ACC whinge

[Molly]

I'm guessing a lot of us own more than one bike and it seems unfair to have to pay an ACC levy on each when they can only be ridden one at a time (I could own ten bikes and it wouldn't change the number of kilometres I'll do in a year).

There's got to be a fairer way hasn't there? Stick it on the fuel maybe? Make people buy their own compulsory insurance based on their individual risk?

[mikeey01]

I'm guessing a lot of us own more than one bike and it seems unfair to have to pay an ACC levy on each when they can only be ridden one at a time (I could own ten bikes and it wouldn't change the number of kilometres I'll do in a year).

There's got to be a fairer way hasn't there? Stick it on the fuel maybe? Make people buy their own compulsory insurance based on their individual risk?

Don't stop just their, take every lawn mower in Auckland, each of those have just had a few cents go to acc, roading etc etc etc.. now add this up around the country and you start to deal with massive numbers!

I hear ya though, I say share that rego / plate around the bikes :)

[motorbyclist]

meanwhile i pay road tax on the fuel for my motox bikes.....

[Crazy Steve]

How about, try never claiming Acc ever...

But yet continuously paying and paying....

Always riding with FULL Gear...and when seeing peeps riding in shorts and tee shirt....Wondering why I'm paying when they make a mistake.....

Surley I should only pay for my Own Mistakes ? ?

Crazy Steve...

[Katman]

meanwhile i pay road tax on the fuel for my motox bikes.....

Well you don't pay any ACC for them.

[Macros]

Surley I should only pay for my Own Mistakes ? ?


Ahh yes.... Socialised medicine sure is evil. The health care system in the states is where it's at. :confused:

[FJRider]

I'm guessing a lot of us own more than one bike and it seems unfair to have to pay an ACC levy on each when they can only be ridden one at a time (I could own ten bikes and it wouldn't change the number of kilometres I'll do in a year).

There's got to be a fairer way hasn't there? Stick it on the fuel maybe? Make people buy their own compulsory insurance based on their individual risk?

I'm guessing a lot of people have more than one car too... ACC levies for them are increased for them now.

There is enough tax on fuel now...

Compulsory insurance will negate the need for Goverment tax sponsored ACC....

[motorbyclist]

How about, try never claiming Acc ever...

But yet continuously paying and paying....

Always riding with FULL Gear...and when seeing peeps riding in shorts and tee shirt....Wondering why I'm paying when they make a mistake.....

Surley I should only pay for my Own Mistakes ? ?

Crazy Steve...

it's either that or they get hurt, but don't go to a doctor for financial reasons, and then as a result of the injury their working ability is impaired and they either end up on a benefit, or otherwise as a drain on society

I hope i never have to argue with a health insurer. automotive insurance is bad enough


Well you don't pay any ACC for them.

actually, yes i do, and not only in my wages etc etc

tis called an MNZ licence, required to enter any half decent event and the majority of the fee goes straight to ACC

of course, i've never actually required acc of my own fault, unless riding the bike in the first place can be considered my fault, and even then i'm yet to have a serous injury (worst i had was an xray and a sling, no breaks or stitches... and one ambo callout after an idiot cager on muriwai did his best to ruin my weekend)

meanwhile my regular dirt riding buddy is practically on a first name basis with paramedics and emergency staff:rolleyes:

[arj127]

There's got to be a fairer way hasn't there? Stick it on the fuel maybe? Make people buy their own compulsory insurance based on their individual risk?

I said something similar to this not that long ago, and most people just gave me shit about it (including Katman). Can't see why i should have to pay ACC on my car rego and then again on my bike rego, i can only use one at any one time!!

Put it on the fuel, then anyone using pays, the dude down the road who chops his toe off cause hes cutting his lawn in jandals.

[FJRider]

I said something similar to this not that long ago, and most people just gave me shit about it (including Katman). Cn't see why i should have to pay ACC on my car rego and then again on my bike rego, i can only use one at any one time!!

Put it on the fuel, then anyone using pays, the dude down the road hows chops his toe off cause hes cutting his lawn in jandals.

Perhaps a road user tax (Per kilometer as for Diesel vehicles) on ALL motor vehicles... the more you travel, the more risk of injury, the more you pay.

Put it on the fuel and to cover the ACC shortfall.... petrol will be around $5.00 a litre.... IMMEDIATELY... do we really want that ???

