Rego fee idea for BRONZ

[James Deuce]

Multiple bikes in the garage = multiple registration fees.

Solution: ACC Levies on only one of the bikes registered to the owner.

Number of ACC levies due per household would be governed by the number of Class 6 license holders living in a household.

1 Class 6 license holder and 4 bikes = 1 Rego fee including ACC levy + 3 rego fees excluding ACC levies. Only one bike can be ridden at a time.

2 Class 6 license holders at an address and 2 bikes = 2 x rego fee including ACC levy. Both bikes could be on the road at the same time.

I would be more happy to continue paying more ACC fees than a Class 1 holder if there was some fairness in the system as described above.

[yungatart]

Brilliant idea! Would certainly save some dollars in this household...4 bikes currently in the gargre, 3 license holders. Every little helps.

[Kflasher]

That would such a sweet deal...the monies saved could go towards...hmmm, bolt on bits.

[u4ea]

Its definatly a great idea but I cant see them doing away with ACC levies for no:2..they need to sqeeze every penny out of us they can remember!!!

[Holy Roller]

Thats a great idea in theory:yes:
Same arguement could be used for cages also. ACC Levys may be charged to licence holders instead as it is the person who gets hurt, then what about those who have a licence but no vechicle?:spudwhat:

[NinjaNanna]

Wouldn't it just be easier to transfer the ACC levie to the Drivers License. (yearly or 5yearly fee)

That way everybody who has a motorcycle license pays the levie, regardless of the number of bikes they own or have registered.

If a rider has a license but does not ride then they should be able to suspend their motorcycle license (much the same as suspending your vehicle license fees)

If you get caught riding while you have your license "on hold" then you get a wacking great fine (say 2 yrs worth of levie)

Seems pretty simple to me

[ManDownUnder]

It doesn't benefit me peraonlly but...

Jesus! Now THERE is common sense if I ever heard it.

Love it... :niceone:

[WarlockNZ]

Multiple bikes in the garage = multiple registration fees.

Solution: ACC Levies on only one of the bikes registered to the owner.

Number of ACC levies due per household would be governed by the number of Class 6 license holders living in a household.

1 Class 6 license holder and 4 bikes = 1 Rego fee including ACC levy + 3 rego fees excluding ACC levies. Only one bike can be ridden at a time.

2 Class 6 license holders at an address and 2 bikes = 2 x rego fee including ACC levy. Both bikes could be on the road at the same time.

I would be more happy to continue paying more ACC fees than a Class 1 holder if there was some fairness in the system as described above.






Are you a member of Bronz?? .. if so, just attend the next meeting and raise it .. i think it's an awesome idea!.

If your not a member ... sign up!!!

[Ixion]

"tis a brilliant idea.

Unfortunately, the idea (in various forms, but all basically along the lines of acc and/or rego following the person rather than the vehicle) has been suggested by BRONZ , to ACC, LTSA, gubbermint in general, many times. It's sort of our annual perennial.

And the response from TPTB each time is the same . A big fat "OK. We'll think about it. Sometime. Not. Now, moving right along".

But we'll keep nagging on about it.

[Jantar]

Or easier still is to charge ACC levies on fuel, not on registration.

Then ride your bike, drive your cage, payy ACC. Leave bike or cage in the garage, don't pay ACC. Simple.

[Big Dave]

The process is a member should raise the issue in general business at the next meeting. - In Auckland that would be with Mr Ixion presiding - and a resolution be voted on by the members present.

This would then go to the National executive as a proposal to be adopted as Policy.

If adopted it will posted on the BRONZ web site policy index (Me being webmaster) and a 'form' letter calling for action would be 'copy and pasteable' to the relevant ministers and their departments.

It starts with the meetings.

ahh I see mr ix answered while i typed. carry on

[xwhatsit]

The problem is, we do tend to hurt ourselves a lot. And I'm sure somebody said that the ACC levies collected don't actually completely cover the cost of ACC payouts anyway? So while this would be very, very sweet (I'd love another plaything, maybe eight), they would lose a lot of money that many times comes back to us when we end up on car bonnets.

