ACC Levies - Unfair for Kiwi Bikers

[Mikeycbd]

New to biking and had my first RTA. When i filled out the ACC form at the hospital it didn't ask me who was at fault? Mmmm

I contacted ACC (Accident Compensation Corporation) to see Why don't they see who is at fault when bikes are involved? They replied... we don't, it's a 50/50 split.

OK then, so why are ACC levies higher for bikers? They said because our accidents cost more. Yeah I said but who do you think cause the greater percentage of Motobike accidents?

It is my belief that more accidents are caused by cars and thus the levies should be equally split not higher for us. So I realllllllly want people to tell me if they have been involved in an Accident and who was at fault. can you E-mail me please. I've also written to Fair Go. mikeycbd@xtra.co.nz without ACC investigating we will always pay the penalty for bad car drivers.

[MSTRS]

Good luck with that. For a organisation who couldn't get out of their own way, and who have a monopoly, do you really think they will be remotely interested?
Don't mean to be harsh but that's the reality.

[idb]

For those of us who pay for more than one rego you'd think they would be extra helpful.
I haven't tested it yet..........

[davereid]

Hi Mikey, Ive been making submissions every year to ACC about this, but on my own its making no difference. Essentially its a vulnerability tax - that is to say motorcyclists are no better or worse than car drivers, but they are more vulnerable so hit em harder. And of course we all know that while we cause a good deal of our own crashes, the majority are caused by car drivers. The statistics dont seem to be recorded any more, but in the good old days the MOT used to produce a booklet "when youve got to stop use the lot" encouraging bikers to use both brakes together to improve braking performance. This booklet claimed that 65% of bike crashes were caused by cars doing illegal right turns. (Not including all the other crap they do !)
Apparently they dont record the stats anymore so just div it up 50/50.
Of course its crap... Lets Tax women a bit extra because they may get raped...

[Steam]

This booklet claimed that 65% of bike crashes were caused by cars doing illegal right turns.

Interesting stuff. Can you describe a bit more by what they meant by what I've quoted above? Thanks!

[BLACK B]

OK then, so why are ACC levies higher for bikers? They said because our accidents cost more.

Mikey, the last information I read from ACC alluded to the fact that the Levy is set to pay for the expected cost of the motorcyclists treatment. This is based on historical costs for the same. Also it is quite apparent that bike riders are more likely to be injured whatever the cause of the crash and therefore more likely to make a claim against ACC.
I believe however that the biggest cost that ACC has to meet is for sporting injuries, Rugby being very high in particular due to the popularity of the game. All motorists and employers subsidise recreationally attributed injuries.
I was in Middlemore Hospital around 9am some years back because of a broken wrist caused by a motorbike off. I was advised that I was fortunate to only have a 3 hour wait for treatment because I had beaten the Saturday sports influx by an hour.

[Grahameeboy]

Whilst I have issues with ACC at the same time it has lots of pros and I really do not see the fact that we pay more on Rego as a big issue in the whole scheme of things........sorry.

[yungatart]

If we could all have the option of not funding ACC, wouldn't the world be a wonderful place - private accident insurance - of course, if you did not have an accident in any one 12 mth period, you would be rewarded with a no claims discount, if your accident was caused by someone else, your insurance would go theirs for the costs associated with your treatment, if you binned and it was your own fault, you would pay a higher premium the next year.
All perfectly sensible and logical - unlike our current system of ACC - the "no fault" accident insurance.
Beauracracy is renowned for its lack of common sense, I wish you well in your endeavours!

[Grahameeboy]

If we could all have the option of not funding ACC, wouldn't the world be a wonderful place - private accident insurance - of course, if you did not have an accident in any one 12 mth period, you would be rewarded with a no claims discount, if your accident was caused by someone else, your insurance would go theirs for the costs associated with your treatment, if you binned and it was your own fault, you would pay a higher premium the next year.
All perfectly sensible and logical - unlike our current system of ACC - the "no fault" accident insurance.
Beauracracy is renowned for its lack of common sense, I wish you well in your endeavours!

Yeah, it should be for 'Accident' not drunk drivers in my view...I mean there is legistration to deal with Drinking and Driving and ACC is 'Legistration' which gives them red carpet treatment.....nothing against getting treatment but a crippled drunk driver is entitled to a $120,000 mobility vehicle plus the rest and a disabled child cannot......there has to be fairness and having ACC as a seperate area has it's issues.............I mean I pay taxes and ACC levies are just a form of tax but there is still disparency.

[Ixion]

,,. All motorists and employers subsidise recreationally attributed injuries.
I,,

Indirectly. Sporting injuries are paid for by the Government from general taxation.

