Comments from Resource and final info threads

[R-Soul]

Nor is the initial cost in 2008, $62M. $38M of it is historical.

Thats true. So if the total amounts paid out during 2008 is $62m and the "fully funded cost" is $49m, does that get added to the 62? Total of $111m - still doesn't make up $240m...

Although as you say, there is part ($38m) of the $62m that is histrocal payouts and should have been fuully funded in the past, so its not $111m, but closer to $69m.

I think this is where the problem is. Additional cash needs to be collected to pay for crashes in the past that were not fully funded.

However, I understand that the initial deadline for collecting all of this expected present and future funding for all current and past bike crashes was suposed to be 2012 (or something like that?). Labour proposed pushing this deadline back to 2019, and even reducing ACC levies before the last election by just pushing the deadline back.

This is why the ACC is not really "in the red". Its in teh red to collect all teh required cash by the arbitrary deadline of 2012. If teh deadline is pushed back, then its no longer in the red, and ifact is waay in the black.

There is another question:

Say the deadline stays the same, and we all get hammered by ACC levies until 2012 to meet this stupid deadline. Once the deadline and cash savings goal has been reached, and we no longer have to save additional cash to pay for past accidents which have not been fully funded, do they drop the levies again?

Not likely...

m

[Ixion]

No. the 49M fully finded cost is a CALCULATION of how much the claims that years will cost altogether

So I crash in 2008. In 2008 they pay out $30000 for my crash (ERC, medical etc)

Then in 2009 I ned a further operation, so that's another $15000
Then in 2010 another fixup - say $5000

Totally cost to fully fund = $50000. But they only PAY OUT $3000 in 2008.

Of course ACC don't know how much any individual claim will cost in future years. But they can take some educated guesses based on experience and so on.

So, the total payout in 2008 was $62M . Current claims 24M (leaving 25 M of the 49M for future years claims aginst this years crashes) . Plus 38M actually paid out this year (2008) for PREVIOUS years crashes.

But most of that 38M will already have been "tucked away" in previous years. Just as we tucked away the 25 M this year for future payouts.

When they come to pay out the $15000 for my operation NEXT year (2009) , they can't say that has to be paid for by 2009 income. They already have that money in the kitty (they put aside 50000 remmeber and only paid out 30000 of it in 2008) - part of the 25 M left over from the $49M.

[R-Soul]

So what you are saying is that they are not just beavering a little excess cash away every year to pay for past accidents that were not previously fully funded - they are hoovering up all the excess cash that they can get their grubby little paws on? If the fully funded cost for 2008 is $49m all up, and they pulled in $240m based on the $77 per car numbers (if this is a true statement), that is a hell of a lot of savings every year already!! And they have said they want more because their own investments went belly up....


Look I suppose its good to get the stuff all fully funded ASAP, since I agree with that principle (as why should new riders pay for past rider's problems?).

But not when it means that the ACC levies go up so much that most riders will be subject to finanical hardships because of it!! And especially not if part of that reason is because their own investments were crappy. In light of the current recession, and financial hardships already being suffered, the LEAST they could do was push the deadline out a few more years.

And again: Will these damn levies ever come down again? Even if we meet the savings target? I will put money on the fact that they wont.

[R-Soul]

In fact, if we are pulling in $240m a year now to pay for future costs of present and past bike accidents, and the savings are all fully funded by 2012 (is this the right year?), then we should expect the levies to come down to a more reasonable 49/240 of the proposed levy changes.

So 49/240*750 = 20% = $153 is what it should be if we did not have pay for past accidents. Any bets?

[MSTRS:Me]

It is easy to get bogged down in detail. That is a lovely trap.
Shouldn't we be stating that the Motor Pool is what all motorists contribute to, in expectation of being 'looked after' if it turns to custard AND was vehicle related? Regardless of actual $ or numbers, the truth is that it has always been, and always will, that the majority pay for the relative few who get hurt.
And to Rsole...we don't know, but suspect that earnings-related compensation comes from that fund - which is why we all pay a little something out of our taxable income. The motorpool/fund is for medical etc.

[Ixion]

Nope. motorvehciles fund must cover ALL costs associated with a motorvehicle. ERC (except first week/fortnight); medical, rehabilitation etc.

Excpet acute hospital treatent (which is bulk funded by ACC) and (I think ) an initial medical cost)


The money taken out of your pay packet each week pays for work accidents (whicha re about 100 times as costly as motor vehicle ones).