If they did this, I could only see them raising the existing ACC levy, penalising owners of single bikes.

[James Deuce]

If they did this, I could only see them raising the existing ACC levy, penalising owners of single bikes.

That's quite simple to avoid. Require all off-road and farm vehicles classed as motorcycles to be registered. Most of the farms I've seen, their quad bikes spend a good percentage of their time on tarseal anyway. That way a group who add to the statistics around motorcycle accident costs, but escape ACC levies on those vehicles will be captured.

I don't see how single bike owners would be "disadvantaged". At present the registered motorcycles in NZ should be covering ACC costs of more than $400 per registered motorcyle. You'd just be paying Accident Insurance premiums commensurate with the cost.

[swbarnett]

Wouldn't it just be easier to transfer the ACC levie to the Drivers License. (yearly or 5yearly fee)

Then what about those who hold a M/Cycle license but haven't ridden in years? Are you suggesting suspending the license? What if I go to live overseas, does that mean that I have to pay an NZ levy or surrender my license?

[Big Dave]

I think the current BRONZ policy favours the collection of excise at the petrol pump. Via a levy or system of them.

[SPman]

One rego affixed to the "bike de jour" ......
a bit like what several people I know do now, only legally?
Sorry - won't work - to much like common sense.

An ACC levy on fuel would be a better way of doing it (haven't BRONZ been talking about this for a while??) - that way it would encompass all vehicles if they are being used on or off road, rego'ed or not, land, sea or air. (or all three if it all goes seriously wrong......!)
It would even cover people who put their foot in the mower.......

[NighthawkNZ]

Or easier still is to charge ACC levies on fuel, not on registration.

Then ride your bike, drive your cage, payy ACC. Leave bike or cage in the garage, don't pay ACC. Simple.

that way is the best... as then the ACC is paid by others like, boaties, when you get something flung in your eye from mowing the lawn etc etc etc...

has been put to parilment many times...

[rwh]

Or easier still is to charge ACC levies on fuel, not on registration.

Then ride your bike, drive your cage, payy ACC. Leave bike or cage in the garage, don't pay ACC. Simple.

I think it's too simple, unfortunately.

We put ourselves at greater risk by riding bikes (never mind who is at fault in an accident), and also use less petrol ... I don't think there's any way this scheme could be regarded as fair. Nice for us, yes, but not fair.

Richard

[rwh]

That's quite simple to avoid. Require all off-road and farm vehicles classed as motorcycles to be registered.

Isn't this very similar to the proposal that caused such a stink in the UK recently? Perhaps you wouldn't go as far as requiring bikes in museums to be registered, but it's still going to raise a huge amount of flak from the "I'll do what I want on my own land" crowd.

Actually, I'm not sure how different it is from the current situation anyway - the definition of 'road' is quite broad in this context, and IIRC includes areas that the public have access to, whether as of right or not. I'd have thought a farm would come under that category, especially if your gates aren't locked and/or you put in styles occasionally. And if it's a road by that definition, your bike needs to be registered.

Richard

[NighthawkNZ]

I think it's too simple, unfortunately.

We put ourselves at greater risk by riding bikes (never mind who is at fault in an accident), and also use less petrol ... I don't think there's any way this scheme could be regarded as fair. Nice for us, yes, but not fair.


Becomes a numbers game... at the end of the day you could end up paying more ACC over a year... or nothing if you doint ride it... and you are only paying for it when you use you vehicle.

Over all the ACC would make more cash (and at the end of the day thats all they are after, they don't care where it comes from)

And as I said, boaties, start paying ACC, and when you mow the lawn and trail bikers, farmering equipment and vehiles (ones that don't get registered) but still have accidents, and even paying extra acc when you are racing on the track, heck you will be paying ACC when you fill you gas bottle for the heater, and the BBQ, just in case it goes bang...

ACC isn't just for road accidents you know...

[mazz1972]

Multiple bikes in the garage = multiple registration fees.

Solution: ACC Levies on only one of the bikes registered to the owner.