[arj127]

True that, FJ, maybe a portion of both is a good idea, that way anyone using fuel, such as fisherman, jetski riders, mx what ever will be contributing towards ACC. I don't mind paying road user tax, average user is 20000k per year, divided by roughly $220 ACC on our rego = $0.011 per kilometre if i have done my calcs right

[MotoKuzzi]

There is a way of claiming back the road tax component of petrol if you can prove it's not being used on public roads. Used to do it on the petrol tractor and Quad bike i had. Don't know whether it only applies to businesses or not. Fuel tax rego board or some such Quango can't remember the details now.

[FJRider]

Simple rule of goverment... you can not please everybody... so they do not try...

[FJRider]

There is a way of claiming back the road tax component of petrol if you can prove it's not being used on public roads. Used to do it on the petrol tractor and Quad bike i had. Don't know whether it only applies to businesses or not. Fuel tax rego board or some such Quango can't remember the details now.

I believe you need to be GST registered... or similar term...

[rosie631]

I'm guessing a lot of us own more than one bike and it seems unfair to have to pay an ACC levy on each when they can only be ridden one at a time (I could own ten bikes and it wouldn't change the number of kilometres I'll do in a year).

There's got to be a fairer way hasn't there? Stick it on the fuel maybe? Make people buy their own compulsory insurance based on their individual risk?

I agree. Not sure of the answer but the current system is BULLSHIT

[cold comfort]

Iff ACC are so bloody short of cash WHY are we coughing up for jap/ Yank snowboarders/ mountain climbers to be choppered out and be operated on at the NZ taxpayers expense? Also suicide "attempts" are also under ACC (ostensibly so the Ambo service gets paid). Is there not some sort of lack of users pays, if not outright inequity?

[AD345]

Whinge is right

It's an insurance premium. Like most insurance premiums the vast bulk of payers never make claims that cover their premium.

Otherwise it don't work.

Given that ACC is levied across a very wide cross section of the population the individual premiums are, in fact, quite low. So low, in fact, that there is a 1.5 billion dollar shortfall. We should be paying up towards $1000 per bike per year

and that would STILL be fucking cheap.

Riding a bike is a choice - not a necessity. There is no rational reason for choosing a bike over any other form of tranpsort other than "I want to".

Get over yourselves.

[Molly]

AD. I think you missed my point. I don't begrudge paying the f'kin' levy. I just begrudge paying it on every bike I own.

I ride whenever I get the chance and that won't change because I own one or ten bikes. There's no justification for my being charged a separate levy on each bike (or car for that matter). The risk simply isn't proportional to the number of vehicles owned.

[AD345]

AD. I think you missed my point. I don't begrudge paying the f'kin' levy. I just begrudge paying it on every bike I own.

I ride whenever I get the chance and that won't change because I own one or ten bikes. There's no justification for my being charged a separate levy on each bike (or car for that matter). The risk simply isn't proportional to the number of vehicles owned.

yeah - I did kinda slip straight into rant mode didn't I?

I do see your point but you're talking about portable personal insurance. Given that ACC covers a multitude of sins it would be a very brave govt. that tried to raise a levy on the individual. The last attempt was the poll tax in the UK - that didn't go down very well. Trying to administer a scheme which kept track of every licensed individual and the number and type of vehicles they owned in order to asses varying degrees of levy would likely raise the costs of the scheme by several orders of magnitude.

Levying by road - registered vehicle is relatively simple with (one hopes) comensurate administration expenses.

It's not necessarily "fair" all of the time - but thats life.

[MaxB]

Whinge is right
Riding a bike is a choice - not a necessity. There is no rational reason for choosing a bike over any other form of tranpsort other than "I want to".

Get over yourselves.

Tell that to the young people at my work on thier 35km/l scooters 'cos they have no other options. Bus passes, trains, cars are all out of reach to these types.

Go to third world countries and see how necessary bikes like Honda Cubs are. We are only a few infrastructure collapses and financial wipeouts from becoming one.

[AD345]

Tell that to the young people at my work on thier 35km/l scooters 'cos they have no other options. Bus passes, trains, cars are all out of reach to these types.

Go to third world countries and see how necessary bikes like Honda Cubs are. We are only a few infrastructure collapses and financial wipeouts from becoming one.

Send them round - I'll tell them. They ARE making a choice.

