Multi-bike registration: Submission to the government

[rocketman1]

I am considering a submission to parliament, to have government reconsider the way (rego) licencing fees to are applied to vehicles, mainly car and motorcycles.
It seems unfair to me that one can own several bikes and cars and to be able to drive them all on nz roads the need to be fully licensed.
I know that you can license vehicles for a mininum of 3 months, and put licences on hold but this does not allow to you use the vehicle whenever you want.
It is riduculous in this day and age with all the monitoring and "whatnot" available that the government can come up with a system that work on a user pays type arrangement.
I realise that the govt will not want to lessen the overall "take" in license fee incomes, for all ACC etc. That is not what I am on about.
For myself to register 4 motorcycles and 4 cars would cost around $3500 per year, all when I can only drive one at a time. Stupid!!
To set the record straight, these are not expensive vehicles, the whole lot would not add up to the price of an avreage new car.

I believe there should be a system where all cars and motorbikes are registered at a minimal fee say $30 per annum. for admin control , stats etc. On top of that there should be a system of registering the owner of these vehicles, at some $ cost, this should also include a third party insurance cost that is related to the way the owner drives, eg it will cost more if he/she has had accidents and infringement notices.
Those that have a poor driving record pay the price. .
To me this would seem alot fairer, the admin would not be anymore, its all done online, electronically these days anyway.
And would mean I could drive all my vehicles anytime. Great.
Do you think its worth a submission upstairs?

[Jantar]

Simple really. A small fee for the label and administration, the rest as a fuel surcharge. Fill up and pay. That way you only ever pay for the vehicle that you are using.

[FJRider]

... all when I can only drive one at a time. Stupid!!


But what if you wanted to allow your Wife/Girlfriend/son/daughter/friend to ride/drive one of those as you were riding/driving another .. ??

[Voltaire]

Good idea but I doubt they care about multiple vehicle owners.
My work around is 40 year old ones, 1975 is now $117.
For the Govt to take it seriously you would need maybe the AA to get behind it.....or the Dog and Lemon muttonchop idiot :laugh:

[MarkH]

Do you think its worth a submission upstairs?

It couldn't hurt but it probably wont help either.

To me it does seem unfair that I have to pay an ACC levy on every vehicle, it would be much fairer to look at all vehicles and make the owner pay the highest ACC levy rather than all the ACC levies. If you have a car and a 250cc bike and a 750cc bike that would mean paying the ACC levy for the 750cc bike but not having to pay the car or smaller bike levy.
But I can't see the government being fair, they prefer to go with the simplest solution - to hell with being fair.

Both my bikes are over 600cc so currently I'm looking at around $1040 per year in rego with over $800 of that being for ACC levies. I'd love it to be much lower but to me it is worth the cost for the fun I get from riding bikes.

[James Deuce]

a. You've described a bureaucracy, which Governments love, except when they implement it it will cost at least 18 times what you propose.
b. Jantar keeps describing the perfect solution. So does every person who gets ejected from any lobby group claiming to represent motorcyclists.

[mossy1200]

Acc levy should be on your licence types and you should renew your licence yearly or less leaving out the licences you don't want to use but they stay on the system for when you want to refresh them (licence on hold).

Licence on hold more than 2 years and you need sit refresher safety course to renew it again.

[roogazza]

as a side note I got a letter from VTNZ saying I owed 500 bucks odd, for unpaid fees and penalty !!!!
Straight on the blower and gave date and time etc that I continued the on hold (did it on line).(was a cop for a long time,Time date and place and notebook entry paid off this time haha).
Be careful out there cos the bloke I spoke to went away and said I don't know what happened there ????????????????? Wiped the penalties and the bill. Bike has been on hold for two years.
He also put it on hold for a further 12 mths for me.
Just something to watch when doing the on line shit !!! :angry::angry:

[rocketman1]

But what if you wanted to allow your Wife/Girlfriend/son/daughter/friend to ride/drive one of those as you were riding/driving another .. ??

