ACC levies to be slashed - hope this includes bikes

[aum108]

Hi,

As part of the Government's "try and buy back some of the totally pissed-off voters" budget of 2014, it seems there are plans to slash motor vehicle ACC levies from next year.

Pray this includes finally restoring motorcycle ACC levies back to sane levels.

(To be fair, this should be geared to insurance data based on accident statistics for each make and model of bike, rather than those crude categories of 0-50cc, 51-250cc, 251-600cc, 601cc+ which didn't even consider the type of bike at all, or its crash stats.)

Fingers crossed, aye?

[awayatc]

cross your fingers all you like...........

we will never get unfucked.....

[FJRider]

(To be fair, this should be geared to insurance data based on accident statistics for each make and model of bike, rather than those crude categories of 0-50cc, 51-250cc, 251-600cc, 601cc+ which didn't even consider the type of bike at all, or its crash stats.)

Fingers crossed, aye?

And ... if ACC statistics show accident numbers are higher with over that 601 figure ... you would believe the Rego costs (ACC Levy included) be appropriate then .. ???

[Ocean1]

To be fair, this should be geared to insurance data based on accident statistics for each make and model of bike,

Actually, to be as fair as it's design brief intended it'd have fuck all to do with make and model of bike.

Or any other risk denominator.

[aum108]

cross your fingers all you like...........

we will never get unfucked.....

A few letters to Judith Collins from bikers, each saying something like "my vote tends to swing between National and Labour, but your decision to reform the anomalies with ACC biker premiums would definitely secure my vote, and that of a lot of my friends", might pissibly make a difference

[Berries]

might pissibly make a difference
You did not mean to but you got it right. Piss chance of making a difference.

[FJRider]

A few letters to Judith Collins from bikers, each saying something like "my vote tends to swing between National and Labour, but your decision to reform the anomalies with ACC biker premiums would definitely secure my vote, and that of a lot of my friends", might pissibly make a difference

Judith Colins has more on her plate to save than the financial gain of a few hundred thousand bikers ... her seat in Parliament for one ...

[Voltaire]

A few letters to Judith Collins from bikers, each saying something like "my vote tends to swing between National and Labour, but your decision to reform the anomalies with ACC biker premiums would definitely secure my vote, and that of a lot of my friends", might pissibly make a difference

so how is the letter going?:laugh:

be sure and post up the reply from Judith.

[aum108]

so how is the letter going?:laugh:

be sure and post up the reply from Judith.

Here's the letter below. I will post any replies I receive.


Attn: The Honourable Judith Collins, ACC Minister

Dear Minister,

I note that the 2014 Budget allows for some reduction in ACC levies, including those paid by motor vehicle owners.

This feels like a good occasion to draw to your attention a severe anomaly with current vehicle ACC levies, in relation to those applied to motorcycles.

The current motorcycle ACC levies regime, both in itself and in comparison to car levies, is unjust on many levels, and is overdue for review and rationalisation.

My main objections to the current charges are:

1. Assumption that fault for accidents lies mainly with motorcyclists

The current regime is based on the premise that since motorcyclists have a much higher per capita accident rate, that they should pay more for their ACC coverage. However, this approach fails to acknowledge that for a significant proportion of motorcycle crashes, fault actually lies with other vehicles, namely cars and trucks, involved in these crashes.

2. Simplistic rates based on engine size

This is a bizarre blunt instrument that fails to consider the type of motorcycle. For example, a two-stroke 250cc sport motorcycle is far riskier than a mellow 650cc cruiser motorcycle, yet the ACC levy paid for the 250cc two stroke sport bike is much lower than that paid for the sedate 650cc cruiser.

Variations in ACC levies for motorcycles should ideally be informed by insurance tables for individual motorcycle makes and models, which have evolved over time to reflect risk with maximum possible accuracy.

Yours sincerely

[Berries]

How do you spell deja vu?

[awayatc]

Can't remember...but have seen it before..

[Pixie]

FAT CHANCE! Just like Collins.
I heard she got caught by NZ Customs ,on her way back from her Chinese holiday, with 40kg of crack.....

[Trade_nancy]

FAT CHANCE! Just like Collins.
I heard she got caught by NZ Customs ,on her way back from her Chinese holiday, with 40kg of crack.....