[yungatart]

Yeah, it should be for 'Accident' not drunk drivers in my view...I mean there is legistration to deal with Drinking and Driving and ACC is 'Legistration' which gives them red carpet treatment.....nothing against getting treatment but a crippled drunk driver is entitled to a $120,000 mobility vehicle plus the rest and a disabled child cannot......there has to be fairness and having ACC as a seperate area has it's issues.............I mean I pay taxes and ACC levies are just a form of tax but there is still disparency.

I agree with you totally! The present system is very unfair, people born with disabilities get less than those whose disability is the result of an accident.
I am an accident free driver/rider, as are Mstrs and hXc, yet we get no financial recompense for that. Under a private system we would.
With 2 cars and 3 bikes to rego,and running a small business, we contribute significantly to ACC.
I would really like a bit more choice as to how we spend the money we earn.

[Grahameeboy]

Indirectly. Sporting injuries are paid for by the Government from general taxation.

Are you sure.....ACC covers this...........

[BLACK B]

Yeah, it should be for 'Accident' not drunk drivers in my view...I mean there is legistration to deal with Drinking and Driving and ACC is 'Legistration' which gives them red carpet treatment.....nothing against getting treatment but a crippled drunk driver is entitled to a $120,000 mobility vehicle plus the rest and a disabled child cannot......there has to be fairness and having ACC as a seperate area has it's issues.............I mean I pay taxes and ACC levies are just a form of tax but there is still disparency.

Do you know any drunk drivers who got hurt in the accidents they caused?
From what I've seen most get off lightly compared to their passengers and the innocent 3rd parties.
Of late though, a lot are finding temporary accomodation in prison where we continue to pay for their living expenses.

[BLACK B]

I am an accident free driver/rider, as are Mstrs and hXc, yet we get no financial recompense for that.

Were you touching wood when you typed that?

[Grahameeboy]

Do you know any drunk drivers who got hurt in the accidents they caused?
From what I've seen most get off lightly compared to their passengers and the innocent 3rd parties.
Of late though, a lot are finding temporary accomodation in prison where we continue to pay for their living expenses.

I agree but was just using this as one illustration......as for passengers are they not the author of their own misfortune getting into a car with a drunk driver???

[BLACK B]

as for passengers are they not the author of their own misfortune getting into a car with a drunk driver???

No argument there!

[Ixion]

Are you sure.....ACC covers this...........

Yes. I mean, ACC covers the injury, but the cost of it is met by the government, funded from general taxation.

ACC have 3 (main) funds that are used to fund the cost of injury cover. The employer fund (actually, employer and employee), funded by a payroll levy on employers, and a levy on income of employed people . This is used to fund the cost of "work" accidents. The motorvehicle fund is funded by (mainly) the rego levy and is used to fund the cost of (duh) motorvehicle accidents. And the general fund is funded by the government from general taxation (ie there is no specific tax for it) and is used to fund the cost of non-work, non-vehicle accidents. Each fund is require dto "pay as it goes", ie the fund has to have enough in it to pay all claims in any year , and provide an acturially based accural for ongoing future costs of such claims.

EDIT What i was origianlly getting at, is that a sport injury is funded from the general fund, which is not funded by employer or rego levies.

[Grahameeboy]

No argument there!

Yeah think I realised that after I sent post.....I have been here 8 years and still think that UK system of taking responsibility is a good one......I mean there is always the National Health System to treat the physical side...just have an issue with the financial reward...tricky one as the wife, kids etc should not suffer but as Youngmisses says that is where private insurance comes in if they have it of course.....

[Grahameeboy]

Yes. I mean, ACC covers the injury, but the cost of it is met by the government, funded from general taxation.

ACC have 3 (main) funds that are used to fund the cost of injury cover. The employer fund (actually, employer and employee), funded by a payroll levy on employers, and a levy on income of employed people . This is used to fund the cost of "work" accidents. The motorvehicle fund is funded by (mainly) the rego levy and is used to fund the cost of (duh) motorvehicle accidents. And the general fund is funded by the government from general taxation (ie there is no specific tax for it) and is used to fund the cost of non-work, non-vehicle accidents. Each fund is require dto "pay as it goes", ie the fund has to have enough in it to pay all claims in any year , and provide an acturially based accural for ongoing future costs of such claims.

EDIT What i was origianlly getting at, is that a sport injury is funded from the general fund, which is not funded by employer or rego levies.

Understand but tax is tax be it a levy on rego.......chances of either running out is not gonna happen from what I hear as they seem to have a bottomless pit.....

[yungatart]

Were you touching wood when you typed that?

Yep! Had my hand on my head and my elbow resting on the desk, just to make sure!

[The Stranger]

Whilst I have issues with ACC at the same time it has lots of pros and I really do not see the fact that we pay more on Rego as a big issue in the whole scheme of things........sorry.

Except there is a govt position paper somewhere (please don't ask where, but I can probably find it if I have to) which basically says that motorcyclists should be ACC levied off of the road. This is one option which ACC are/were considering, and may yet come to pass.