Thats the point, you have registered the vehicle, ie you are the registered owner, but wifey etc have to pay an $ amount to drive / operate the vehicle on a nz road. For that fee they are paying for the registration, TP insurance, maybe there driving license fee etc etc.
It shifting the bias of costs from the vehicle to the owner.
Ie the AA dont care what car you drive, you pay to have the vehicle that your are driving fixed. not the vehicle. same logic should apply.
Maybe to hold a motorcycle license as well as a car licence would cost more than just a car. I am sure this can be sorted though.
Tourists just have to pay the proportion of the year they are driving , say minimal charge, And ACC fees to include for costs incurred for driving on the wrong side of the road etc.:)

[Racing Dave]

But I can't see the government being fair...

Not entirely true - some years ago when Nick Smith was the Minister for ACC, we had an exchange of emails on this very topic, and in his last one to me he stated that the ACC levy "must be fair to everyone".

From this, I take it that he means that no-one must pay more than their share. There are ways to make this happen.

[FJRider]

Not entirely true - some years ago when Nick Smith was the Minister for ACC, we had an exchange of emails on this very topic, and in his last one to me he stated that the ACC levy "must be fair to everyone".

From this, I take it that he means that no-one must pay more than their share. There are ways to make this happen.

If official policy is that the motorcyclists cost the system is more than a car drivers ... then official policy would then be motorcyclists pay their (fair .. ??) share ..

His idea of fair may differ from yours ...

[FJRider]

It shifting the bias of costs from the vehicle to the owner.


Perhaps .... costs should be shifted to the driver.

[Akzle]

get fucked. Basically. I had a stack of infringements. Never injured anyone.
And dont pay rego or cvl. So back to my first sentiment.

[Voltaire]

get fucked. Basically. I had a stack of infringements. Never injured anyone.
And dont pay rego or cvl. So back to my first sentiment.

Oh my Mr Axles, I'm sure your Mitsi is registered, your bike if you have one, probably not. :laugh:

[FJRider]

get fucked. Basically. I had a stack of infringements. Never injured anyone.
And dont pay rego or cvl. So back to my first sentiment.

There is a consensus of opinion .... your next fuck should be from something with a bigger cock than yours .... (shouldn't be difficult in THAT regard)

Our only worry is ... you might enjoy it ...

[Swoop]

I find the current scheme quite economical!

[bsasuper]

I am considering a submission to parliament, to have government reconsider the way (rego) licencing fees to are applied to vehicles, mainly car and motorcycles.
It seems unfair to me that one can own several bikes and cars and to be able to drive them all on nz roads the need to be fully licensed.
I know that you can license vehicles for a mininum of 3 months, and put licences on hold but this does not allow to you use the vehicle whenever you want.
It is riduculous in this day and age with all the monitoring and "whatnot" available that the government can come up with a system that work on a user pays type arrangement.
I realise that the govt will not want to lessen the overall "take" in license fee incomes, for all ACC etc. That is not what I am on about.
For myself to register 4 motorcycles and 4 cars would cost around $3500 per year, all when I can only drive one at a time. Stupid!!
To set the record straight, these are not expensive vehicles, the whole lot would not add up to the price of an avreage new car.

I believe there should be a system where all cars and motorbikes are registered at a minimal fee say $30 per annum. for admin control , stats etc. On top of that there should be a system of registering the owner of these vehicles, at some $ cost, this should also include a third party insurance cost that is related to the way the owner drives, eg it will cost more if he/she has had accidents and infringement notices.
Those that have a poor driving record pay the price. .
To me this would seem alot fairer, the admin would not be anymore, its all done online, electronically these days anyway.
And would mean I could drive all my vehicles anytime. Great.
Do you think its worth a submission upstairs?


Dreaming..

[MarkH]

Not entirely true - some years ago when Nick Smith was the Minister for ACC, we had an exchange of emails on this very topic, and in his last one to me he stated that the ACC levy "must be fair to everyone".

From this, I take it that he means that no-one must pay more than their share. There are ways to make this happen.

Oh well, if a politician said they must be fair then that is the end of the story.
I guess I'll just tell them I don't want to pay a 2nd ACC levy because that wouldn't be fair.