Sheesh...I'd av thought her crack would've weighed more than that...

[aum108]

Here's the letter below. I will post any replies I receive.

Attn: The Honourable Judith Collins, ACC Minister
Dear Minister,
(yada yada)
Yours sincerely

Here's my first reply:

Good afternoon

On behalf of Hon Judith Collins, Minister for ACC, I acknowledge your email below. You can expect to receive a response from the Minister in due course.

Regards
Nancy Robbie

Nancy Robbie | ACC Private Secretary
Office of Hon Judith Collins | Minister of Justice | Minister for ACC | Minister of Ethnic Affairs | MP for Papakura

[TheDemonLord]

Here's my first reply:

Good afternoon

On behalf of Hon Judith Collins, Minister for ACC, I acknowledge your email below. You can expect to receive a response from the Minister in due course.

Regards
Nancy Robbie

Nancy Robbie | ACC Private Secretary
Office of Hon Judith Collins | Minister of Justice | Minister for ACC | Minister of Ethnic Affairs | MP for Papakura

I think your response should be something like this:

Dear Nancy,

Thank you for your prompt response - Do you take it up the Arse?

Thanks
Demon


- You are probably going to get a more truthful response for that question then you will for your actual request

[veldthui]

Hi,

As part of the Government's "try and buy back some of the totally pissed-off voters" budget of 2014, it seems there are plans to slash motor vehicle ACC levies from next year.

Pray this includes finally restoring motorcycle ACC levies back to sane levels.

(To be fair, this should be geared to insurance data based on accident statistics for each make and model of bike, rather than those crude categories of 0-50cc, 51-250cc, 251-600cc, 601cc+ which didn't even consider the type of bike at all, or its crash stats.)

Fingers crossed, aye?

Obviously I read a different one to you because the one I read only mentioned cars and no other form of vehicle.

[Katman]

My main objections to the current charges are:

1. Assumption that fault for accidents lies mainly with motorcyclists

The current regime is based on the premise that since motorcyclists have a much higher per capita accident rate, that they should pay more for their ACC coverage. However, this approach fails to acknowledge that for a significant proportion of motorcycle crashes, fault actually lies with other vehicles, namely cars and trucks, involved in these crashes.



You should take a good close look at motorcycle crash stats.

You might be unpleasantly surprised.

[aum108]

Dear Nancy,

Thank you for your prompt response - Do you take it up the Arse?

Thanks
Demon


Dear Demon,

Your social offer is noted. However, Parliamentary Services has established strict policies regarding intimate social communication over Parliamentary computer networks. Therefore, I must ask if you could please take this dialogue private, and send a picture of yourself, your bike, and a time/place in Wellington at which we can meet, to my personal email address: nancy.robbie419@hotmail.com

Regards
Nancy Robbie

Nancy Robbie | ACC Private Secretary
Office of Hon Judith Collins | Minister of Justice | Minister for ACC | Minister of Ethnic Affairs | MP for Papakura

[MrKiwi]

I think your response should be something like this:

Dear Nancy,

Thank you for your prompt response - Do you take it up the Arse?

Thanks
Demon


- You are probably going to get a more truthful response for that question then you will for your actual request

Why take it out on Nancy she's only doing her job, it's straight processing until someone in ACC can draft a reply for the Minister's consideration. It is those two we should be worried about.

[MrKiwi]

Sadly the changes do not affect bikes other than a reduction in petrol prices. Neither has ACC proposed to align the split between less than and over 600c to the LAMS approved 660cc power to weight ratio, which would make more sense in my mind.

Motorcycle levy rates stay the same and the $30 safety levy stays place, while cars get a weighted average 40% reduction based on a risk rating. I discussed with ACC the possibility of risk ratings for bikes with ABS and traction control as overseas data was indicating some good reductions in the rate and seriousness of accidents arising from motorcycle accidents where bikes are fitted with these technologies. Again no real interest.

In the details of the proposals ACC continue to misquote the 22 more times statement by saying motorcyclists are 22 times more likely to be involved in an accident. When will they learn! The 18-22 times more relates to a vulnerability index, not crash rate.