I would be more happy to continue paying more ACC fees than a Class 1 holder if there was some fairness in the system as described above.


Great idea....for the two of us we have 4 bikes and 2 cars....somehow can't see the govt favouring it...


I think the current BRONZ policy favours the collection of excise at the petrol pump. Via a levy or system of them.

Got to be the fairest way IMO

[James Deuce]

Great idea....for the two of us we have 4 bikes and 2 cars....somehow can't see the govt favouring it...



Got to be the fairest way IMO

Heaps of KBers have more than one road registered bike. Just go look at their profiles. KB is by no means a majority of NZ's road registered motorcycle population.

I was merely airing an idea.

The fuel idea has been mooted since the late '80s. It still isn't policy is it?

[davereid]

Or easier still is to charge ACC levies on fuel, not on registration.

Then ride your bike, drive your cage, payy ACC. Leave bike or cage in the garage, don't pay ACC. Simple.

Totally agree - unavoidable, easy to collect, reflects vehicle usage not vehicle ownership.

Same for road tolls - no need to put tracking systems in place to send invoices. Just work out the (median) cost of a road per km, the number of km we travel, and how much fuel we use and presto, a fuel tax that funds our roads without any extra technology needed.

[Skyryder]

Until the Government recognises that the biker community is a political force................nothing will change. I have no idea of the number of registed bikes out on the road. Others here may have some idea. If half turned up outside Parliment say a few weeks prior to the next election I'd say that at least one Party would run with J2's idea. I've said this before get in their face with a massive ralley and use it for a membership drive at the same time. With all due respect BD and IX etc. websites just don't carry the same weight as a few thou mufflers reved up in a mutual roar in protest. DO IT.


Skyryder

[Big Dave]

With all due respect BD and IX etc. websites just don't carry the same weight as a few thou mufflers reved up in a mutual roar in protest. DO IT.
Skyryder

None taken - conversational tone:

What is it exactly you are going to protest and how are you going to communicate it?

There are no galvanizing issues, we've all got some peeves, but there's no single issues that the general populous feels strongly enough about to come to a planning meeting first even.

You need an agenda beyond 'we're pissed off about ACC' and chuck a few burnouts.

[NighthawkNZ]

Until the Government recognises that the biker community is a political force................nothing will change. I have no idea of the number of registed bikes out on the road. Others here may have some idea. If half turned up outside Parliment say a few weeks prior to the next election I'd say that at least one Party would run with J2's idea. I've said this before get in their face with a massive ralley and use it for a membership drive at the same time. With all due respect BD and IX etc. websites just don't carry the same weight as a few thou mufflers reved up in a mutual roar in protest. DO IT.


Skyryder

that happpened in 1993... when they were going to increase the Rego and ACC fee to some abserd figure for motorcycles... it would have put the joys of motorcycling out of reach for alot of cyclists (including me) BRONZ organised a protest run out side parliment... I can't remember the number that turned up... but it was in the thousands... I rode down from Napier for it... :)

[NinjaNanna]

Then what about those who hold a M/Cycle license but haven't ridden in years? Are you suggesting suspending the license? What if I go to live overseas, does that mean that I have to pay an NZ levy or surrender my license?


NO in your circumstances you would volunterrily place your license on HOLD (to avoid paying the higher risk levy), and then re-activate it (no tests, no proof of competency required) when you decide to begin riding again.

Of course I do acknowledge that this would make it simple for the Authorities to introduce new legislation that did require re-testing if you had put your license on hold for an extended period - but would this be such a bad thing anyway? Could be linked to the need to attend a RRRS course or the likes as a refresher.


This approach seems pretty simple to me, and follows the same systems that are all ready in place for suspending the registration on project cars/bikes etc. This allows you to place rego on hold to do any long term work, and then re-license the vehicle with out the hassle of needing to re-rego/re-vin the vehicle when you have finished.

[SARGE]

how bout charging the horse people, the Thugby players and watercraft people too?

