Non-payment of ACC levies: how do you reckon this will end?

[Zedder]

Secondly, the definition of the groups that incurance companies use to aportion relative risk values are completely arbitrary. Imagine the public backlash if they started aportioning risk values based on race. Why should your choice of vehicle be any different?

Thirdly, the whole idea of no-claim bonuses, while nice when you're on the receiving end, is completely illogical. The financial model of an insurance company is based around that fact that some customers will never claim; their premiums then more than make up for those that do.

Winston can get back to you on the other questions.

However, insurance companies use actuaries for risk calculation. Actuarial science is what they do.

A no claims bonus sustem is a type of reverse discount. There's nothing wrong with that.

ACC is a joke in its present form, In fact why have it at all, why not just have a law in place that says no fault for injuries. Getting people into paid work should be the primary objective for Government,then we can afford to fund infrastructure properly.

[MSTRS:Me]

If you ride a motorcycle you are high risk and pay accordingly. It doesn't matter that muppets in cages cause the accidents for bikers, the core fact is a biker gets hurt and needs compensation.

Tell us again how ACC is a 'no blame' system...

[caseye]

Correct cassina, but totally wrong!
Aged returning riders in fact make up far less of the stats than the young guns, having said that their ACC entitlements are significantly higher thanks to their advanced years, and their almost exclusive professional occupations that mean that POOR OL ACC have to pay out more.
Therein lies the beating heart of the debacle, ACC would have us believe that returning aged riders are most often involved in accidents and that they are in fact generally at fault in those accidents.
In reality they are involved in those accidents but their fault is far less than a young Valentino and it IS their remuneration that makes ACC Sweat so badly and encourages them to LIE about the stats in order to get the general public to NOT feel sorry for them.

[oneofsix]

Correct cassina, but totally wrong!
Aged returning riders in fact make up far less of the stats than the young guns, having said that their ACC entitlements are significantly higher thanks to their advanced years, and their almost exclusive professional occupations that mean that POOR OL ACC have to pay out more.
Therein lies the beating heart of the debacle, ACC would have us believe that returning aged riders are most often involved in accidents and that they are in fact generally at fault in those accidents.
In reality they are involved in those accidents but their fault is far less than a young Valentino and it IS their remuneration that makes ACC Sweat so badly and encourages them to LIE about the stats in order to get the general public to NOT feel sorry for them.

And there's the rub. Because they earn more they also pay more into ACC's coffers via their employee levies. It is their employee levies that covers their lost income, the motorcycle levy only covers the the treatment of the injuries.

In sum total the higher levy on the larger bikes is an all out lie.

[kiwi cowboy]

Some type of Road User Charge, I'm not sure about the numbers yet.

Why not register the person?.

[Zedder]

Why not register the person?.

See post number 57.

[kiwi cowboy]

See post number 57.

Yes got to that after I posted and couldn't be arsed editing

[Zedder]

Yes got to that after I posted and couldn't be arsed editing

Ya bloody cowboy...

[BMWST?]

Why not register the person?.

it would be more for most and less for those with lots of vehicles...they will divide their 50 million(or whatever by licenced motorcycles riders instead of the number of registered bikes.Do the sums

[kiwi cowboy]

it would be more for most and less for those with lots of vehicles...they will divide their 50 million(or whatever by licenced motorcycles riders instead of the number of registered bikes.Do the sums

Not if person reg was uniform it wouldn't and I don't agree with the motorcyclist should pay more because there are too many variables with other vehicles.

The gov wouldn't do that though because it would cost 90% of nz'ers more so would get the arse next election Same ol same ol screw the minority.

[MSTRS:Me]

And there's the rub. Because they earn more they also pay more into ACC's coffers via their employee levies. It is their employee levies that covers their lost income, the motorcycle levy only covers the the treatment of the injuries.

In sum total the higher levy on the larger bikes is an all out lie.

Eggsakery!!
Said so much betterer than I could

[baffa]

Interesting reading.

Re AMI's bankruptcy, their apparent focus on CHCH doesnt hold water. They werent the only ones. And their focus was much more on vehicles than many of the other direct providers, who do the lion's share of house and contents covers.
The real reason they failed spectacularly was due to poor business practice, namely under-reinsuring.
Which really bugs me, as several other companies got raped financially from CHCH, and multiple other big events in the country, and they get lambasted by the media because the occasional client cant read his policy wording, and decides to go to fair go.

Meanwhile AMI gets bailed out, then bought by IAG, and acts like their shit dont stink.