The same old, same old - not good enough really. :crazy:

[bogan]

Speaking of which, where the fuck are motonz on this (or any other) issue?

[MrKiwi]

Speaking of which, where the fuck are motonz on this (or any other) issue?

Not sure, I'm standing down, June is my last meeting and I did not make the previous one. Initially the Council preferred to comment on ACC levies but current thinking by most is that it is outside their remit. Technically that might be correct, but morally I have my doubts.

The reasons I am standing down are:
- I've done my stint and 3 and 1/2 years later it is time for me to move on. I've tried with some success to influence thinking around basing decisions on a good understand of the data (imperfections and all) and I personally put a lot of effort into the conspicuity work. The development of guidance material for road controlling authorities to have regard to needs of motorcyclists in the design and maintenance of roads is useful, but any benefits are a long time in coming.
- I now work in the new vehicle sector as the Chief Executive of the Motor Industry Association, a lobby group of companies that are the official NZ distributors of new cars, new trucks and new motorbikes. As such I need to take a more active role in lobbying ACC, and at times criticising them, something that was problematic while on the Council.

And finally, the appointment to the Council came at some personal cost in terms of criticism, but I expected that. I deliberately sought views on this forum at various points on the last 3 years. I generally appreciated the frankness of advice, and occasionally shook my head in disbelief at the head in sand arrogance of some members. Everyone is entitled to their views and opinions though.

I will remain a member of this forum, as foremost I am a motorcyclist. Through my work I still get opportunities to lobby and that I will continue to do, just from outside the tent now and not from the inside.

Cheers...

[Kiwi675]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/news/10350082/ACC-motor-vehicle-levy-cuts-confirmed




Hi,

As part of the Government's "try and buy back some of the totally pissed-off voters" budget of 2014, it seems there are plans to slash motor vehicle ACC levies from next year.

Pray this includes finally restoring motorcycle ACC levies back to sane levels.

(To be fair, this should be geared to insurance data based on accident statistics for each make and model of bike, rather than those crude categories of 0-50cc, 51-250cc, 251-600cc, 601cc+ which didn't even consider the type of bike at all, or its crash stats.)

Fingers crossed, aye?

[R650R]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/news/10350082/ACC-motor-vehicle-levy-cuts-confirmed

Note the bit about staggered levy based on cars risk factor... So unless your rich and can afford the latest car you prob wont get much off.
So whose funding the treatment cost for a pedestrian run over by the latest audi with seven airbags, oh that's right bikers will pick up the tab.

When a car crashes it often has more than one person inside, up to four plus the victims in the other vehicle they hit. A biker typically only injures himself and pillion at the most.

[davebullet]

TV3 has confirmed a brief item on today's ACC dscrimination protest will air on TV3 news tonight. Keep an eye out.

[blackdog]

TV3 has confirmed a brief item on today's ACC dscrimination protest will air on TV3 news tonight. Keep an eye out.

linky please?

[R650R]

We must have a few lawyers in the ranks... Surely we can use ACC's own propaganda and statements against them.
I think there is a case for Fraud to be answered in that they have said we cost them $$$ in claims due to x,y,z, when x,y,z numbers are not close to what they say.
We'd be screwed if they just said the levy for bikes is x$ you have to pay it. But they've spouted so much crap over the years I'm sure they've digged themselves a statistical hole that a good lawyer would have a field day with.
Now if only someone in 'dirty polotics' could get us inter dept emails... Even under an OIA request I bet there must be some careless ones in there where some hater has said lets screw the bikers over...

[MrKiwi]

We must have a few lawyers in the ranks... Surely we can use ACC's own propaganda and statements against them.
I think there is a case for Fraud to be answered in that they have said we cost them $$$ in claims due to x,y,z, when x,y,z numbers are not close to what they say.
We'd be screwed if they just said the levy for bikes is x$ you have to pay it. But they've spouted so much crap over the years I'm sure they've digged themselves a statistical hole that a good lawyer would have a field day with.
Now if only someone in 'dirty polotics' could get us inter dept emails... Even under an OIA request I bet there must be some careless ones in there where some hater has said lets screw the bikers over...

arguably they have been inconsistent with the stats, but sadly, based on the stats I've seen and analysed, even allowing for the most favourable interpretation for us riders we're still on the wrong side of the ledger with some way to go...