[scumdog]

My thoughts in the past have been: Buy an ACC levy 'ticket' each year - one for cars, one for bikes.
You can only drive/ride one at a time.

I've got 5 cars and 3 bikes and I'm lucky that all but CBs car are 40+ years old and rego is cheap for them.

But the bikes? Grrrr!

[Beemer]

I'd be keen, we've got five bikes and three cars! Even if we both use them at the same time, that's a maximum of two at a time so it does seem unfair. Only one is an off-road bike so all need to be registered if we are using them on the road. Not sure how they could do it fairly though.

[Big Dave]

that happpened in 1993... when they were going to increase the Rego and ACC fee to some abserd figure for motorcycles... it would have put the joys of motorcycling out of reach for alot of cyclists (including me) BRONZ organised a protest run out side parliment... I can't remember the number that turned up... but it was in the thousands... I rode down from Napier for it... :)

Nice - but it's a bit different to banging the drum for 'I want relief on my five bikes'?

[Skyryder]

None taken - conversational tone:

What is it exactly you are going to protest and how are you going to communicate it?

There are no galvanizing issues, we've all got some peeves, but there's no single issues that the general populous feels strongly enough about to come to a planning meeting first even.

You need an agenda beyond 'we're pissed off about ACC' and chuck a few burnouts.

Yes you do need an agenda………..and a national one at that. But a national agenda be it J2’s thread idea or some other idea can only be developed by leadership. The rank and file may bring issues to the notice of an organisations office holders but it is the office holders, committees etc that develop the idea into a course of action. There are no guarantees of success but there is a formula that in time can work. Political parties work to a philosophy. Surprisingly they do have a set of values that their policies generally adhere to. If the party strays off this line one of two things will happen they lose the election along with their rank and file members and usually do not get them back until the party comes back on course. Secondly and this has become more important with MMP, all political parties are looking for areas that their policies will find favour with. That is the nature of politics. Biking issues, roading, safety issues (free day care) etc do not come under any ideology and as such these issues are fertile grounds for lobby groups. In other words if a party thinks there is votes to be counted for them they will develop a policy to ensure that they do get the votes. That in short is how our political system works. It's a numbers game. Produce the numbers and the politicians will act.

I’m not too sure just what kind of info BRONZ has but on the J2 issue it would be helpful if they knew how many bikes were registered as against owners that have multiple registrations. That to me is the deciding factor if this issue is to become a national issue. The argument then becomes one of fairness. Why should all bikes owned by one individual be tied into a levy when the owner can only ride one bike at a time? That to me seems to be the issue that J2 has raised. It then become an issue of the high ground and one of fairness.

When an organisation of any kind takes to streets it requires some planning. First and foremost is the issue itself. There can be side issues but it is extremely important that one and only one becomes the focus. Any more and whole thing becomes confusing. The media love single issue events. The Maori seabed and foreshore is but one example of this.

A date needs to be decided upon. On this (J2 thread idea) needs to be discuss at a national level to see if indeed there is support. How many bikers own two or more bikes? That needs to be canvassed. Is this issue of any interest to me personally? No I only own one bike. How many like me. This needs some research done to find out. So there’s bit of work before any thing can be finalised etc.

OK so it’s a goer. Letters outlining your concerns need to be sent to as many biker groups as possible. Notices placed up on bike shop notice boards and a website for registration. I would advise all members of Parlimentof your concerns and the actions you are planning to take to bring your concerns toa the attention of the public. It would not be a bad idea to rais their awareness of the many charity groups that the bike community at large supports. You will have to notify the Wellington City Council of your intentions and possibly the police of the numbers expected. The biker community has its own grapevine. You may need to organise a special sailing for Southern bikers to get across. That would depend on numbers. Ideally the place to hole this would be in Parliament grounds. Permission would need to be granted but if granted public address systems need to be put in place and who know some kind of biker entertainment made available. Seems to me this would be good idea for the biker community to show off some of it’ stunts wet tee shirt, best paint job etc.

There is never any guarantee of success but with careful planning you will be surprised what can be achieved.

But these things take a lot of work.

Skyryder