Doomongerers notwithstanding we are not a Third World country - and we are not likely to become so in my or your lifetimes

[klingon]

...
Riding a bike is a choice - not a necessity. There is no rational reason for choosing a bike over any other form of tranpsort other than "I want to"...

or "it's a cheap and practical way to get around the city that saves me time and money. It is cheaper and faster than walking, riding a pushbike, public transport or driving a car."

But yeah, apart from that there's no other reason.

[rwh]

I do see your point but you're talking about portable personal insurance. Given that ACC covers a multitude of sins it would be a very brave govt. that tried to raise a levy on the individual.

And that doesn't make it any fairer either, since there are many people who don't drive - even if they have licences.

The claim that 'I have several bikes and obviously can't ride more than one at a time' isn't perfectly logical either, since you can easily lend them to your mates, so they could all get ridden at once.

There's no way that will suit everybody.

Richard

[AD345]

or "it's a cheap and practical way to get around the city that saves me time and money. It is cheaper and faster than walking, riding a pushbike, public transport or driving a car."

But yeah, apart from that there's no other reason.


There's a few myths in there I reckon.

Cheaper?

How much public transport could you pay for from the money that has gone on:
Buying the bike
Buying the gear
Buying the extra flouro gear
Insuring the bike
Servicing the bike - including tyres
Registering the bike
"Personalising" the bike (we all do)
last and least - the petrol for the bike

More practical?

Most don't work in what they wear to ride, especially in inclement weather.
Limited luggage capacity (very).

faster?

Yeah - probably for inner city commuting.

I understand all the reasons for buying and riding bikes - its what I do too. But I don't kid myself that it is anything other than personal choice

[klingon]

Well if, like me, buying a bike allowed you to get rid of your car - then you save all the money you would have spent on registering, maintaining etc etc...

Also in my case I would need to take at least two buses and two hours to get from home to work (each way) and the fare would be around $10 a time.

My bike wasn't expensive to buy and isn't expensive to maintain. The gear was cheap (mostly on special, second hand, or bought with gift vouchers that I requested for Xmas and birthday presents).

And then there is the fuel saving! Huge! :clap:

So yeah. For me I definitely chose to get a bike as a cheap and practical form of transport. Since then I have become very fond of the bike and the lifestyle that goes with it, but that is an unexpected secondary benefit.

[AD345]

Well if, like me, buying a bike allowed you to get rid of your car - then you save all the money you would have spent on registering, maintaining etc etc...

Also in my case I would need to take at least two buses and two hours to get from home to work (each way) and the fare would be around $10 a time.

My bike wasn't expensive to buy and isn't expensive to maintain. The gear was cheap (mostly on special, second hand, or bought with gift vouchers that I requested for Xmas and birthday presents).

And then there is the fuel saving! Huge! :clap:

So yeah. For me I definitely chose to get a bike as a cheap and practical form of transport. Since then I have become very fond of the bike and the lifestyle that goes with it, but that is an unexpected secondary benefit.

Ok lets have a look then

Although you chose the bike over a car - that doesn't remove the costs from the equation when comparing against public transport.

So:

Buying the gear
lets say $800 over a year
Buying the extra flouro gear
lets say $100
Insuring the bike
lets say $500
Servicing the bike - including tyres
lets say 1 tyre and a well maintained bike over a year = $1100
Registering the bike
we'll call it an even $200
"Personalising" the bike (we all do)
lets say another $500
last and least - the petrol for the bike
lets say $20 per week

Now - you're gonna have to go to work for 46 weeks a year (52 weeks minus 4 weeks holiday and 11 public holidays.) At $20 per day for public transport that 20 x 5 x 46 = $4600 to take the bus

Ze bike is 800 + 100 + 500 + 1100 + 200 + 500 + (20 x 46) = $4120

So - Klingon beat AD335 - Victory is hers!

But, Im comfortable that Im conservative in my cost estimates - it wouldn't take much to blow them out - PLUS I didn't include the original purchase price of the bike. That would actually be a saving AGAINST the bike

Its going to be a while and some cautious riding before those savings really start to kick in.


Its way more fun though

cos thats what ya chose

[MaxB]

There's a few myths in there I reckon.

Cheaper?

How much public transport could you pay for from the money that has gone on:
Buying the bike
Buying the gear
Buying the extra flouro gear
Insuring the bike
Servicing the bike - including tyres
Registering the bike
"Personalising" the bike (we all do)
last and least - the petrol for the bike

More practical?