[James Deuce]

arguably they have been inconsistent with the stats, but sadly, based on the stats I've seen and analysed, even allowing for the most favourable interpretation for us riders we're still on the wrong side of the ledger with some way to go...

Those stats are based on the the most lax data collections standards possible and therefore moot. Any improvements made in the last 5 years to data collection only impact on the data collected durin gthat period and comparing it to previously collected data can only be used to demonstrate that the data collection methods have changed or improved. So the sample is still too small to avoid wild swings in apparent issues and the analysis of those issues caused by anomolous events.

Overall road deaths have decreased proportionally with improvements in vehicle safety, not driver training, not road rule changes, and have nothing to do with Policing. Motorcycle stats will only improve measurably for motorcyclists when other road users are required to look for motorcyclists and not use their vehicles as weapons. The only other measurable changes that can be made for motorcyclists to reduce the death and injury rates are roadside furniture changes and changes in attitudes by farmers and other people have the potential to litter the road with deadly objects.

There is little you can do to actively drop death and injury rates for motorcyclists as there is an achieveable level in practical changes. That bar is REALLY low as it relies on people wanting to be part of the solution. They don't. People hate change, particularly if it means acknowledging that their dearly held beliefs are just a crock of shit.

Lots more work needs to go into the intangible and indirect threats. Number one is the bullshit that goes on inside the average motorcyclist's head. Number 2 is the bullshit that goes on inside every other road user's head. Then we can talk about training and hi-vis (doesn't work) and ABS and TCS and practical enforcement changes and making farmers liable for wandering stock and freight companies liable for dropping shit on the road, both of the actual shit variety and the objects of a size large enough to unseat the unwary.

[MrKiwi]

You raise good points...

[vifferman]

To: Hon. Dr. Jonathan Coleman
Subject: The Unfair Nature of ACC Fees and other taxes

I know that it's not your portfolio, but I'm contacting you as my local MP, about the inherently and blatantly unfair nature of ACC fees.
My understanding is that the size of the levies is supposed to be related in some way to the associated risk. I also read that ACC fees had been reduced, or were supposed to be, due to the enormous excess in recent years of fees over outgoing payments.
Why is it then, that even though I can use only one (1) vehicle at a time, I nevertheless have to pay two (2!) lots of ACC components on my vehicle registration?
I use a motorcycle during the week to travel from Chatswood into the Auckland CBD, due to the abomination that is the only T3 Transit lane in NZ, so that's a total of 2.5 hours a week I am actually being 'risky'. For the privilege of being risky, I pay $427.18/year in ACC fees.
Of course, this is in addition to the ACC fees my computer software company owner employers pay on my behalf, in case I were to get RSI or the like.
By the way - I am 56 this year, not a "born again biker" (having been riding for over 40 years).
Occasionally I use my wagon on the weekends to fetch groceries or other materiel. I bought a very fuel-efficient late-model VW diesel, so the savings I make due to its thriftiness (which also benefits NZ's balance of payments) are more than entirely negated by a combination of paying 5.8c/km
RUCs (the same as a 4.5 tonne diesel truck), and $311 in ACC fees. Yay.
Yet another unfairness in the way we are taxed: classifying small, fuel-efficient diesel vehicles in the same category as trucks.
Way to go. Not!
Why can't the government at least shy away from professing to be fair, and come up with a more equitable system? Like, perhaps licencing the individual?
I was reading last night on a local biker forum that many of my fellow bikers are equally bemused by the government on the one hand talking about being fair, while using the other hand to help themselves to an apparently captive population's hard-earned wages in order to fix the results of their poor accounting skills?
Many of these guys (and girls) are enthusiasts, so have more than one bike (and sometimes one or more cars as well), so they too have to pay multiple ACC fees due to the increased danger of them travelling by several vehicles at the same time...
Anyway, that's enough ranting. I know the Government tries hard to balance the books, and in the unlikely event this year brings a change in our overlords it's very unlikely to be accompanied by any favourable changes to our tax burden. However, I have a strong sense of justice and what is / is not fair, and even if I was paying this tax elsewhere in order that the books could be balanced, if it was at least justified by some logic, where the fees were proportional to the risk, it would make me less grumpy and ranty. I'm sure that would make my wife and mutant offspring very happy.
Sincerely,
Mr Ranty

His Reply:

Thank you for your email. I contacted the office of Hon Judith Collins, Minister for ACC regarding your concerns and I was provided with the following advice.