[R650R]

The danger from having a one rego covers multiple vehicles is that a system will be needed to identify the appropriate owner or designated employee is the only person using that vehicle.
That would need some sort of electronic tagging of licence which will just encourage them to the next step of electronic licences and monitoring of driving.
There's no reason the money needed for car rego couldn't just be lumped in with normal taxes, its just another mechanism of control and tool to spot the disobedient, hence why change is unlikely.

[James Deuce]

Not entirely true - some years ago when Nick Smith was the Minister for ACC, we had an exchange of emails on this very topic, and in his last one to me he stated that the ACC levy "must be fair to everyone".

From this, I take it that he means that no-one must pay more than their share. There are ways to make this happen.

Nick is a consummate liar. What he meant is that Motorcyclists should be carrying the entire burden for motorcycle related death and injury.

[Scuba_Steve]

Only way to do multi-vehicle (or any vehicle) fairly is RUC's, pay per k

[Oakie]

The problem with OPs proposition is plain maths.

We have a set nuimber of BIKES paying rego to arrive at the figure ACC claims we cost them. Lets call it 25 million in ACC expense for argument's sake and lets call it 60,000 bikes owned by 40,000 bikers. (Figures won't be right ... they are just for illustration purposes)

Presently the 25 mill divided into the 60,000 bikes equals an average of $416 ACC levy per bike.

If you were to make it RIDER pays then we go 25 mill divided into 40,000 riders which gives an ACC levy of $625 per person.

In this case you'd be increasing 66% of all riders levies by 50%. Good luck swinging that!

My sympathies to those lucky bastards with a bike for each day of the week and I understand the argument that you can't ride them all at the same time ... but the majority of bikers would be significantly worse off under a rider pays regime. Remember the bottom line is that ACC still needs to raise X million dollars and reducing the levyable units can only increase the individual levies.

[mossy1200]

The problem with OPs proposition is plain maths.

We have a set nuimber of BIKES paying rego to arrive at the figure ACC claims we cost them. Lets call it 25 million in ACC expense for argument's sake and lets call it 60,000 bikes owned by 40,000 bikers. (Figures won't be right ... they are just for illustration purposes)

Presently the 25 mill divided into the 60,000 bikes equals an average of $416 ACC levy per bike.

If you were to make it RIDER pays then we go 25 mill divided into 40,000 riders which gives an ACC levy of $625 per person.

In this case you'd be increasing 66% of all riders levies by 50%. Good luck swinging that!

My sympathies to those lucky bastards with a bike for each day of the week and I understand the argument that you can't ride them all at the same time ... but the majority of bikers would be significantly worse off under a rider pays regime. Remember the bottom line is that ACC still needs to raise X million dollars and reducing the levyable units can only increase the individual levies.

I thought the figures were more like 300k bike licences and 80k registered bikes.

That's why I think Acc should be paid on licence type not vehicle registrations.

[Jantar]

The problem with OPs proposition is plain maths.

We have a set nuimber of BIKES paying rego to arrive at the figure ACC claims we cost them. Lets call it 25 million in ACC expense for argument's sake and lets call it 60,000 bikes owned by 40,000 bikers. (Figures won't be right ... they are just for illustration purposes)

Presently the 25 mill divided into the 60,000 bikes equals an average of $416 ACC levy per bike.

If you were to make it RIDER pays then we go 25 mill divided into 40,000 riders which gives an ACC levy of $625 per person.

In this case you'd be increasing 66% of all riders levies by 50%. Good luck swinging that!

My sympathies to those lucky bastards with a bike for each day of the week and I understand the argument that you can't ride them all at the same time ... but the majority of bikers would be significantly worse off under a rider pays regime. Remember the bottom line is that ACC still needs to raise X million dollars and reducing the levyable units can only increase the individual levies.
I recall from the ACC protest data that there are aproximately 250,000 licenced motorcylists in New Zealand and around 100,000 licenced motorcycles. I'll need to look up the exact numbers but they were in that ball park.

[Oakie]

I recall from the ACC protest data that there are aproximately 250,000 licenced motorcylists in New Zealand and around 100,000 licenced motorcycles. I'll need to look up the exact numbers but they were in that ball park.