Would you still be happy with paying more then?

[Grahameeboy]

Except there is a govt position paper somewhere (please don't ask where, but I can probably find it if I have to) which basically says that motorcyclists should be ACC levied off of the road. This is one option which ACC are/were considering, and may yet come to pass.

Would you still be happy with paying more then?

I have no problem paying more....I enjoy riding my bike so over a 12 month period the Rego is insigificant compared to other things and is just not a battle I worry about...........at the end of day when we crash it can cost more ands as ACC is 'Non-Fault' then who was to blame is not as important as the treatment provided by ACC.

It just seems that motorcylists are full of self pity....bloody cops, bloody cagers, bloody Rego etc and that we forget the important part of riding a motorbike........it is a luxury for most of us and I guess this costs....I mean a new set of sport tyres costs $550, service $250, clothing etc, and we could replace tyres once a year so paying $200 or so for Rego is small change.

[The Stranger]

It is my belief that more accidents are caused by cars and thus the levies should be equally split not higher for us. So I realllllllly want people to tell me if they have been involved in an Accident and who was at fault. can you E-mail me please. I've also written to Fair Go. mikeycbd@xtra.co.nz without ACC investigating we will always pay the penalty for bad car drivers.

No the biggest cause of motorcycle accidents is single vehicle (i.e. our own fault) loosing it on a right hand bend.

That said, although we cause most of our own accidents these cost ACC F.A. (in general). What costs is when another vehicle is invloved. The majority of these are the (usually) cages fault. Sure everyone knows of exceptions, but that is how it is for the most part.

[Grahameeboy]

No the biggest cause of motorcycle accidents is single vehicle (i.e. our own fault) loosing it on a right hand bend.

That said, although we cause most of our own accidents these cost ACC F.A. (in general). What costs is when another vehicle is invloved. The majority of these are the (usually) cages fault. Sure everyone knows of exceptions, but that is how it is for the most part.

So if we are mainly to blamed why are we worrying about paying higher Rego?

[The Stranger]

I have no problem paying more....I enjoy riding my bike so over a 12 month period the Rego is insigificant compared to other things and is just not a battle I worry about...........at the end of day when we crash it can cost more ands as ACC is 'Non-Fault' then who was to blame is not as important as the treatment provided by ACC.

It just seems that motorcylists are full of self pity....bloody cops, bloody cagers, bloody Rego etc and that we forget the important part of riding a motorbike........it is a luxury for most of us and I guess this costs....I mean a new set of sport tyres costs $550, service $250, clothing etc, and we could replace tyres once a year so paying $200 or so for Rego is small change.

Sure and if you own only one bike and a car that is all good. I still see this as the thin edge of a wedge. I would prefer to address it now than when they do decide to levy motorcycles off of the road. I would prefer that ACC know they will have a fight on their hands and not try.

I note you only pay about $200.00. I know a guy who has a $1,800.00 annual bill for registering his motorcycles. He only ever rides one at a time. Why should he pay $1,800.00 when you pay $200.00 for the same pleasure? Other than the ACC cost his cost of ownership is not that much greater than yours.

[Grahameeboy]

Sure and if you own only one bike and a car that is all good. I still see this as the thin edge of a wedge. I would prefer to address it now than when they do decide to levy motorcycles off of the road. I would prefer that ACC know they will have a fight on their hands and not try.

I note you only pay about $200.00. I know a guy who has a $1,800.00 annual bill for registering his motorcycles. He only ever rides one at a time. Why should he pay $1,800.00 when you pay $200.00 for the same pleasure? Other than the ACC cost his cost of ownership is not that much greater than yours.

In the UK you pay a Road Licence per vehicle so I don't have an issue...plus I do not have the same pleasure as matey with a few bikes as I only have one bike to ride...surely his cost of ownership is more if he has 9 bikes although I guess that is relative to earnings....user pays, he has 9 bikes so he pays for it......I think it is that simple plus I guess the % of guys with several vehicles is pretty low so not much of an argument.

Plus do you really think that ACC will think they have a fight on their hands against 1% of the population??

The Govt does not seem to worry about disability which affects 24% of the population so lets just enjoy the pleasure of riding our bikes........life is really too short...

[The Stranger]

So if we are mainly to blamed why are we worrying about paying higher Rego?

Think of the number of bins on the Thursday night ride.
Most of these walk away, many ride home. Some have spent a night or generally no more than 2 in hospital.

A mate got hit by a 4x4 was off work for a year, in intensive care for about a week, had a hip joint rebuilt, titanium rod in his leg, house modified, been in rehab. Been back to have his leg re-set had more time off of work and still walks with a stick.