“All levies received from motor vehicles (including motorcycles) go directly into ACC’s Motor Vehicle Account to fund all injuries that occur on public roads in New Zealand. This account is funded from the petrol levy and a levy collected with the motor vehicle licensing fee. When assessing levy rates, ACC calculates motor vehicle levies based on the level of risk that a particular motor vehicle group bears, and the costs of accidents involving that group. ACC also has to consider the lifetime cost of claims. The ‘life’ of a claim can vary from 1 day to 40 – 50 years.

ACC needs to have enough money in the bank to cover these costs. So when it calculates the motor vehicle levies you pay each year, it factors in all the costs in the year for new injuries and then adds on the estimate of the future costs for those injuries. Through this ACC achieves a ‘fully funded’ ACC Scheme.

On average, ACC receives 3.4 times as many claims per 10,000 motorcycles as cars, and each claim will cost 2.6 times as much over its life than claims for occupants of cars. Ministry of Transport figures show that motorcyclists are 22 times more at risk of being involved in a fatal or serious injury crash than car drivers per kilometre driven.

Injuries to motorcyclists are expected to cost ACC around $104 million for the 2015/16 year. ACC is asking motorcycle owners to pay $27 million of this cost. The rest of the levy, to cover the cost of injuries to motorcycle riders, is charged to owners of other vehicles (mostly by owners of cars).

While it may appear that owners of diesel vehicles pay a higher levy fee than owners of equivalent petrol vehicles, this is not the case. ACC collects the Motor Vehicle levy from owners of petrol driven vehicles when they fill up their tanks (currently 9.9 cents per litre on petrol sales) as well as when their vehicles are licensed each year.

In contrast, the entire levy for diesel-powered motor vehicles comes from the annual licence fee. This is because only a fraction of the diesel sold in New Zealand is used for powering vehicles that travel on public roads. The rest is used for power generation, boats, trains and other industrial purposes.

The Corporation sets its rates to ensure that the average levy collected for diesel vehicles equates to the average combined petrol levy and licence fees for petrol vehicles. This means that, on average, drivers and owners of diesel vehicles pay a similar amount in ACC levies as drivers and owners of equivalent petrol vehicles.

In September last year new regulations were introduced that split the Goods Service vehicles class by weight and these regulations come into force on 2 December 2013. GSVs weighing more than 3,500 kg are now classed as heavy GSVs. GSVs below that weight had a reduction in levies, and are only marginally higher than passenger vehicles.

While it is true that an owner cannot ride more than one motorcycle or drive more than one vehicle at the same time, people have a choice about how many vehicles they own. Similarly, if someone owns more than one property there is no rebate on the rates and other charges on those they are not currently occupying. If a vehicle is not going to be used for an extensive period you are able to register it for only part of a year, which enables you to reduce your overall levy costs.

Applying levies to registered motor vehicles is the simplest way to collect them. It avoids potential difficulties and substantial administrative costs. For example, if ACC levies were applied to every motor vehicle licence holder, people who hold a licence but do not own or use a motor vehicle would have to pay a levy. This would be very unfair. Although other systems of collecting levies from drivers have been suggested none are convincingly more equitable or cost-effective than the current situation.

Each year ACC consults with the public on the upcoming year’s levies. Levy payers are invited to take part in consultation by submitting comment and suggestions directly to ACC. Public consultation for this year has recently closed and the ACC Board has made its recommendations to the Minister for ACC, which include a significant reduction to the average motor vehicle levy. I expect Cabinet will make a decision and announcement on the 2015/16 levy rates shortly.

The ACC Scheme is unique and world-leading in the benefits it provides its clients. The premise of the no-fault scheme is that it is a safety net for all New Zealanders, where injuries that meet the statutory criteria are covered without the need for lengthy and costly litigation. ACC may provide entitlements such as weekly compensation, medical treatment, rehabilitation, lump sums, death entitlements, elective surgery, dental treatment, transport costs and home help, for a person given cover under the Scheme.”