We don't want to get into a debate with them/Minister about what the numbers SHOULD be 9or will be if balh balh). Just to be able to say "ACC numbers are wrong, you can't rely on them, look , see )

[R-Soul]

It is easy to get bogged down in detail. That is a lovely trap.
Shouldn't we be stating that the Motor Pool is what all motorists contribute to, in expectation of being 'looked after' if it turns to custard AND was vehicle related? Regardless of actual $ or numbers, the truth is that it has always been, and always will, that the majority pay for the relative few who get hurt.
And to Rsole...we don't know, but suspect that earnings-related compensation comes from that fund - which is why we all pay a little something out of our taxable income. The motorpool/fund is for medical etc.

Detail is boring and actuarial, but pays to understand it so that you can nail those stupid political soundbytes dead where they stand...

And if our payments are going to other compensation funds, then the cage drivers can cough as much as us and spread the misery around a bit. Dammit!!

[MSTRS:Me]

Nope. motorvehciles fund must cover ALL costs associated with a motorvehicle. ERC (except first week/fortnight); medical, rehabilitation etc.

Good to know. Will have to remember that.
I guess the detail side of things is important, in so far as we can see the bullshit. It is the endless calcs and recalcs that get overwhelming.

[Ixion]

I hope , after much calc and recalc , to boil it down into half a dozen "THAT'S WRONG" statements.

ACC claim we should be paying $3500. THAT'S WRONG

ACC Claim cars are subsidising us $77 each . THAT'S WRONG

ACC claim that big bikes crash more and cost more . THAT'S WRONG

Got those ones so far.

[R-Soul]

Good to know. Will have to remember that.
I guess the detail side of things is important, in so far as we can see the bullshit. It is the endless calcs and recalcs that get overwhelming.

I still think my original point of opening that whole can of worms about the right to sue may be a wake up call to government. We can't be expected to pay group risk-related premiums (with no mods for responsible behaviour) without being able to sue to reduce our payouts when we are not at fault.

Did you notice how fast Goff wanted to move teh cobversation away from the "right to sue" issue at the Ulysses rally? It definitely raised his temperature.

This issue is something that could swing car drivers to prefer to subsidise us on a group basis than as individuals (if we can sue them).

We have been cuddling up to car drivers to get them on our side, but we should also arm ourselves with some nasty teeth to spur them into action.

[wharfy]

in the mean time here is a report about ACC

Stephen


> BLOOD ON THE COAL: THE ORIGINS AND FUTURE OF NEW ZEALAND'S ACCIDENT COMPENSATION SCHEME

Sorry cant load it up too big

Web site

http://www.hazelarmstronglaw.co.nz/reports.php

This is a must read for everyone - I had been working 2 years when ACC was introduced but I never REALLY knew who the architects of the scheme were.

[hippycrippy]

I Urge all bikers to make their own submission on ACC levies.
Do it on line using the site as detailed in Kiwi Biker info.
The important thing in your submission is to ask "To be heard".
Give your phone no and ask for a conferenmce call or video conference call to be set up.
It does not matter what the substance of your submission is but make it relevant. If everyone does it, by the time they organise all those conference calls the message will surely be sinking in.
Submissions close on 10 November

[Oxy]

I wonder what they would do if all bikers refused to pay registration.

[Bald Eagle]

It is easy to get bogged down in detail. That is a lovely trap.
Shouldn't we be stating that the Motor Pool is what all motorists contribute to, in expectation of being 'looked after' if it turns to custard AND was vehicle related? Regardless of actual $ or numbers, the truth is that it has always been, and always will, that the majority pay for the relative few who get hurt.
And to Rsole...we don't know, but suspect that earnings-related compensation comes from that fund - which is why we all pay a little something out of our taxable income. The motorpool/fund is for medical etc.

Absolutely I'm not concerned about the numbers other than the fact that they are so demonstrably wrong. This is a COMPENSATION scheme not an INSURANCE scheme and it's every NZ'ers right for compensation when the excrement hits the rotating air conditioner.

[MSTRS:Me]

Nope. motorvehciles fund must cover ALL costs associated with a motorvehicle. ERC (except first week/fortnight); medical, rehabilitation etc.

Excpet acute hospital treatent (which is bulk funded by ACC) and (I think ) an initial medical cost)

On the back of an orange form, section 4.2 states...

The ACC Levy is collected on behalf of the ACC and provides personal injury insurance cover for those injured in motor vehicle accidents on public roads. It covers entitlements such as medical and hospital costs, weekly compensation and rehabilitation care.