WTF - charged for road closure after accident?

**Banditbandit** · 20th February 2013, 09:13

What the fuck is with this ??? It's not like she wanted to close the road ...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...s-crash-victim

**SMOKEU** · 20th February 2013, 09:15

Isn't that what part of the cost of vehicle licensing goes toward, or maybe fuel tax?

**imdying** · 20th February 2013, 09:27

Single vehicle accident, flipped it, where's the problem?

**ducatilover** · 20th February 2013, 09:33

I've never heard of it myself, but it does not surprise me at all.

**nudemetalz** · 20th February 2013, 09:39

The Council charges people that damage the road signs. This really is no different. Expect more I reckon.

**Scuba_Steve** · 20th February 2013, 09:40

I would tell them to get fucked, you wanted the road closed, you pay the cost. We close roads FAR to often nowadays & always far in excess of whats required

**Paul in NZ** · 20th February 2013, 09:44

I'd like to see that tested by the courts....

Sounds a bit whiffy to me....

**oneofsix** · 20th February 2013, 09:46

My initial thoughts were if you are at fault for the crash then you or your insurance pays the costs but then I considered who is doing the charging, who decides fault, who has the "experts", and that road closures due to crashes are just part of that business, and now the who decides how the road is to be closed, how much and for how long has been raised this is not fair. Imagine tar bleed due to cheap arse materials "causes" a crash - not likely, it will be not driving to the conditions even though there might be no indicator to the condition.

**Jantar** · 20th February 2013, 09:53

The car went into gravel on the side of Links Rd, flipped and landed on its roof on top of a wall.

So the crashed car wasn't even on the road. I would ask the reasons why the road needed to be closed rather than reduced to one lane, and who asked for the road to be closed. If the police asked for the closure then the invoice should go to them and they could then pass the cost on to the insurance company.

Within days of her daughter leaving hospital, Mrs Goodfellow was told by NZTA that she had a month to pay $1366.20 for the cost of contractors, traffic control and cleanup for the four hours during which the road was closed

it appears that in this case the bill hasn't even gone to the driver who was at fault, but to the registered owner of the car. More complication rather than less.

**Zedder** · 20th February 2013, 10:06

Originally Posted by imdying

Single vehicle accident, flipped it, where's the problem?

Health and Safety procedures, Political Correctness, NZTA and probably The Treaty of Waitangi is in there somewhere...

**SS90** · 20th February 2013, 10:14

Paving the way for compulsory private insurance companies, best get ready guys.......

**Banditbandit** · 20th February 2013, 10:16

Originally Posted by Zedder

The Treaty of Waitangi is in there somewhere...

YES !!!! We have rights - we are indigenous ... this was our land first - I can stick my vehicle where I want to ... so stick your fucking bill up your arse !!!

**Hoon** · 20th February 2013, 10:25

Originally Posted by Jantar

So the crashed car wasn't even on the road. I would ask the reasons why the road needed to be closed rather than reduced to one lane, and who asked for the road to be closed.

More than likely Ambulance, Fire as well as Police. Their job is to save peoples lives. Their ability to do this job cannot be impeded by trying to dodge traffic, squeezing their rescue efforts into one lane of a road or anything else that reduces their effectiveness. I doubt people would be happy to accept that they or their loved ones will only receive life saving treatment at say 80% of what could have been done just to save a few bucks.

If the road needs to be closed to improve the chances of saving someones life then the road needs to be closed.

Who should pay for it is another matter though. Whether it be by rego or insurance doesn't matter, in the end it will be us the road user that pays through increased regos or insurance premiums. However I do agree that the NZTA Road contractors need to be reimbursed some how. Expecting them to cough up out of their own existing budget will just screw them long term (and their ability to fix our roads) so this needs to be accounted for somehow.

**Zedder** · 20th February 2013, 10:32

Originally Posted by Banditbandit

YES !!!! We have rights - we are indigenous ... this was our land first - I can stick my vehicle where I want to ... so stick your fucking bill up your arse !!!

Well, you've probably answered the question from your first post then.

**Zedder** · 20th February 2013, 10:36

Originally Posted by Hoon

More than likely Ambulance, Fire as well as Police. Their job is to save peoples lives. Their ability to do this job cannot be impeded by trying to dodge traffic, squeezing their rescue efforts into one lane of a road or anything else that reduces their effectiveness. I doubt people would be happy to accept that they or their loved ones will only receive life saving treatment at say 80% of what could have been done just to save a few bucks.

If the road needs to be closed to improve the chances of saving someones life then the road needs to be closed.

Who should pay for it is another matter though. Whether it be by rego or insurance doesn't matter, in the end it will be us the road user that pays through increased regos or insurance premiums. However I do agree that the NZTA Road contractors need to be reimbursed some how. Expecting them to cough up out of their own existing budget will just screw them long term (and their ability to fix our roads) so this needs to be accounted for somehow.

Fulton Hogan got paid via the contract to Auckland City for their work at crash scenes etc. AFAIK it's still the same deal now.