Thank you once again for writing to me and I trust this response addresses your concerns.

Kind regards

Jonathan

Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman
MP for Northcote
Minister of Defence, Minister of State Services, Associate Minister of Finance

[Ocean1]

You raise good points...

Again.


+10mfch

[Ocean1]

To: Hon. Dr. Jonathan Coleman
Subject: The Unfair Nature of ACC Fees and other taxes

An excellent rant, Ian, as usual.

Deserved better.

[Ripperjon]

"While it is true that an owner cannot ride more than one motorcycle or drive more than one vehicle at the same time, people have a choice about how many vehicles they own... If a vehicle is not going to be used for an extensive period you are able to register it for only part of a year, which enables you to reduce your overall levy costs.

... if ACC levies were applied to every motor vehicle licence holder, people who hold a licence but do not own or use a motor vehicle would have to pay a levy. This would be very unfair. Although other systems of collecting levies from drivers have been suggested none are convincingly more equitable or cost-effective than the current situation."

Well why not apply levies to every licence holder, and allow them to put their licence on hold?
Simpler and fairer!

[bogan]

"While it is true that an owner cannot ride more than one motorcycle or drive more than one vehicle at the same time, people have a choice about how many vehicles they own... If a vehicle is not going to be used for an extensive period you are able to register it for only part of a year, which enables you to reduce your overall levy costs.

... if ACC levies were applied to every motor vehicle licence holder, people who hold a licence but do not own or use a motor vehicle would have to pay a levy. This would be very unfair. Although other systems of collecting levies from drivers have been suggested none are convincingly more equitable or cost-effective than the current situation."

Well why not apply levies to every licence holder, and allow them to put their licence on hold?
Simpler and fairer!

Nah, that'd get a bit tricky for those who only use it very occasionally. I say just implement a multiple vehicle owners ACC discount, rego first one at 100%, second one gets the ACC discounted by 75% (paying a little more for multiple vehicles is fine, just not the whole rate) of what you paid on the first, third discounted at 75% of what you paid on first and second. Provided all vehicles are owned and rego paid for by the same person.

[Ripperjon]

Yea that sounds good

[R650R]

Right sit down folks, this will make your blood boil...

Under this scheme http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_communications/documents/publications_promotion/wpc119892.pdf trucking companies can reduce their ACC levy by $186 PER VEHICLE if they successfully complete the program.
Now why is there not a similar program for bikes...

[Swoop]

Right sit down folks, this will make your blood boil...

Under this scheme http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_communications/documents/publications_promotion/wpc119892.pdf trucking companies can reduce their ACC levy by $186 PER VEHICLE if they successfully complete the program.
Now why is there not a similar program for bikes...

There already is.
I have reduced the amount to $0.00.

This has resulted in savings equating to LOTS of tyres, substantial amounts of tanks full of petrol along with quite a lot of other expenditure "reallocations" such as safety equipment (gloves, jacket & helmet).

Any other rider can achieve the same.

[Pixie]

Heard a rumour yesterday that Assortedcuntsandcocksuckers want to INCREASE the levy for bikes to the level that they asked for before the bikoi.That would mean $750.00 to licence a bike.

I wonder how much NZ bikers will be willing to pay before they grow a pair?

$1000? $2000?......

P.S. I also ride un-licenced most of the year.I got my first ticket in 3 years a few weeks ago.$100 fine.
I smiled at the cop and told him I was well in credit compared what I would have paid in ACC levies.

[Pixie]

Right sit down folks, this will make your blood boil...

Under this scheme http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_communications/documents/publications_promotion/wpc119892.pdf trucking companies can reduce their ACC levy by $186 PER VEHICLE if they successfully complete the program.
Now why is there not a similar program for bikes...

The reason there is not such a program for bikes is that the real agenda of ACC,NZTA,AA etc. is to make motorcycling so unattractive that few will pursue it as an activity.
Motorcycling will never be safe enough to allow them to meet their road safety (toll) targets.So it must be eliminated.

Can't have the perfect, mindless, cottonwool bound society they are planning while such dangerous activities exist.