Probably another nail in the 'per user' argument is the case of my wife's grandmother. Yes, at age 75 she had a motorcycle licence but she'd not ridden for 50 years. It may be that of that 250,000 people you quote with bike licences, perhaps only half are active riders?

[Jantar]

More like a third :)

[BMWST?]

More like a third :)
if that....

[Racing Dave]

Oh well, if a politician said they must be fair then that is the end of the story.
I guess I'll just tell them I don't want to pay a 2nd ACC levy because that wouldn't be fair.

Don't tell them, just don't pay.

[Racing Dave]

Nick is a consummate liar. What he meant is that Motorcyclists should be carrying the entire burden for motorcycle related death and injury.

I imagine his lips were moving when he dictated the reply to his minion.

I take my own meaning from his words.

[AllanB]

Maybe a user 'plate' like a car dealers plate. Licensed to the user who attaches the plate to the vehicle they are using. They could have nice day-glow yellow ones for motorcycles to make them more visible and less prone to accidents.......

How long before they ban black helmets?

[BlackSheepLogic]

Probably another nail in the 'per user' argument is the case of my wife's grandmother. Yes, at age 75 she had a motorcycle licence but she'd not ridden for 50 years. It may be that of that 250,000 people you quote with bike licences, perhaps only half are active riders?

If she's not been riding and has no plan to there could be an option to renew just the car license and let the motorcycle license lapse.

[Oakie]

If she's not been riding and has no plan to there could be an option to renew just the car license and let the motorcycle license lapse.

I'm sure that's already there but where there's no cost to having then extra, who is going to have them removed. My licence allows me to drive a heavy vehicle. I haven't driven anything over 3.5 tonne for 12 years but I wouldn't surrender it 'just in case'.

[BlackSheepLogic]

My sympathies to those lucky bastards with a bike for each day of the week and I understand the argument that you can't ride them all at the same time

Have two but one is a scooter for around town use. Saves the wear and tear on the larger bike and the scooter is a much better in city traffic. I'm sure others like myself want a smaller bike for the city not because we are rich buggers.

[BlackSheepLogic]

I'm sure that's already there but where there's no cost to having then extra, who is going to have them removed. My licence allows me to drive a heavy vehicle. I haven't driven anything over 3.5 tonne for 12 years but I wouldn't surrender it 'just in case'.

In the context of needing to pay ACC levees on the license classes you have there would be a financial incentive to serenader a license class if it's not being used.

[ellipsis]

...my mate had to renew his licence after the ten years were up...it came back with his m/c licence removed and another class, self laying tracks taking it's place...he sent it back to be fixed and they told him, sorry, we can't do that, you will have to sit your m/c licence again...sorry, unrelated and seemingly unbelievable but true...:crazy:...he know has a learners m'c licence and also his self laying tracks class, which he has never contemplated having...

[5ive]

...my mate had to renew his licence after the ten years were up...it came back with his m/c licence removed and another class, self laying tracks taking it's place...he sent it back to be fixed and they told him, sorry, we can't do that, you will have to sit your m/c licence again...sorry, unrelated and seemingly unbelievable but true...:crazy:...he know has a learners m'c licence and also his self laying tracks class, which he has never contemplated having...

The incompetence isn't that far-fetched, it happens a lot.

I walked into a VTNZ to renew my drivers licence after the ten years, and they removed my class 2 and 4 because I didn't have a medical certificate with me (fair enough, and I wan't using them), funnily enough the license renewal notice that they sent out didn't reach me as they'd sent it to Westlake Girls College (I'm neither female nor a teacher, it boggles the mind where they pulled that address from). Then a year or so later when I sat my class 6 learners license they gave me my class 2 and 4 back (without a medical certificate because I couldn't be bothered at the time), "a simple click of the mouse" said the friendly lady behind the counter after being puzzled as to why I had licenses showing on the computer that were not on the physical card itself, and she was able to re-instate them herself.