Most don't work in what they wear to ride, especially in inclement weather.
Limited luggage capacity (very).

faster?

Yeah - probably for inner city commuting.

I understand all the reasons for buying and riding bikes - its what I do too. But I don't kid myself that it is anything other than personal choice

It may be personal choice but people on low incomes have very limited choices.

Time for some facts. The student kid my daughter works with gave me his running costs from his home to Auckand city.

Costs for the first 2 years averaged $47.30/week for everything while he paid off the 100cc commuter bike, gear and consumables. His petrol cost was $22/week and that includes social trips.

Now the bike has been paid for his costs are down to $35/week.

A 10 trip train/bus ticket is $51.50. Neither comes within 2k of his rent reduced house. And it is dead money, at least with the scooter he has an asset albeit not a very good one.

So exactly what other alternatives does this guy have?

[AD345]

It may be personal choice but people on low incomes have very limited choices.

Time for some facts. The student kid my daughter works with gave me his running costs from his home to Auckand city.

Costs for the first 2 years averaged $47.30/week for everything while he paid off the 100cc commuter bike, gear and consumables. His petrol cost was $22/week and that includes social trips.

Now the bike has been paid for his costs are down to $35/week.

A 10 trip train/bus ticket is $51.50. Neither comes within 2k of his rent reduced house. And it is dead money, at least with the scooter he has an asset albeit not a very good one.

So exactly what other alternatives does this guy have?

You know Max - you may have a (tiny) point.

To all the scooter riders out there - hard luck.

I was thinking and writing about actual bikes as the vast majority of people on this site (including alllll the posters to this thread) ride bikes and not scooters. The post you quoted was in reply to Klingon and her Volty.

Im sure you feel all warm inside knowing that you were able to find this $35 per week paragon of thrift and hold them up as a shining example to humble the arrogant AD345and his sweeping generalisations.

I am in awe.

[Road Guardian]

How about, try never claiming Acc ever...

But yet continuously paying and paying....

Always riding with FULL Gear...and when seeing peeps riding in shorts and tee shirt....Wondering why I'm paying when they make a mistake.....

Surley I should only pay for my Own Mistakes ? ?

Crazy Steve, you are spot on the mark there!!!!! :2thumbsup

Did you know that every time someone is involved in a car accident and gets transported to a hospital (from small cuts/bruises to fractures), wam bam, up goes our ACC levies on vehicles again. Funny how plain old common sense could stop things like this from happening.

[thepom]

Sell one of your ten bikes to cover your cost,s......:lol: and this is a third world country...:buggerd:

[klingon]

So - Klingon beat AD335 - Victory is hers!




You know Max - you may have a (tiny) point.
...
Im sure you feel all warm inside knowing that you were able to find this $35 per week paragon of thrift and hold them up as a shining example to humble the arrogant AD345and his sweeping generalisations.

I am in awe.

Aaaawww don't take it all so personally! :hug: We were actually making these points to inform the discussion for everyone reading it, not as a personal victory over you.

In fact, the numbers you have estimated for my Volty above are seriously over-inflated. For example I'm flattered that you think my new fluoro gear cost $100 (it does look very stylish) but it actually cost $30 (and is a one-off cost).

Gear: I have two jackets! :banana: One I won in a competition, one is a summer mesh jacket that cost $250 (I bought it with birthday gift vouchers). My cordura trousers cost $120, gloves $30, helmet $200, boots $350. [I think my draggin jeans were $150 from the motomail outlet store but my memory may be incorrect.] The helmet will need to be replaced in a couple of years but the rest are all one-off expenses.

As for tyres, I got new ones when I first bought the bike in 2006, and haven't changed them since. Little commuter bikes don't go through tyres the way big bikes do.

Insurance $100 per year

Maintenance - well I rebuilt the bike after a major melt-down late last year. Bought a GN for $700, paid a mechanic to swap the engines over and sold the remains of both bikes for parts. That was a once-only event. Normal yearly maintenance would be closer to $100 than $1100.

If I didn't have the bike I wouldn't just have to pay for daily commuting on public transport - I would also be going places in the evenings and weekends, and would have to take a bus *shudder* to visit my mother in Hamilton.

None of this takes into account the time I save by taking a bike instead of a bus, and the fact that on a bike I have a fairly accurate idea of the time I will reach my destination. On a bus I would need to allow a margin of error of about an hour if I wanted to be at a meeting on time.