[R650R]

P.S. I also ride un-licenced most of the year.I got my first ticket in 3 years a few weeks ago.$100 fine.
I smiled at the cop and told him I was well in credit compared what I would have paid in ACC levies.[/SIZE][/SIZE]

I've heard we might be losing the exemption scheme altogether thanks to people abusing it. BTW its $150 fine and 20 demerit points.

And you might get a letter from NZTA wanting your rego paid too...


23 Revocation of temporary exemption


(1) The Registrar may, by notice in writing to the registered person, revoke an exemption granted under regulation 20 if—

(a) the relevant motor vehicle is operated at any time while the exemption has effect (except in the circumstances described in clause 9 or 10 of Part 1 of Schedule 2); or

As in if the exemption is revoked then the current licence period and maybe the exempted portion could become payable...
It sucks that we have to pay extra but abusing the exemption process just wrecks it for everyone.

[R650R]

The reason there is not such a program for bikes is that the real agenda of ACC,NZTA,AA etc. is to make motorcycling so unattractive that few will pursue it as an activity.
Motorcycling will never be safe enough to allow them to meet their road safety (toll) targets.So it must be eliminated.


Yes you probably right. And if even 10-20% of the population started using fuel efficient commuter style small mc and mopeds the loss in petrol tax would be massive.

[Hawk]

https://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/acc-returns-2-1bn-surplus-213533123.html

[willytheekid]

https://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/acc-returns-2-1bn-surplus-213533123.html

After my dealings with ACC...that honestly made me feel sick!:sick:

The pricks made me wait 8yrs for knee surgery!....then told the surgeon that "he didnt know what he was doing"...and instructed him to only give me key hole on one knee and forget the other:angry:
...I now need both knees completely rebuilt :facepalm: (Just as the surgeon warned!)...guess I will just have to wait another 8yrs huh? (And 16 more for my recent injuries from ANOTHER drunk driver hitting me! (shoulder AC joint destroyed) )


but so glad there PROFIT margin is looking so massive <_<


...the fucking pricks!

Why do we pay ACC Rego charges again?? (Ohhh thats right...not allowed private aye...no PROFIT in that!)

[MrKiwi]

I wrote a quest column in the November issue of bike rider, arguing for a significant change in road policy to recognise motorcycles (scooters and mopeds) which provide important transport opportunities. Had some feedback, but mostly the rushing sound of people running away rather than wanting to talk about it, let alone face up to the challenge of changing their ideology.

We keep trying...

[Murray]

Chair, Paula Rebstock says new claims rose 4.7 percent on the previous year, that's 1.8 million new claims.

Unbelievable an increase of 1.8 million claims and thats only an increase of 4.7% on the previous year
I really cant be bothered working out how many claims that means there were last year??

Surely that cannot be right??

[haydes55]

Chair, Paula Rebstock says new claims rose 4.7 percent on the previous year, that's 1.8 million new claims.



Unbelievable an increase of 1.8 million claims and thats only an increase of 4.7% on the previous year

I really cant be bothered working out how many claims that means there were last year??



Surely that cannot be right??


Roughly 40 million claims this year then? Funny, I race motorbikes and ride a road bike (with no car).... Apparently the average amount of acc claims per person is 10/year.... And motorcyclists are so dangerous we should be above average, so I'm about 15 acc claims behind where I should be.

I think that's a miss quoted stat and acc claims have risen by 4.7% to 1.8million claims this year.

In that case people will average an acc claim every 2-3 years.

I'm all for raising the acc levy on pensions, those walking hospital beds must account for half of acc health bill last year with all their falling over and old creaky bones and all.

Ridiculous situation, like smoking, the taxes on smoking are so high they can cover all health costs of all smokers and still bank massive revenue from it. At least the government are more honest about wanting to abolish smoking.

[bogan]

Chair, Paula Rebstock says new claims rose 4.7 percent on the previous year, that's 1.8 million new claims.

Unbelievable an increase of 1.8 million claims and thats only an increase of 4.7% on the previous year
I really cant be bothered working out how many claims that means there were last year??

Surely that cannot be right??

I think it means 1.8mill new claims this year, but they still have millions of claims on the books from other years. Ie, last year new claims were 1.7million.