Less than a week later I received a threatening letter in the mail from the NZTA demanding that I return the temporary paper license immediately (or I'd "be in big trouble mister", and the plastic one when it arrives (yes, they sent the warning letter before they sent the license :laugh: ). So I did, but only after they'd given me another correct one - you can't drive without one after all :bleh:

You'd think that would be the end of it...

When I went to pay for my class 6 Restricted license, I took with me a medical certificate just to put an end to the charade, this time though I went to an AA because it was the only place open on a Sunday. Took my DL1 application form up to the counter with all of the license boxes ticked, and the medical form signed by the doctor (which has it's own check box), and was told that I'd have to fill out another DL1 form and pay TWICE.

Said thanks, but no thanks and that I'd be going back to VTNZ with my paperwork and money and as if by magic they were unexpectedly then able to process the single application form because their computer had changed it's mind and said yes.

Though to be fair, in the case of the AA it was probably more of a scam than pure incompetence. Would expect nothing less from them.

Would be nice to just have one rego, but it would be very open to abuse.

[Oakie]

Have two but one is a scooter for around town use. Saves the wear and tear on the larger bike and the scooter is a much better in city traffic. I'm sure others like myself want a smaller bike for the city not because we are rich buggers.

Fair call. If my commute was much shorter I'd probably do the same myself although the 600 makes a pretty good commuter.

[mossy1200]

Hope something changes.
Idd own a few older bikes and do them up to keep if it wasn't so expensive to retain them on the road.

[AllanB]

I think the point Mossy is they (powers that be) want the older machines off the road. Update the fleet to wizz bang spazz vehicles with safety this and that.

[St_Gabriel]

Sounds like a great idea this single rego idea, can register the missus' car (though jointly owned) in my name and just pay the rego on the higher of the vrod or commodore (or better still register them both in her name). No more need to run the bike on hold and no cost to register the car :laugh:

[mossy1200]

I think the point Mossy is they (powers that be) want the older machines off the road. Update the fleet to wizz bang spazz vehicles with safety this and that.

Idd class my café racer safer than my other bike. The mirrors have a better view behind and the horn is louder.

[gjm]

I'd love to see something like this happen. There are many people who would very much like to own more than one, or two bikes, and be free to use them whenever they felt like it.

A good-sized tourer. A lightweight trail bike. A custom (perhaps). And more...

Paying for them as they are used would be good. For those that feel that way, laying them up in bad weather wouldn't mean sorting multiple regos-on-hold; having them available wouldn't mean multiple rego payments.

WoF is essential, of course. But rego could be paid on use, not on the fact you have a bike in the garage.

We just need a truly viable way to implement this, in a way that doesn't see the guvmint out of pocket.

[FJRider]

I'd love to see something like this happen. There are many people who would very much like to own more than one, or two bikes, and be free to use them whenever they felt like it.



Perhaps having vehicles rego on hold ... and being able to license them for a month ... or even a few days ONLINE ...




Oh wait ...

[gjm]

Perhaps having vehicles rego on hold ... and being able to license them for a month ... or even a few days ONLINE ...

Oh wait ...

To be fair, I've not tried or looked into this. Is it possible? 1 month rego?

It'd be a faff, but might just be worth it. :) :ride:

[FJRider]

To be fair, I've not tried or looked into this. Is it possible? 1 month rego?



Or less ...


And few others haven't either ... <_<

[Scuba_Steve]

To be fair, I've not tried or looked into this. Is it possible? 1 month rego?

It'd be a faff, but might just be worth it. :) :ride:

online you can only do 3mths & it has to be with a 3 month cycle, so if you're 2 months into the cycle they're gonna back date to the beginning of that cycle & you'll be paying 3months to use it for 1 month... this is all about extorting $$$ so they don't make anything convenient.

... At-least thats how it was 6mths ago

[FJRider]

online you can only do 3mths & it has to be with a 3 month cycle, so if you're 2 months into the cycle they're gonna back date to the beginning of that cycle & you'll be paying 3months to use it for 1 month... this is all about extorting $$$ so they don't make anything convenient.