[Motig]

So does anyone know what the increase in ACC is going to be on motorbikes ? Sure to be far more than the $30 odd dollars for a car.

[motorbyclist]

It's an insurance premium. Like most insurance premiums the vast bulk of payers never make claims that cover their premium.

very true



Otherwise it don't work.
Riding a bike is a choice - not a necessity. There is no rational reason for choosing a bike over any other form of tranpsort other than "I want to".


to start off, owning more than one bike is a choice, and very rarely a necessity.

but for a large portion of us, a bike is the only viable mode of transport, and for most 'necessity' riders their gear is a bare minimum as is their 'recreational petrol bill' as i like to call it, to reflect the abject poverty some are subjected to, often while studying. unfortunately this makes them more likely to be hurt in an accident, and an accident usually involves hitting a car


meanwhile, further up the economic ladder, there are still 'necessity riders' buy cost:

my old man CAN and occasionally does have to drive his ute to work, but if he doesn't need to he'll take his vfr800. this saves him over $100 a week, which can then go back into supporting his student offspring.

myself, I am a full time engineering student (ie will actually give back to economy with my degree) and really have little time even to work a part time job with reliable hours. My parents earn just enough to make me ineligible for a student allowance, despite them supporting two tertiary students and one high schooler. as such, i live at home, rent free. unfortunately This means I catching the bus is a lost cause, and catching the train means a DRIVE to the nearest train station (or a few stages down the line as it's cheaper to drive than train), followed by delays in the system, and HOUR on the train and $5.70 each way, then have to walk ten minutes to actually get to the university.
If i drove to uni it would cost less and even in peak traffic take less time, BUT i'd get raped by 6 -12 $/hr parking in the city.
If i ride my 400, it takes 30 minutes in peak traffic or 20 minutes in flowing traffic, and about 1 L of petrol each way. I can park on campus most days, right outside where i need to be.

SO, for me, a casual worker/full time student, I face either $3 and 60minutes a day for travel, plus work travel, OR $12, at least 150 minutes, and require someone to drop me at the train station or risk parking my own vehicle (with acc rego etc :rolleyes:).
travel time is time i could spend studying or working, currently valued at $15 an hour after tax, and there is NO available bus route to within 15 minutes walk of one of my jobs, and i need my bike gear for my other job anyway.

so, while i could take the bus/train/drive, i'd have to be bloody retarded to do so. i tell my friends this regularly. they are all rapidly getting scooters/bikes. it's fun riding in groups on our commute, and makes things safer.
a carpool would be just as good, but we all operate to wildly different schedules.

lets look at another case: my brother who was working full time and is now studying full time in a 9-month CAD course (job lined up for afterwards). He flats in mt albert, and rides an r6. while he was working he lost his licence to speed - he went from a 5 minute commute to a 30 minutes commute plus 15 minute walk plus a tenfold increase in cost. now he's studying a bus is again such a ridiculous proposistion, and ont he bike he can take his girlfriend as a pillion to keep costs down further.

again because their parents earn too much they can't get a benefit (despite both pairs of parents supporting several students), they're students so can't go on the dole, and yet running an r6 is the only financially viable solution

another case: my youngest brother, 5th form. For him, the only difference is that of a 5 minute commute by bike, or an HOUR by bus. I know which one i'd choose.

[The Pastor]

rego on the fuel costs is really good.

if fuel went up 10c cos of the regos, you'd have to do a shit load of kms before it comes close to having paid the same ammount as the rego fee. Then most of us have more than 1 registerd vechile (i have 3 atm) so with the rego on the fuel you only pay for what you use. For me to spend the $900 in rego i'd have to do 135 000k a year to match that (on 10c a L and 15Km/L). And if i dont drive for a month inbetween, i dont pay for it!

Its brilliant.

[The Pastor]

then again i dont actually pay my regos, so if it went on fuel costs i'd be forced to pay more.... but it'd make insurance alot better.

[Motig]

Just googled to try to find motorcycle ACC levy- nothing. But interestingly one of the reccomendations from business new zealand was that the govt remove the cross subsidy of car ACC payers towards motorbikes. Grief if that came in we'ed be priced of the road.

[MaxB]

Uncle Helen's junta made it so that all bike accidents are paid from the rego component for bikes. A large proportion of claims happen via unregisterted bikes. Like when little Johnny busts his arm jumping sand dunes. Official race organisers have to levy riders for ACC within the entry fees but the average Joe pays nothing towards his off road thrills and spills on an unregistered bike.

