ACC Levies. BRONZ meeting

[Thani-B]

Lol, Yep I got Ixion, Klingon, Gi Joe, Danae, PirateJafa, didn't realise the rest of you were there.

I was sitting beside PirateJafa.. I would think that the majority of people that showed up would be KB'ers right? Although I did see a few that I know, who arent.

[Danae]

I would have liked to stick (user)names to faces. I was at the front. Saw (but did not meet) Mom, Maha and Big Dave; met Klingon(nice to meet you, great work) and Mystic

[Brian d marge]

listen stupid... prefacing your rants with ' listen stupid ' does not mean you are right .. ok... I presume you would prefer if the oil companies competed... or the supermarkerts? ... what is different about accident insurance?

No listen stupids means that Redneck slack Jawed New Zealand morons , with barely the ability to string together a sentence, with at least ONE preposition
have ruined motorcycling , as we know it , in one of the best places for it

You did nothing ,( and possibly wont )

This ACC thing has been coming at you since 1993 ,,

now I know I am right because the current situation has PROVED i am, right

Check my post history

What NZ needs is to get rid of the white under educated ,she'll be right intelligentsia , Your good self, and replace them with boat people

people who know what its like to lose everything and will fight dam hard not to lose it

I might change listen stupids ,,,to you frigged morons

I wouldn't be surprised if ( ACC) this goes through ... I just wouldn't .... I wouldn't be pissed off ,
just resigned and hopeful that the younger generation might change the status quo

I m alright , I earn more money than I can shit and 750 isn't a problem for me
it is for others , and thats why I work hard to stop people ( such as your self , from bolloxing up godzone with a sheer lack of understanding

now hurry up and pass on or go to Australia , so that people worthy of such a nice place can do a better job

Stephen

[short-circuit]

No listen stupids means that Redneck slack Jawed New Zealand morons , with barely the ability to string together a sentence, with at least ONE preposition
have ruined motorcycling , as we know it , in one of the best places for it

You did nothing ,( and possibly wont )

This ACC thing has been coming at you since 1993 ,,

now I know I am right because the current situation has PROVED i am, right

Check my post history

What NZ needs is to get rid of the white under educated ,she'll be right intelligentsia , Your good self, and replace them with boat people

people who know what its like to lose everything and will fight dam hard not to lose it

I might change listen stupids ,,,to you frigged morons

I wouldn't be surprised if ( ACC) this goes through ... I just wouldn't .... I wouldn't be pissed off ,
just resigned and hopeful that the younger generation might change the status quo

I m alright , I earn more money than I can shit and 750 isn't a problem for me
it is for others , and thats why I work hard to stop people ( such as your self , from bolloxing up godzone with a sheer lack of understanding

now hurry up and pass on or go to Australia , so that people worthy of such a nice place can do a better job

Stephen

Too true - the right wingers on here have become right whingers

[Skyryder]

just not too sure what thread to post this on. This one jumped out.

ACC Changes to Rule out Competition?


Labour's announcement that it will promote an immediate law change after the election to reduce the pressure on ACC levy rates, raises some serious questions about the future funding and status of ACC.
Having completed the laborious transition to a fully funded scheme, news that cuts to the motor vehicle and employers' levy comes as a surprise and seem to throw into doubt Government's commitment to the fully funded model.
Among the other spectres raised by the proposed changes is the possibility that the Government is trying to make privatisation or ACC competition a less palatable option.

This is from Russell McVeigh Public Public Law News

http://www.russellmcveagh.com/_docs/...InConsultation


It seems pointless to speculate on the effects of Labours ACC policy now but if they had have been elected Labour’s ACC policy would have been a reduction of levies.

R McV. See this in a negative light. But if they had have been elected you would have had a reduction in ACC levies not an increase. Or even half an increase as Smith is now speculating on

Skyryder

[kwaka_crasher]

I reckon it differs from contract to contract.

The Insurance Law Reform Act 1977 states:

Mis-statements in other contracts of insurance

(1) A contract of insurance shall not be avoided by reason only of any statement made in any proposal or other document on the faith of which the contract was entered into, reinstated, or renewed by the insurer unless the statement—

(a) Was substantially incorrect; and

(b) Was material.

and there can be no contracting out.

See materiality defined.

In short, you are covered as the fact you have not paid for a vehicle licence is arguably immaterial and they cannot deny cover on this basis regardless of the contract (see no contracting out). Of course they'll try, but don't they always, anyway?

[jeffs]

Ixion have ACC provided you with their figures yet?
I for one would also like to see them . Has the CEO of ACC for filled his promise made on National TV ?

