Bike Rego Petition

[Navy Boy]

Like most I disagree with the steps. My argument is that you'll damage yourself as much on a 250 as you would on a 1000cc bike coming off at 100kph. One price for all, whatever that may be.

I'm not keen on the stepped rego fee system either. However if they were to do it in the same way as cars then you become perilously close to a UK-style system where the band is determined by the vehicle's official average CO2/KM output, much like our rebate/feebate system. That would do our machines no favours at all.

Careful what you wish for...

For years bike manufacturers haven't bothered publishing their machines' average fuel consumption figures as they simply weren't required to, unlike car manufacturers. I suspect that were they obliged to do so then it would get the attention of those whom we don't wish to take an interest in our hobby/passion.

[jellywrestler]

The owner can only ride one bike at a time . Simple.

that's funny, more than one person can ride the bike, no differnt to having one car in a household with a number of the family driving it

[JATZ]

Bike Rego in NZ is cheap.
My Vstrom 650 was $1600 cad (a whisker over 2k nzd) for 3 months. That is the minimum length of time. They have done away with the no claims discount and because I have an out of province licence there is no discount. That included 3 mil liability cover.
Pay the $$ and be grateful for the ACC safety net

[MarkH]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

[pritch]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

You're over thinking it. The government explained, they worked out how much they needed and then they worked out how much they needed to charge to cover that.
They are not about to change anything - unless it's to increase it.

[Dadpole]

ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

This is a possibility. It would probably be incorporated with the GPS tracking system currently being talked about. It will also come with congestion (toll) charging - with additional cost for peak hour travel - and automatic speeding tickets. Be careful what you wish for.

[rastuscat]

This is a possibility. It would probably be incorporated with the GPS tracking system currently being talked about. It will also come with congestion (toll) charging - with additional cost for peak hour travel - and automatic speeding tickets. Be careful what you wish for.

GPS tracking system? Automatic speeding tickets?

Has your tinfoil hat started to kick in?

[rastuscat]

You're over thinking it. The government explained, they worked out how much they needed and then they worked out how much they needed to charge to cover that.
They are not about to change anything - unless it's to increase it.

Cool, finally someone talking some sense. Aside from one small factor.

They worked out how much they need to cover motorcycle related injuries and rehab, then divided it by the number of licenced (registered) motorcycles on the road.

When they realised that would be around $1500 per year, they realised that would be too high, and nobody would comply.

So they charge motorcyclists as a group around 35% of the cost of motorcycle injuries and rehab, and the other 65% is paid by other road users.

It's immensely expensive to cover the cost of injuries and rehab. I am grumpy about the cost to licence my bike, but I understand why. I'm also grateful that we have the system we have, rather that having to pay for individual injury cover. And of course, those who don't buy their own individual cover would be complaining about having to cover the cost of their own injuries.

Many other systems have been suggested, but each has drawbacks. The system they have adopted is seen as the one with the least number of inequities.

Yes, there are some injustices, but it's a case of the best of a bad situation.

[jellywrestler]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

an outdated idea, what about the electric bikes that will flood our roads in the near future, how will they be covered?

[F5 Dave]

Cool, finally someone talking some sense. Aside from one small factor.

They worked out how much they need to cover motorcycle related injuries and rehab, then divided it by the number of licenced (registered) motorcycles on the road.

When they realised that would be around $1500 per year, they realised that would be too high, and nobody would comply.

So they charge motorcyclists as a group around 35% of the cost of motorcycle injuries and rehab, and the other 65% is paid by other road users.

It's immensely expensive to cover the cost of injuries and rehab. I am grumpy about the cost to licence my bike, but I understand why. I'm also grateful that we have the system we have, rather that having to pay for individual injury cover. And of course, those who don't buy their own individual cover would be complaining about having to cover the cost of their own injuries.

Many other systems have been suggested, but each has drawbacks. The system they have adopted is seen as the one with the least number of inequities.

Yes, there are some injustices, but it's a case of the best of a bad situation.

When I've spanked myself up I've made pains to explain to hospital people that it wasn't on the road, but you know they are looking at a form as their hand moves down to tick Motorcycle accident box.
So thank you registered Motorcyclists for helping to pay for my roadracing and dirtbike injuries. But I bet anything on a motorcycle goes into the same ACC analysis of cost.
And not to say, Sport as Rugby would be.

[Berries]

I think this whole idea of charging an ACC levy on the bike rego is deeply flawed. Some bikes are running 20,000+ kms per year, others <2,000 km per year - the exposure to risk of injury varies wildly. ACC levy should be charged on distance ridden (within the price of petrol or with a RUC or whatever) rather than on a yearly fee.

Very much a fan of basing cost on actual risk however distance alone would not work. You may well be exposed to risk for a longer time due to the distance covered but there is also something to be said for the experience gained through all those miles compared to some dude who rides on four or five sunny weekends each year.

[rastuscat]

When I've spanked myself up I've made pains to explain to hospital people that it wasn't on the road, but you know they are looking at a form as their hand moves down to tick Motorcycle accident box.
So thank you registered Motorcyclists for helping to pay for my roadracing and dirtbike injuries. But I bet anything on a motorcycle goes into the same ACC analysis of cost.
And not to say, Sport as Rugby would be.

Off road motorcycle injuries are paid from a different account, not the road account.

You're right, there are probably clerical errors when coding, but generally it's done correctly.

[Bass]

Basically agree with the" leave it alone or you'll only make it worse" logic.
However, I have a DR650.
It's over 600cc and so top whack on ACC levy.
It's so low powered that it's LAMS approved.
Now there's logic for you

[rastuscat]

Basically agree with the" leave it alone or you'll only make it worse" logic.
However, I have a DR650.
It's over 600cc and so top whack on ACC levy.
It's so low powered that it's LAMS approved.
Now there's logic for you

Yup, one of the inequities.

My R1200RT is almost LAMS compliant. Lots of weight, not terribly powerful. Just too big to qualify.

[Kickaha]

Off road motorcycle injuries are paid from a different account, not the road account.

I reckon they paid about 100k for me when I ended up in a induced coma a few years ago, thanks guys the drugs were mostly great