People are pinged in other ways so the Average Joe will pay into other accounts for his ACC contribtuions but I look forward to the day when my car rego includes all the lawn tractor and go-kart accidents caused by unregistered 4 wheeled vehicles. Or road registered bikes only pay for on road accidents.

[MarkH]

There is no rational reason for choosing a bike over any other form of tranpsort other than "I want to".

So not true!

I chose to switch from commuting around Auckland in a car to doing it on a bike because it saves me a huge amount of time. I am self employed and travel around Auckland quite a lot during the day, the traffic can be VERY bad at times. I believe this is a perfectly rational reason for my decision and therefore good proof that your statement is incorrect.

[xwhatsit]

I've gone from spending most (and I mean most, i.e. more than half) of my wages on transport to and from work and uni on the bus, to having it now as a fairly small factor in my expenses. I can save money now (although, I spend it on things like fancy clip-ons and mirrors and headlights, which is self-defeating -- but still discretionary). And of course the massive time savings and ability to spend extra time at work, earning more money, because I don't have to catch the last bus at 10.40pm.

It's hardly a choice, well it is of course, but right now I'd deem it economically impossible to go back to catching the bus without a big drop in lifestyle quality (i.e. baked beans for tea instead of being able to go out with the missus to a restaurant every once in a while), especially as since I stopped using it the price of bus fares has gone from $10 a trip to more like $15.

I find your figures extortionate -- if I had to spend that sort of money I wouldn't be able to afford it. My insurance is half, I don't wear fluoro, I bought a second-hand set of leathers, I maintain the bike myself and tyres are $120 each and last for 20-30,000kms. I get 28km/L.

AD345, while you might ride the bike purely as a toy (I'm making that assumption from the way you write and your choice of motorcycle), there's a lot of us for whom it is a necessary and important tool in our daily life. It serves a serious and important function. It's not a trivial `lifestyle choice' in the slightest. For sure I go for weekend rides when I have the time but that's additional discretionary spending, and fairly cheap fun at that compared to going to the pictures.

On topic, if we only paid one ACC levy instead of one on each bike, to make up the shortfall in total income, they'd have to raise the ACC levies overall to compensate. So while the guys with heaps of bikes would be better off, those with only one (and no interest in getting more) would be stung. GiJoe1313 with his >9000 bikes is subsidising the rest of us. Thanks mate!

[davereid]

Like anything, if the price gets too expensive, people will stop buying.

Thats a danger for ACC.

Lots of the bikers on here with several machines will simply ride their favorite, and leave the others on hold.

ACC will still have the same risk, as the number of miles being ridden hasn't changed, but they have halved their income.

Its already happened in the davereid household, ACC will only get a fraction of last years revenue from me as I have put low usage vehicles on hold, or farm rego.

[motorbyclist]

Just googled to try to find motorcycle ACC levy- nothing. But interestingly one of the reccomendations from business new zealand was that the govt remove the cross subsidy of car ACC payers towards motorbikes. Grief if that came in we'ed be priced of the road.


Uncle Helen's junta made it so that all bike accidents are paid from the rego component for bikes. A large proportion of claims happen via unregisterted bikes. Like when little Johnny busts his arm jumping sand dunes. Official race organisers have to levy riders for ACC within the entry fees but the average Joe pays nothing towards his off road thrills and spills on an unregistered bike.

People are pinged in other ways so the Average Joe will pay into other accounts for his ACC contribtuions but I look forward to the day when my car rego includes all the lawn tractor and go-kart accidents caused by unregistered 4 wheeled vehicles. Or road registered bikes only pay for on road accidents.

lets not forget that a sizeable chunk of motorcycle accidents are generally caused by four wheeled vehicles anyway

[RocKai]

I'm intrigued. What say you AD? I'm about to switch from driving my cage to riding a bike this weekend. Is it a choice? Yes and No. Car just simply cost me too much. You don't wanna start with the figures. Bike = Bad hair, weather dependent...etc. But I'd rather smoke those dumb ass boy racers in my 2 wheels then having to take it in my 4 wheels. Then again, I'm from a 2 wheels 3rd world country so 2 wheels will always be my choice, be it entertainment or necessity. :bash:

[mikeey01]

AD. I think you missed my point. I don't begrudge paying the f'kin' levy. I just begrudge paying it on every bike I own.

