ACC shafts the little guy

[Ocean1]

Thats ok if you have the injury after you have the insurance, I found out when I had insurance they exempt any cover for any part of you thats had an ACC claim even if it was a full recovery, can't blame them for major stuff but it did rule out half my body so was kind of pointless in the end.

I've never seen a policy that didn't specifically exclude pre-existing conditions.

In fact I don't have private health cover that'd help in that regard anyway. Any form of insurance is more expensive than simply paying for the fix yourself, you've just got to be able to stump up with the readies at the time.

[Robert Taylor]

Bit of a ramble I know, but does it make any sense?

Sure does. Agree whole heartedly. I write to [Hon] Nick Smith every so often reminding him motorcyclists are being wrongly punished.

I dont think that is 100% correct. While there is more than ample justification in the argument that motorcyclists as a group are being targeted there is a strong counter argument that many irresponsible motorcyclists neither help our image or the adverse statistics.
I certainly dont regard this one issue as something that would 100% influence who I am voting for in November either. Its a big wider world out there

[oldrider]

I dont think that is 100% correct. While there is more than ample justification in the argument that motorcyclists as a group are being targeted there is a strong counter argument that many irresponsible motorcyclists neither help our image or the adverse statistics.
I certainly dont regard this one issue as something that would 100% influence who I am voting for in November either. Its a big wider world out there

True!

Totally agree! .... I just wish they would stop tinkering with things that adversely effect my retired life style! (selfish, yes I know)

[zelto]

I dont think that is 100% correct. While there is more than ample justification in the argument that motorcyclists as a group are being targeted there is a strong counter argument that many irresponsible motorcyclists neither help our image or the adverse statistics.
I certainly dont regard this one issue as something that would 100% influence who I am voting for in November either. Its a big wider world out there

But the acc scheme had at its core, 'no fault', it didnt want to take into account 'irresponsible motorcyclists' 'or the adverse statistics' .It didnt want to judge groups or individuals, thats why it was called a social contract.A promise to all new zealanders that we have got each others backs, no matter how young or old or stupid you are.We go through stages in our lives from crazy fresh licence holders to brittle bone oldies.It was an acceptance that we are real people and not perfect, yet we are still worthy of cover.I think its a brilliant scheme, a very nz one, that we could be proud of.Accepting all nzrs at all stages of their lives, not just when you are a high levy paying, low claiming bright economic unit.

Thats why the increase in bike fees goes so against the spirit of acc.Of course these days, there are many aspects of acc that have gone against the original intent.Case managers getting kpi points/money for exiting claimants that are unable to return to work.Favoured specialists, that consistently get so many assessments sent their way, because acc can be sure of the return to work outcome etc..

Even in the user pays days we live in, i believe there is still a place for a true acc scheme.The beast we have today is more like an insurance company, concerned with profit and loss, with a job that is described as a loss adjuster.It isnt a social contract anymore.If you were ever unlucky enough to be a long term claimant you would agree i am sure.For short term injuries they do an excellent job, but if you exceed the 'injury profile' time frame , you are the enemy.

[davereid]

I While there is more than ample justification in the argument that motorcyclists as a group are being targeted

Motorcyclists are being targeted. But its not actually that ACC are out to get motorcyclists. Its simply that

(1) Any normal insurer considers LIABILITY. Who caused the crash. Who should pay. Even if we cause 50% of accidents and therefore should be responsible for 50% of first party injuries, , motorcycle V car seldom injures the motorcar driver. So as a group our total liability is very low. However ACC by its design is NO FAULT. So ACC use this as a reason NOT to consider liability.

(2) Vulnerability. As a group we are VULNERABLE, as are pedestrians, cyclists, elderly people, and drivers of smaller older cars. ACC can see a way here to reduce their exposure to cost. While they cant (yet) charge cyclists or pedestrians, motorcyclists were sitting ducks, as we were an identifiable group within existing ACC categories and we already paid ACC.

My Bet ?

ACC will seek to expand vulnerability charging. And users of older cars, cars with low safety ratings, no airbags, or ABS will soon be picked off, and charged higher ACC levies. We were just the easy first pickings.

[Pseudonym]

So if we where to get a small electronic device that buzzed out at a frequency that triggered the closest airbag sensor if it got within, say, 150mm of us, it would:
1. Alert the driver.
2. Injure them.
But as it’s them that are having bits of phone removed from their faces, it’s now them that carry the risk, e.g. they are vulnerable
The fact that a motorcyclist caused the injury is inconsequential.
And as it’s often the wider airbag storing pillars that hide us so well from the blind, it’s only fair that that’s where the sudden explosive alert comes from.

I’m just pissed off at the wholesale reaming that we got.
Maybe the next protest we should just line up on the motorways and stop?
Not that it helped the truck drivers…

It’s so nice to see that both the National and the Labour party can work together for consistency.
Neither of them gives a flying fuck what we want once they have control.

[warewolf]

If you were ever unlucky enough to be a long term claimant you would agree i am sure.For short term injuries they do an excellent job, but if you exceed the 'injury profile' time frame , you are the enemy.

Yep, I've seen this first hand with a close personal friend. She is an intelligent, strong-willed, independent and very active person. She had a nasty fall and suffered injuries to her head, face (teeth), pelvis and more. ACC just made it so difficult for her to deal with them that she all but gave up going to them for assistance... yet she still was not ready to return to work or even go out in public. Dealing with ACC added to her woes; caused not just extra stress but also physical pain when she withdrew from the fight and just suffered in silence. Their behaviour quite disgusted me, and makes me fear for myself should I require any serious assistance from them.

She had injuries to various parts of her body that were being treated by different, unrelated, uncoordinated teams. At one stage she was receiving a letter a day due to the paperwork generated by the various teams. They would schedule appointments at conflicting times (without her input), and when she tried to reschedule them their attitude was not to listen but to say, "well if you can't be bothered coming in we'll strike you off our list and recommend further treatment is denied." Cocks.

[Usarka]

Yep, I've seen this first hand with a close personal friend. She is an intelligent, strong-willed, independent and very active person. She had a nasty fall and suffered injuries to her head, face (teeth), pelvis and more. ACC just made it so difficult for her to deal with them that she all but gave up going to them for assistance... yet she still was not ready to return to work or even go out in public. Dealing with ACC added to her woes; caused not just extra stress but also physical pain when she withdrew from the fight and just suffered in silence. Their behaviour quite disgusted me, and makes me fear for myself should I require any serious assistance from them.

She had injuries to various parts of her body that were being treated by different, unrelated, uncoordinated teams. At one stage she was receiving a letter a day due to the paperwork generated by the various teams. They would schedule appointments at conflicting times (without her input), and when she tried to reschedule them their attitude was not to listen but to say, "well if you can't be bothered coming in we'll strike you off our list and recommend further treatment is denied." Cocks.

Philip Schimdt - ACC Lawyer.