, compulsory lights on, compulsory hi viz, compulsory ABS, compulsory rider training etc etc.

Eventually we will find that no amount of safety gear makes a motorcycle as safe as a car.

And if we haven't established that we have the right to do something that is a bit unsafe, just for pleasure, then we won't have a leg to stand on when we loose our right to ride.

Thats the issue here. Motorcycling will never be safe. We need to stay whoa, hands off my pleasures.

You asked the question would I want my kids to be safe. Of course.

But thats the thing here.

For everyone who describes a motorcyclists without as ATGATT as a darwin candidate, there are 20 car drivers describing motorcylists with ATGATT the same way.


Its a case of perspective. You think a motorcycle is "safe enough" to ride with all the gear. But its not. Its still 18 to 22 times more dangerous than a car.

To me, thats an acceptable risk. But it has to remain my decision what level of risk I am able to take, to enjoy my life.

[GTRMAN]

I am most certainly not bagging the man, I get the feeling he has a genuine and well focused belief that compulsory safety gear will help motorcycling survive.

Sadly I see it as the beginning of the end.

Americans will still be fighting helmet laws and riding, while we will have had helmets, compulsory lights on, compulsory hi viz, compulsory ABS, compulsory rider training etc etc.

Eventually we will find that no amount of safety gear makes a motorcycle as safe as a car.

And if we haven't established that we have the right to do something that is a bit unsafe, just for pleasure, then we won't have a leg to stand on when we loose our right to ride.

Thats the issue here. Motorcycling will never be safe. We need to stay whoa, hands off my pleasures.

You asked the question would I want my kids to be safe. Of course.

But thats the thing here.

For everyone who describes a motorcyclists without as ATGATT as a darwin candidate, there are 20 car drivers describing motorcylists with ATGATT the same way.


Its a case of perspective. You think a motorcycle is "safe enough" to ride with all the gear. But its not. Its still 18 to 22 times more dangerous than a car.

To me, thats an acceptable risk. But it has to remain my decision what level of risk I am able to take, to enjoy my life.

I think you'll find that safety gear WILL help save a life, or reduce the severity of an altercation. The point made in the article was that many do not wear it, because they are not legally obliged to.

So if I can quote you.. "For everyone who describes a motorcyclists without as ATGATT as a darwin candidate, there are 20 car drivers describing motorcylists with ATGATT the same way"

This would seem to be a fitting argument for people both wearing the correct gear and getting the right training.

[davereid]

I think you'll find that safety gear WILL help save a life, or reduce the severity of an altercation. The point made in the article was that many do not wear it, because they are not legally obliged to.

Playing devils advocate, I agree that safety gear WILL help save a life, or reduce the severity of an altercation.

But motorcycling is not necessary. Its mostly done for pleasure, and doesn't need to be part of any modern transport solution.

It would be so much safer and effective just to ban motorcycles.

We would get an overnight 18 - 22x instant improvement in safety outcomes, over the alternative - a fully trained, helmeted and ATGATTED motorcyclists.

No more selfish people like me that think that it is my business alone, to choose an inherently unsafe vehicle when there are perfectly good cars available.

Someone somewhere, (your Mother, Father, Sister, Brother, SO, other relatives and friends loves me... I have a responsibility, to them, to come home in the same condition that you went out in.... and riding a motorcycle is an unnecessary risk, that I simply don't need to take.

Motorcycling IS DANGEROUS in the wrong hands, or even in the right hands.... and a total ban is the best outcome.


Every reason we have to use compulsion to make people wear safety gear, is exactly the same justification that will be used to ban motorcycles.

[Nasty]

I think you'll find that safety gear WILL help save a life, or reduce the severity of an altercation. The point made in the article was that many do not wear it, because they are not legally obliged to.

So if I can quote you.. "For everyone who describes a motorcyclists without as ATGATT as a darwin candidate, there are 20 car drivers describing motorcylists with ATGATT the same way"

This would seem to be a fitting argument for people both wearing the correct gear and getting the right training.


Please let me correct you.

Safety gear contributes to saving lives. IT WILL NOT SAVE LIVES.

My (late) partner wore awesome safety gear and died. Does that mean that he should have lived?

It does contributes to the reduction of the injuries and severity or injuries sustained should the rider have an accident. But the reality is that if you end up breaking 16 ribs, puncturing a lung, rupturing your spleen, unless you are really close to a tertiary hospital little can be done to save you.

[GTRMAN]

Please let me correct you.

Safety gear contributes to saving lives. IT WILL NOT SAVE LIVES.

My (late) partner wore awesome safety gear and died. Does that mean that he should have lived?

It does contributes to the reduction of the injuries and severity or injuries sustained should the rider have an accident. But the reality is that if you end up breaking 16 ribs, puncturing a lung, rupturing your spleen, unless you are really close to a tertiary hospital little can be done to save you.

First of all, I am sorry for your loss, nothing can replace a loved one gone before their time. However I did say that safety gear will help, but only help.

[ELectronicFlesh]

I've done some research and here is a comparative list of services in Wellington which provide a tuition course from no experience all the way to passing the BHS test-including bike and partial gear hire. Here is a list with their comprehensive course pricing:

$335 Streetwisenz (http://www.streetwisenz.co.nz/basic-handling-skills.html)
$390 Roadsafe (http://bookwhen.com/roadsafe)

Edit:
This list was comprehensive of google's results for Wellington BHS tests, I've removed many which were on here due to them actually being based in Auckland. We need more BHS test providers in Welly.