... At-least thats how it was 6mths ago

Go to a Post Shop ... they'll do it for a day

[Swoop]

While that submission is being made to government (it is still happening, isn't it?:scratch:), can you also ask for Jeremy Clarkson's suggestion to be actioned as well...

He suggests a scheme where if a driver has had a tipple and feels over the drink-drive limit, the person must attach a GREEN rotating beacon to the roof of their vehicle and then may proceed towards their home at no more than 10mph.
Other road users will see the beacon and say "uh-oh! That person's had too many - I'll give him a wide berth".

Also, there are times when a person requires to travel faster than the posted speed limit. A downloadable app could be used to notify the authorities that such an event is about to occur and the reasons behind it (death/dying close relative, injured child, etc). A limit of only ONE use of this scheme per year, per person, to avoid abuse.

Abuse either of the above schemes and the punishment is instant death.
Sounds do-able!

[pritch]

I believe there should be a system where all cars and motorbikes are registered at a minimal fee say $30 per annum. for admin control , stats etc. On top of that there should be a system of registering the owner of these vehicles, at some $ cost, this should also include a third party insurance cost that is related to the way the owner drives, eg it will cost more if he/she has had accidents and infringement notices.


An option to register riders rather than bikes was put forward at the time the fees were hiked. It was pointed out that paying ACC levys on every vehicle or bike when we can only use one at a time was overly burdensome. The official reply was that such a system would not meet the ACC budget. In other words, any system that makes less money would be unacceptable to ACC and to their political masters.

Of course it would be interesting to know if they actually met their budget or if it transpired that the budget had been overly optimistic?

[breakaway]

Simple really. A small fee for the label and administration, the rest as a fuel surcharge. Fill up and pay. That way you only ever pay for the vehicle that you are using.

Then people with V8s would pay more than granny with a 1.3 Corolla. That's not fair.

The RUC per vehicle class based on distance travelled is one way I could see it working.

[FJRider]

Then people with V8s would pay more than granny with a 1.3 Corolla. That's not fair.

The RUC per vehicle class based on distance travelled is one way I could see it working.

I lived in Singapore for a few years ... their Road Tax system was based on engine size for ALL vehicles. The bigger the engine ... the more you pay. Plus ... the older the vehicle ... the more you pay.

[Akzle]

Then people with V8s would pay more than granny with a 1.3 Corolla. That's not fair.

The RUC per vehicle class based on distance travelled is one way I could see it working.

how is that not fair? Very few fucks NEED an 8, less actually make full use of it (plus, the top 3-4 gears' speeds are illegal)

even with ruc, its graduated (by gvm), so youd probably end up similar, or paying in cc bands (as with bikes)

i say divide whatever budget is required by 1million and make aucklanders pay. (after all, they bang on about being the centre of the universe /economy, they can afford it.)

[breakaway]

Why don't you sell your gsx-r 750 and buy a gn125? I mean shit, it does the speed limit after all.

There's hybrids, turbo/super charged, rotaz etc -- a displacement based system is even more myopic than the current system.

[Akzle]

Why don't you sell your gsx-r 750 and buy a gn125? I mean shit, it does the speed limit after all.

There's hybrids, turbo/super charged, rotaz etc -- a displacement based system is even more myopic than the current system.

because i ignore the speed limit all the time.

It would likely be a gvm or kW system, as already said, and as already in place.

[FJRider]

because i ignore the speed limit all the time.




Sounds fair .... being the KB champion that's being ignored the most. Even more than I've been .... :shifty:

[BlackSheepLogic]

Bikers which have a history of unavoidable accidents should also have their ACC levies raised reducing the burden on the rest of us.


I suggested in an earlier post it could be funded by whacking the rego up on car drivers who hit bikes and they are found at fault. They pay the higher reg for life and as bike reg goes up so does theirs.

[Swoop]

Sounds fair .... being the KB champion that's being ignored the most.
Wrong. He's behind Skidmark and katman.

[Akzle]

So that means if someone crosses the centre line and hits you should have your reg raised for "Failing To Avoid" ????? Just because you have been lucky in the past it does not mean you will be able to "Avoid" any muppet who screws up in front of you in the future.

or a super speedy dog :laugh: