John Key - bikers' friend?

[aum108]

I'm not a National voter, but I can see the ironic possibility of John Key doing something nice for bikers.

If he does open up ACC to competition, we could see the entry of one or more providers who charge sane premiums for bikers.

[yachtie10]

I'm not a National voter, but I can see the ironic possibility of John Key doing something nice for bikers.

If he does open up ACC to competition, we could see the entry of one or more providers who charge sane premiums for bikers.

somehow I doubt that

If they assesed like insurance maybe but with acc being the backstop and way they do things I doubt a private insurance company would be cheaper
No claims bonus migh make things better for some (like me)

[Scuba_Steve]

I'm not a National voter, but I can see the ironic possibility of John Key doing something nice for bikers.

If he does open up ACC to competition, we could see the entry of one or more providers who charge sane premiums for bikers.

... Oh, oh god... you actually believe things would get cheaper

Um I don't know how to tell you this but insurance companies are in it more for profit then ACC is

[SMOKEU]

Don't believe anything that JK says.

[shrub]

I'm not a National voter, but I can see the ironic possibility of John Key doing something nice for bikers.

If he does open up ACC to competition, we could see the entry of one or more providers who charge sane premiums for bikers.

Very, very, very unlikely. Many years ago I worked for an insurance company and they hate paying claims. We are such a small percentage of the market that cost a lot of money to fix, so if anything changes there will be exclusion or limitations on cover for what the actuaries see as dangerous pursuits like riding motorcycles.

[sleemanj]

Private cover will not in any way be cheaper, ESPECIALLY not for motorcyclists.

ACC does not exist to create a profit, they have an effective monopoly meaning high amortization of claims across the sector, they have good investments.

A private insurer exists to make a profit, they have only a share of a market meaning small local amortization of claims in the sector, and they probably don't invest as well as ACC because not many do.

A private insurer may benefit a few people (generally, the people who own insurance companies). But most people are much better off with ACC as the one-and-only.

[Winston001]

I am absolutely against National introducing competition for ACC cover and I say that as a (sometimes) rightish wing voter .

National tried this in 1998 but fortunately Labour reversed it 2 years later. One thing I do remember from that time is although our employment premiums at work became cheaper, the insurance company we were with went into liquidation in 2003. I assume ACC had to pick up their clients on claim.

Private insurance companies are not interested in covering granny and your kids, or motorcyclists. They will be sensible and pick the best categories to offer policies for. Low risk white collar jobs. Yes they will be cheaper than ACC but they won't approve claims quickly like ACC do.

We've had a generation of ACC and consequently forgotten the cold hard world of personal injury insurance.

[davereid]

One thing I do remember from that time is although our employment premiums at work became cheaper, the insurance company we were with went into liquidation in 2003. I assume ACC had to pick up their clients on claim.
Private insurance companies are not interested in covering granny and your kids, or motorcyclists. They will be sensible and pick the best categories to offer policies for. Low risk white collar jobs. Yes they will be cheaper than ACC but they won't approve quickly claims like ACC do.
We've had a generation of ACC and consequently forgotten the cold hard world of personal injury insurance.

Yes. ACC needs sorting. It has to start becoming a well manged transparent organisation that actually performs, and appreciates it is accountable to the public.

But private companies will merely cherry pick the easy profits, leaving the hard stuff to ACC.

And it will be a cold day when the private insurer goes broke, while you are still hoping for another 40 years of cover for the spinal injuries you got when that uninsured drunk driver hit you.

[NONONO]

I'm not a National voter, but I can see the ironic possibility of John Key doing something nice for bikers.

If he does open up ACC to competition, we could see the entry of one or more providers who charge sane premiums for bikers.

What a lame arse

[RDJ]

... Oh, oh god... you actually believe things would get cheaper

Um I don't know how to tell you this but insurance companies are in it more for profit then ACC is

Yes, insurance compamnies are in it for profit. Why is profit a dirty word? Without profits, no-one could afford to pay taxes to finance all those people who love to spend OPM (Other People's Money) on their favorite people and charities, sometimes amounting to the same thing... Right Minister Turia?

Premiums could be a lot cheaper for many of us as insurers assess individual actuarial risk and charge premiums accordingly. ACC does not do this - indeed as we all know, lately has demonstrated what amounts to vindictiveness in assessing motorcyclists' charges (as under the terms of the Woodhouse no-blame concept, people at higher risk from their own or others' actions should be treated no differently).

Last but certainly not least - you can change providers with private insurers and you can negotiate premiums with insurance companies. You can't do either with ACC...

[oneofsix]

Yes, insurance compamnies are in it for profit. Why is profit a dirty word? Without profits, no-one could afford to pay taxes to finance all those people who love to spend OPM (Other People's Money) on their favorite people and charities, sometimes amounting to the same thing... Right Minister Turia?

Premiums could be a lot cheaper for many of us as insurers assess individual actuarial risk and charge premiums accordingly. ACC does not do this - indeed as we all know, lately has demonstrated what amounts to vindictiveness in assessing motorcyclists' charges (as under the terms of the Woodhouse no-blame concept, people at higher risk from their own or others' actions should be treated no differently).

Last but certainly not least - you can change providers with private insurers and you can negotiate premiums with insurance companies. You can't do either with ACC...

"Without profits, no-one could afford to pay taxes to finance all those people who love to spend OPM (Other People's Money) on their favorite people and charities"
profits don't get taxed all that much, talk to Gareth Morgan. Wage and salary earners pay the taxes foool.

Profit is a dirty word because since "greed is good" profit has meant excesses. Yes there are issues with ACC, mainly politicians not following the designers plan and being influenced by those that want to get their greedy hands in.

Did you read where NZ is now looking attractive to the like of Lloyds due to the Chch earthquake because they can how hike the premiums which immediately implies above actual risk. Before the earthquake the risk wasn't great enough for them to profiteer out of NZ, we were seen as too safe.

[RDJ]

[QUOTE=oneofsix;1130258344]"Without profits, no-one could afford to pay taxes to finance all those people who love to spend OPM (Other People's Money) on their favorite people and charities" profits don't get taxed all that much, talk to Gareth Morgan. Wage and salary earners pay the taxes foool./QUOTE]

Wages and salaries get paid by profitable companies... and even unprofitable ones if lack of profitability does not continue too long. Government has no money it does not get from others and employs people to regulate more than it does to produce, whereas companies mostly employ people to add value to their product. No employment, no wages and salaries...

...but judging by the "foool" in your response your mind is made up and not about to be swayed by reason.

[Zedder]

ACC going private? I certainly hope not but wouldn't trust John Key at all because it's probably pretty much signed up now behind the scenes.

Here's the likely scenario: They'll fleece everyone with their premiums for as long as possible and when the time comes to pay out in a major crisis they'll just do an AMI "Sorry gone broke, please JK and NZ bail us out".

[slowpoke]

Sorry RDJ, you aren't thinking about the big picture. Like it or not motorcyclists are high risk clients, it's just a simple fact. At the moment, even with the higher costs imposed recently we are still subsidised by the lower risk "normal" people. If ACC was privatised into a purely commercially driven insurance market they'd assign premiums based purely on individual risk and we'd be absolutely, royally and completely arse fucked.

You can argue all you like about being a responsible rider but the bottom line is that when things go wrong for motorcyclists they go wrong in a big way so the inherent risk to the insurer remains high, as will your premium.

[Scuba_Steve]

Premiums could be a lot cheaper for many of us as insurers assess individual actuarial risk and charge premiums accordingly. ACC does not do this - indeed as we all know, lately has demonstrated what amounts to vindictiveness in assessing motorcyclists' charges (as under the terms of the Woodhouse no-blame concept, people at higher risk from their own or others' actions should be treated no differently).

Last but certainly not least - you can change providers with private insurers and you can negotiate premiums with insurance companies. You can't do either with ACC...

If you think bikes are expensive now just wait till the Govt decides to go private... The whole increase as it were, was to make insurance attractive to overseas companies & they won't be reducing any costs that's for sure, the whole model doesn't allow for it.
It might be worth you researching just what the US insurance system is like, start with "Sicko" that should at-least balance out this Govt propaganda your buying into (unless of course you work for insurance company which would explain the stance)