[nzspokes]

I agree that gear wont save lives but helps prevent injuries becoming more life threatening than they already are. My partners crash in which she flew/slide 18m at 80 kph resulted 4 pelvic fractures, two broken wrists, cracked L5, bruised spleen. And on top of that she only had one cut from the foot peg of the bike. Yes most of her fractures were compound but there was no other skin injury. At the crash scene if she had significant skin trauma I very much doubt she would have lived. As a case in point her back protector heavily damaged. The crack to her L5 was considered insignificant and needed no treatment. I doubt that would be the case had she not had it on.

I now don't ride anywhere without a back protector.

But in saying that I don't believe the gear should be compulsory. Education would be better, compulsion will make people buy cheap shit gear.

[Erelyes]

But in saying that I don't believe the gear should be compulsory. Education would be better, compulsion will make people buy cheap shit gear.

Perhaps, but I think that saying "cheap shit gear" isn't fair.

A cheap pair of leather gloves will still do a ton better than bare hands. Spending 5x as much will give only a moderate improvement compared to that. So what if people buy cheap gear? The only people buying the cheap gear are those who would otherwise be wearing nothing, and still get a large increase in protection. Low hanging fruit.

Doesn't affect those who have already spent or would spend 3x (or more) as much for a moderate increase over that. At least not directly.

[Maki]

BHS itself I found not too difficult. The main thing is to fully understand what you have to do in each of the tests.

Study this until you can recite each stage from memory. Practice in a parking lot too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqpT2cbTfx8

Mine was an 'extra' $60 on top of a $90 lesson, but for just a BHST $120 sounds about right. Bear in mind your instructor has to organise a venue, drive to wherever you're doing it, lay out the course, etc etc


Thanks for the video, very interesting. I find the test inadequate, since all it really tests is your ability to take a turn of a certain radius and make an emergency stop from 20km/h. I would at the very least suggest an emergency stop from 50km/h and if you do not stop within a reasonable distance you fail.

I had my bhs with Andrew and I recommend him highly. I got the feeling that he actually cared about me and wanted me to be safe. (Please do not judge Andrew by my current riding. It's been years since my bhs and he is in no way responsible for it.)

[Vic]

Playing devils advocate, I agree that safety gear WILL help save a life, or reduce the severity of an altercation.

But motorcycling is not necessary. Its mostly done for pleasure, and doesn't need to be part of any modern transport solution.

It would be so much safer and effective just to ban motorcycles.

We would get an overnight 18 - 22x instant improvement in safety outcomes, over the alternative - a fully trained, helmeted and ATGATTED motorcyclists.

No more selfish people like me that think that it is my business alone, to choose an inherently unsafe vehicle when there are perfectly good cars available.

Someone somewhere, (your Mother, Father, Sister, Brother, SO, other relatives and friends loves me... I have a responsibility, to them, to come home in the same condition that you went out in.... and riding a motorcycle is an unnecessary risk, that I simply don't need to take.

Motorcycling IS DANGEROUS in the wrong hands, or even in the right hands.... and a total ban is the best outcome.


Every reason we have to use compulsion to make people wear safety gear, is exactly the same justification that will be used to ban motorcycles.



I've been living in NZ for a few months, and all I can say is that this is the "licences" country. You need a licence for almost everything u want to do!!. And every licence hides a business behind it. Someone is making good money thanks to laws, acts and licences.

I think safety gear is great, but incredibly expensive. And if a law enforses its use, it will be more expensive too!. Bike shops will abuse on the fact that if you don't have safety gear, u can't ride.
And why not to have a WOF for your safety gear???. U will need a WOF. NZTA must be sure that the gear u are wearing is in good condition. So now, every six month u have to pay for "wofing" your jacket, gloves and trousers?.

Nobody will ban motorcycles, they will only try to get all our money. We are good business for the government :(

[Milts]

I've been living in NZ for a few months, and all I can say is that this is the "licences" country. You need a licence for almost everything u want to do!!. And every licence hides a business behind it. Someone is making good money thanks to laws, acts and licences.

I think safety gear is great, but incredibly expensive. And if a law enforses its use, it will be more expensive too!. Bike shops will abuse on the fact that if you don't have safety gear, u can't ride.
And why not to have a WOF for your safety gear???. U will need a WOF. NZTA must be sure that the gear u are wearing is in good condition. So now, every six month u have to pay for "wofing" your jacket, gloves and trousers?.

Nobody will ban motorcycles, they will only try to get all our money. We are good business for the government :(

If you've been in germany or the netherlands, you'll know that the money made from the NZ licence system is NOTHING compared to many other countries.

In Germany it costs thousands and thousands of euros to get a licence. This includes 14 theory classes, 12 practical classes, and a first aid certificate. But, it means you are a competent driver before you reach public roads, instead of learning to drive while on a public road (with nothing except an L plate for "safety").

EDIT: On top of which, the government outsources most of the licencing/vehicle inspection process. Which means, actually, none of that money (bar transaction tax) goes to the government, it goes to the business owners.

[davereid]

Which means, actually, none of that money (bar transaction tax) goes to the government, it goes to the business owners.

Business owners, who are often given monopoly or near monopoly businesses and are free to set their own charges.

Border vehicle inspection, COF inspection, Driver Licensing testing, Driver licence printing, driver licence photos, number plate manufacture, number plate issuing, road signage manufacture, personalised plates, the list goes on and on and on.

[Milts]

Business owners, who are often given monopoly or near monopoly businesses and are free to set their own charges.

Exactly. Long live Reaganism.

280681