Demerit points hiked for unlicensed vehicles

[Pixie]

Ok so I own 2 houses, why should I pay rates on 2 houses when I only live in 1?
Nobody argues with rates
One of the houses is bigger than the other , I pay more rates on the big one
No problem there either

When the powers that be apply the same charging regime on motorvehicles its a revenue gathering exercise etc bla bla bla.

If you dont pay yer rates, you get penalised, happens every day , nobody complains.

Some guys here are going to speak with their vote. wont make much difference, they wont change this, a swing to the left will cost as much or more than where we are now.

I think you are all screwed ! China has 1 child policy , NZ going to have 1 vehicle policy maybe

People do have problems with rating property.Each year there is talk of a better way of raising local body funds.Why,for example,should two properties pay different amounts for the same services merely because one is valued at a higher level by the vagaries of the property market?

[Pixie]

Maybe you could get discounted for 6 of your 7 bikes.

Then when you loan the 6 discounted bikes to some mates, they can ride around on your bikes, get injured, and still expect ACC to pay.

Yeah, that's really fair.

This happens a lot - pass me a tui

[davereid]

People do have problems with rating property.Each year there is talk of a better way of raising local body funds.Why,for example,should two properties pay different amounts for the same services merely because one is valued at a higher level by the vagaries of the property market?

Yes, rates are alleged to be a charge for services. A $500,000 house with a little old lady in does not use anywhere as many services as the house next door worth $350,000 that has 14 people in.

Its chosen simply as its easy and reliable way of collecting the money.

What did fairness have to do with it ? lol

[p.dath]

Jeepers I think you may have missed the point here the main charge in rego is ACC risk. I'm pretty sure there's no comparison between sitting in your house compared to sitting on your bike?? Not quite the same risk factor, don't think this house/rates vs bike/rego/ACC argument flys at all??

Actually, it's the exact opposite. ACC pay out *substantially* more for accidents at home than on motorcycles. It seems you are far more at risk staying home.

Get out on your bike now. Save yourself.

[Pixie]

Its people like you that are causing the problem
if you wont register at least one of your vehicles then your a bludger
and I bet you will expect acc to cover you when you crash

(I have no issue with people not registering one of many vehicles)

I pay $2000 / year in business ACC levies,in a field in which the chances of injury is next to nil.In fact the highest risk to me recently,occurred when I found myself in Christchurch on Feb 22.
I feel I've covered myself adequately with that sum and don't feel any guilt not paying any vehicle levies.

[MSTRS:Me]

Ok so I own 2 houses, why should I pay rates on 2 houses when I only live in 1?
Nobody argues with rates

Is the other house empty and unused? If it is, then it's the same as a vehicle on hold and sitting in the shed...it's not 'using' any services...and you'd have a genuine gripe about rates.

Maybe you could get discounted for 6 of your 7 bikes.

Then when you loan the 6 discounted bikes to some mates, they can ride around on your bikes, get injured, and still expect ACC to pay.

Yeah, that's really fair.

Yep. Those calling for this, believing it would be fairer, must be naive if they think this wouldn't be a source of massive abuse. The odd unrego'd vehicle is a drop in the ocean compared....

[racefactory]

Maybe it could just be on fuel, or even better as a road user charge that reflects distance traveled.

Remember that the BIGGEST reason the motorcycle levy is high is that ACC funds 80% of your income while you get back to work. This can be correctly thought of as income protection insurance.

So a beneficiary, or low wage earner pays the same premium for income protection insurance as I do, yet the beneficiary actually gets NO cover.

The way to sort this mess out is easy.

1) Collect income protection insurance, by putting the charge on income. So poor people don't pay for cover they don't get.

2) Collect the balance from road user charges that reflect distance traveled.

3) Return to a no-fault basis, where all road users pay the same km rate.

Just like how everyone is running on hold right now, if that was the case then instead everyone would be winding back speedometers. It just wouldn't work doing it on kms.

[Latte]

Just like how everyone is running on hold right now, if that was the case then instead everyone would be winding back speedometers. It just wouldn't work doing it on kms.

It's exactly how they do road user charges on diesels now . The govt can force us all to buy hubodometers

[Scuba_Steve]

Just like how everyone is running on hold right now, if that was the case then instead everyone would be winding back speedometers. It just wouldn't work doing it on kms.

I could be wrong but I don't think winding back is quite as easy on these new fangdangeled digital odo's & even stopping them I believe to sometimes be quite a challenge without being noticed.

I am a huge supporter of RUC's for everyone & that being the way to pay for all our road tax's it's fairer that current systems especially for those of use with multi vehicles. Pay only for what you use

[racefactory]

That could well work depending on what the fine is for disconnecting the speedo cable and if the police were out enforcing random checks.

[Yow Ling]

I could be wrong but I don't think winding back is quite as easy on these new fangdangeled digital odo's & even stopping them I believe to sometimes be quite a challenge without being noticed.

I am a huge supporter of RUC's for everyone & that being the way to pay for all our road tax's it's fairer that current systems especially for those of use with multi vehicles. Pay only for what you use

RUC is probably the basis for a fair system, dont forget though its pay before you use, and the current penalty is 3 times the unpaid distance, so say it were $40 per 1000km (same as a light van) and you were 3000km over the fine would be $480 , same as it is now, all of a sudden $600 to reg a bike with road user built into the fuel as it currently is with petrol vehicles, is looking like an easier system for the user to maintain.

For the guys with 7 bikes , they would need to buy 7000km up front before being able to go on the road. That is if they actually rode their 7 bikes.

[MSTRS:Me]

RUC is probably the basis for a fair system, dont forget though its pay before you use, and the current penalty is 3 times the unpaid distance, so say it were $40 per 1000km (same as a light van) and you were 3000km over the fine would be $480 , same as it is now, all of a sudden $600 to reg a bike with road user built into the fuel as it currently is with petrol vehicles, is looking like an easier system for the user to maintain.

For the guys with 7 bikes , they would need to buy 7000km up front before being able to go on the road. That is if they actually rode their 7 bikes.

What's the problem with that? You do that now with petrol...

[miloking]

I could be wrong but I don't think winding back is quite as easy on these new fangdangeled digital odo's & even stopping them I believe to sometimes be quite a challenge without being noticed.

one word = speedohealer


You can calibrate it to run at 10% of the actual speed...so could show like 5km/h instead of 50 or something (just so you have some idea how fast you are actualy going)

[Scuba_Steve]

RUC is probably the basis for a fair system, dont forget though its pay before you use, and the current penalty is 3 times the unpaid distance, so say it were $40 per 1000km (same as a light van) and you were 3000km over the fine would be $480 , same as it is now, all of a sudden $600 to reg a bike with road user built into the fuel as it currently is with petrol vehicles, is looking like an easier system for the user to maintain.

For the guys with 7 bikes , they would need to buy 7000km up front before being able to go on the road. That is if they actually rode their 7 bikes.

but usually those 7 bikes wouldn't have been brought all at once & once the RUC is on you can use at you leisure no yearly raping by the Govt.
As for being over, I would ditch the fines, if your caught with your odo over your RUC's you can either pay right there on the spot for new distance licence or you can get out & leave your vehicle wherever it is (or if more than than 1000km's over it will be kindly towed back to the nearest town for you at your expense where it will not be released until both RUC's are upto date & the towage fee has been paid). that means if your in the middle of the desert road, well stink for you should have kept your RUC's up to date

[AllanB]

I find it hard to believe you are all surprised. It was always coming.

I'd rather see them add demerit points for lack of warrants - after all a lack of a WOF can mean a vehicle may be dangerous to the user and others on the road. Rego is apiece of paper only.