The difference is in cost HUGE

Another point to consider is why are only motorcyclists singled out for attention. We are the only ones who are (outside of employment related categories) The no blame part is is for both cause and cost, not just cost. You are not blamed if you are in the commission of a crime are you?

Another point about the no blame thing, trucks account for say 5% of the truck fleet but about 17% of accident costs. Why not single them out?

The figures in the last example may be a bit out because they are from memory, however they aren't far out.

[Grahameeboy]

Think of the number of bins on the Thursday night ride.
Most of these walk away, many ride home. Some have spent a night or generally no more than 2 in hospital.

A mate got hit by a 4x4 was off work for a year, in intensive care for about a week, had a hip joint rebuilt, titanium rod in his leg, house modified, been in rehab. Been back to have his leg re-set had more time off of work and still walks with a stick.

The difference is in cost HUGE

Another point to consider is why are only motorcyclists singled out for attention. We are the only ones who are (outside of employment related categories) The no blame part is is for both cause and cost, not just cost. You are not blamed if you are in the commission of a crime are you?

Another point about the no blame thing, trucks account for say 5% of the truck fleet but about 17% of accident costs. Why not single them out?

The figures in the last example may be a bit out because they are from memory, however they aren't far out.

But is accident cost related to ACC payments? Plus Lorries pay a higher Road User Charge. A lot of Lorry accidents are also single vehicle so we are back in Motorbike area and most drivers walk away, probably with less cost to ACC than single accident riders.

So we are singled out..big deal....nothing new plus we are a minority so we are an easy target....compared to a car riding a motorbike is a higher risk.......maybe there is a genuine concern because I doubt the total ACC levy from motorbikes is that great anyway and I suspect that car drivers levies contribute more to the cost, to ACC of looking after motorcyclists than we do anyway...I mean does $200 or so cover me just having gravel rash treated...suspect not

I wish you well but to me it is a nothing issue that is all but respect you for following your beliefs.

[The Stranger]

I wish you well but to me it is a nothing issue that is all but respect you for following your beliefs.

Ok, Grahameeboy, I can dig what you say sir.

Me, I try to put something back into motorcycling cause I really appreciate what I get out of it and all the absolutely fucken awesome people you meet. I try to make a difference politically, volunteer my time with RRRS and help anyone I can with advice and time with repairs and tools etc.

I figure if we don't protect (or at least try to) what we have or we stand to loose it (or some of it) and shit, I don't want that thank you.

To each his own though.

But hey what I can't figure out is, if you really don't care, why you arguing? Slow day I guess?

[Grahameeboy]

Ok, Grahameeboy, I can dig what you say sir.

Me, I try to put something back into motorcycling cause I really appreciate what I get out of it and all the absolutely fucken awesome people you meet. I try to make a difference politically, volunteer my time with RRRS and help anyone I can with advice and time with repairs and tools etc.

I figure if we don't protect (or at least try to) what we have or we stand to loose it (or some of it) and shit, I don't want that thank you.

To each his own though.

But hey what I can't figure out is, if you really don't care, why you arguing? Slow day I guess?

I care to contribute to this Thread

[Ixion]

What Mr CaN said. If y'don't fight back every time, the bastidges will screw y'down. Give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile.

TPTB hate motorcycles with a mighty hatred, cos we stand for everything they want to destroy. Pricing us off the road by absurd levies would be music to their ears.

They almost managed it in the 90's that's why I'm so pleased to see more motorcyclists on the road. There's strength in numbers. Provided we can all stick together and have a bit of gumption, and don't go rolling over and wimping out like bikers did in the 90s.

Back in the 70s bikers were a force to be reckoned with, I remember what happened when they tried the ACC levy trick back then. They were a tougher breed back then, we won't see the likes of those old bikers again, but we can still make our mark. If we stick together.

Stick it to the Man , cos if y'don't he'll stick to you!

[Grahameeboy]

What Mr CaN said. If y'don't fight back every time, the bastidges will screw y'down. Give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile.

TPTB hate motorcycles with a mighty hatred, cos we stand for everything they want to destroy. Pricing us off the road by absurd levies would be music to their ears.

They almost managed it in the 90's that's why I'm so pleased to see more motorcyclists on the road. There's strength in numbers. Provided we can all stick together and have a bit of gumption, and don't go rolling over and wimping out like bikers did in the 90s.

Back in the 70s bikers were a force to be reckoned with, I remember what happened when they tried the ACC levy trick back then. They were a tougher breed back then, we won't see the likes of those old bikers again, but we can still make our mark. If we stick together.

Stick it to the Man , cos if y'don't he'll stick to you!

I have my own important battles and this just is not one that I worry about......I think the more trubs we create the more we expose ourselves and open ourselves up.................but if you asked me to sign something I would cause I can still support in that way..

[M1CRO]

... and help anyone I can with ...
Hey, if I ask, can you help me with ... lol? :rockon: