Email List of MPs - Copy and Paste to SEND!

[Reckless]

Sent mine in thought I'd leave it a week or two so the flow is constant.

Had to sent it in 4 lots as the server wouldn't do all the addresses at the one time to so many recipients.

My 2 cents anyway!

Firstly I'll keep this short and to the point!
I'm sure you have had lots of emails quoting and questioning figures etc so I won't go over what a you already know is very wrong.

My first point is that ACC cannot even tell us if their payouts/statistics include all Off Road bike accidents or not? If I'm going to be billed for something I'd like to be able to ask for a breakdown of what I am paying for, these figures should prove I'm not subsidizing any other group of people, this is a basic consumer right. I haven't seen or read anything anywhere that unequivocally states this is what road bikers cost us in ACC, say, in the 08 year therefore this is what rego will be in the 2010 year! simple! A Bike registration charge should relate to road bike related risks and costs only!

ACC is supposed to be a no fault system. It is undemocratic and totally unfair to single out one group!
You either come up with a plan to charge all sports and ACC claimants across the board from one specific point time and make it a fault allocated system for all or you leave it as is!

Your cc rated charging cost structure is so far from understanding the true nature of biking and bikes it hints complete and utter incompetence on ACC and the National governments part! Let me tell you a Suzuki VS1400cc cruiser has a top speed less than a late model Toyota Corolla. A 250cc sports bike has a top speed of more than that, and a 600cc sports bike has a top speed of approx 2 times the corolla, the VS1400cc bike or any large capacity Harley etc. On top of this the riding style and risk factor of the purchaser of the sports bike is going to be greatly different than the purchaser of the larger capacity cruiser bike! To charge on engine size is simply wrong.

You are hugely penalising the classic bike collectors or anyone that has more than one bike but can only ride one bike. With rego at today's costs these outgoings are manageable but at $800 or more per year, per bike owning a 1978 classic and a commuter bike will be unaffordable. National is forcing us to put our classics on hold most of the year (loss of income to acc) or ride illegally. It is ridiculous to pay approx $2000 per year for two bikes when my risk ACC assessment goes down when on the 1000cc classic. It is simply wrong for a person to be charged twice for the same thing ie ACC risk!

I suggest you also look into your own practises before committing one group to unfair charges based on warped figures that are bias towards your aims. It is the ACC that in my opinion has let costs spiral out of control pretty much manufacturing a whole new medical criteria which is Physio. In days gone by if you broke a leg or has an injury you went to hospital and got it fixed. You didn't have weeks and weeks of physiotherapy. How many get FREE physio signs do I see around. ACC have let costs get out of control in my opinion and should look within.

These new bike registration ACC charges are unjust an unjustifiable based on the present statistic gathering models and figures. From everything I have researched the stats are simply not finite enough to allocate blame and cost specifically to any one group.

National ACC needs to be fair and just. For the reasons stated above, in my view, this is not the case and I will not be voting for national next election (if this goes through) and my rego's will go on hold so ACC will get much less money out of me at the increased rates than they have had in the past at the lower rate over my classic and road bikes for the same risk.

Yours sincerely

[rok-the-boat]

Good point there - and one we should all make. Every time we pay for each vehicle we are paying again for the same service. This should not happen. Each person should pay once if they have more than one vehicle.