I ride whenever I get the chance and that won't change because I own one or ten bikes. There's no justification for my being charged a separate levy on each bike (or car for that matter). The risk simply isn't proportional to the number of vehicles owned.

I hear ya, I hear ya.

It's a pain in the arse and there is no way out of simple paying, over and over again on many rego's.

I use too share the plates / rego around... no know ever knew the difference.

[Pixie]

I wouldn't be as disgusted with the ACC system if they ran it like an insurance company and didn't pay for safety ads on TV,contribute to road policing etc.Do you know they were a significant sponsor of the Pacifica Festival?- with our levies!

And the inability to sue those responsible for accidents and unsafe conditions,
is the reason NZTA can get away with the atrocious condition of our roads.
You wouldn't get them using cut-price construction techniques if they stood to get their arses sued when vehicles run off the road.

[klingon]

...Do you know they were a significant sponsor of the Pacifica Festival?- with our levies!...



Are you sure that's the Accident Compensation Corporation? Not Auckland City Council?

[sharknet]

Here's my 10c worth...

If you own more than one bike and/or car, (which I have to do, as moving my two kids around on the bike is not that easy) you pay two ACC levies.

As it has been pointed out, you can only ride/drive one at a time so...

Put the ACC levy on the drivers licence, make it a yearly renewal. The onus is then on every licenced driver to be paid up.

As vehicles get registered yearly (or six monthly) and each vehicle needs to be registered TO someone, it would be easy for the LTSA to check the ACC componment. No ACC, no rego.

For those who do not own cars, a similar system of notification to say a power bill would need to apply.

As it stands, putting the ACC component on fuel hurts all those who never use a road, as pointed out before.

As for the pathetic public transport in Auckland, who wants to spend three hours EACH way, and in my case over $30 per day on a train/bus..?

I ride a bike because 1. I enjoy it, 2. I only have so much time in the day and 3. In my own little way I am easing the traffic congestion.

I don't save all that much in fuel, the diesel truck I have actually costs about 10% more to run than the bike, what I can't (and won't) do is waste the precious little time I have left after work sitting in traffic. The bike helps there, but as I ride every day, sometimes I really miss the roof and the heater.

[rosie631]

I agree with sharknet. Excellent idea

[rwh]

Here's my 10c worth...

If you own more than one bike and/or car, (which I have to do, as moving my two kids around on the bike is not that easy) you pay two ACC levies.

As it has been pointed out, you can only ride/drive one at a time so...

Put the ACC levy on the drivers licence, make it a yearly renewal. The onus is then on every licenced driver to be paid up.

Just as a driver with 2 vehicles can only drive one at a time, so a couple with one car between them can only drive one at a time. It's exactly the same - except I'm betting there are more shared vehicles out there than single people with more than one.

And in either case, there are exceptions - you can lend a vehicle to someone else while you drive the other, and the couple can borrow one.


As vehicles get registered yearly (or six monthly) and each vehicle needs to be registered TO someone, it would be easy for the LTSA to check the ACC componment. No ACC, no rego.

Not necessarily to a natural person, or a person who has a licence. Companies can own them, and you could have one that you need to get a chauffer to drive.


For those who do not own cars, a similar system of notification to say a power bill would need to apply.

I don't follow that bit


As it stands, putting the ACC component on fuel hurts all those who never use a road, as pointed out before.

Most of the non-road uses of fuel I can think of aren't much less risky, if at all.

The system (either the current one or the fuel tax idea) is approximately fair enough, IMHO. Any attempt to make it fairer will make it more complex and more expensive for everyone in the long run.

And anyway, as someone else pointed out - insurance, which ACC is, works by sharing everything out. To make it perfectly fair, you'd just have to leave people to die on the roadside, because they couldn't afford the medical bills.

Richard

[Benjiboi]

I ride a bike to work each day, since it is such a short trip its cost me around $20 a fortnight (depending on current fuel prices).

In my car the same trip costs around $70 a week and takes roughly 20mins longer.:crybaby:

Huge savings on fuel are good for my pocket and the environment.:woohoo:

[rosie631]

..I say get rid of ACC altogether. They have blown their budget so all our fees go up so they have more money to waste. I have worked out what I pay in ACC levies on my vehicles and I'm damn sure I could find private accident cover for a hell of a lot less than I'm paying these arseholes