[jeffs]

I was reading back through this thread and had a thought. I hope the CEO of ACC was not using the same calculations I used when I posted this.

ACC cost by vehicle type.
Cost of claim / number of registered vehicle
car $208,343,000 / 206084 = $1010
bike $62,545,000 / 17248 = $3636

My figures were WRONG ( as I said in my next post ). I had only read the line in the LTSA report that said newly registered bikes. Instead of the total registered bikes of 106,000.

This could could be why he was spouting the real cost as $3000 per bike.

Or perhaps they do not know, so are reading Kiwibiker.co.nz to find out their numbers, and there is no report, but he never read my post retracting my figures.

[I GS 1]

Ixion have ACC provided you with their figures yet?
I for one would also like to see them . Has the CEO of ACC for filled his promise made on National TV ?

If we look at what ACC are doing with providing the figures (requested under official information act) for another of their target groups (sensitive claims), we will find that they will faff around/provide un-analysable groupings etc. and only come up with the figures we need after the closing date for submissions.

(If the rehabilitation of motorcyclists is so much more costly, you would have thought that they would have been backing us in the past in trying to get the use of those cheese cutter barriers on roads banned)

[MSTRS:Me]

(If the rehabilitation of motorcyclists is so much more costly, you would have thought that they would have been backing us in the past in trying to get the use of those cheese cutter barriers on roads banned)

Statistically, 1 death (no matter how horrific and abhorrent) is not proof that cheesecutters pose the threat of costs that would over-ride their use.
Bikers perceive them in light of personal threat - no one else does.

[scumdog]

Statistically, 1 death (no matter how horrific and abhorrent) is not proof that cheesecutters pose the threat of costs that would over-ride their use.
Bikers perceive them in light of personal threat - no one else does.

I've said that many times, there are way more dangers out there than cheese-cutters - like ACC for example.....

[R-Soul]

From the close up interview, this is one of many questions I still cant get my head around.

Perhaps this question could be asked of Price water house the ACC auditors.

If there are 106,000 registered bikes and it cost ACC $62,545,000 in claims why do they think the true ACC charge they are saving us from should be $3000.

What have I got wrong.

62,545,000 / 106,000 = $590

The 106,000 does not include the 30,393 mopeds/scooters under 50cc or the sum would be

62,545,000 / 136,393 = $458

Thats the point of the ACC payment collection scheme- they are not just pulling n enough each year to pay for that years claims, they want to pull in enougheach year to pay for all the future claims for the accidents from that year. So they want a huge chunk of cash on top of teh actual payments, so that the cash can earn interest, and pay for all future payouts for those accidents. That way all current bikers pay for all current accidents and their future claims.

However, this apparently (from what I have read) can still be done by assembling the required lump sum of cash over a longer time. Labour wanted to push the deadline for assembling the cash to 2019, instead of the current deadline of 2012. This would have allowed a reduction of ACC levies. National don't want to push the deadline back, but prefer to make out that ACC is in crisis. That way they can privatise it.

[MSTRS:Me]

I was reading back through this thread and had a thought. I hope the CEO of ACC was not using the same calculations I used when I posted this.

ACC cost by vehicle type.
Cost of claim / number of registered vehicle
car $208,343,000 / 206084 = $1010
bike $62,545,000 / 17248 = $3636

My figures were WRONG ( as I said in my next post ). I had only read the line in the LTSA report that said newly registered bikes. Instead of the total registered bikes of 106,000.

This could could be why he was spouting the real cost as $3000 per bike.

Or perhaps they do not know, so are reading Kiwibiker.co.nz to find out their numbers, and there is no report, but he never read my post retracting my figures.

Sorry, but the $62M is also wrong. It is just the total of all claims still being paid out. Over half of it has been covered by levies paid in previous years.

I've said that many times, there are way more dangers out there than cheese-cutters - like ACC for example.....

They can both cost us an arm and a leg.

[R-Soul]

In a no-fault scheme there should be NO divisions. It should matter not what I do. As far as ACC is concerned any individual should be a faceless number with no hint of who they are. This is the only way to maintain true equality and fairness.

I'll say it again as it seems to be falling on deaf ears - the ONLY fair way to fund ACC is through income tax.

The fact is that we HAVE being paying more than others, and now they want more. the fact that we have accepted the additional payemnts in the past is damning to us, and turning around now and insisting on "equality" is going to look dumb. Even though it is fair.

We should just insist that if we pay additional money, then we want the rugby players, netball players and cyclists to pay their way too. We will see how much balls the government has if they are faced with making the rugby players cough... thats a surefire loss at the next election!

[swbarnett]

The fact is that we HAVE being paying more than others, and now they want more. the fact that we have accepted the additional payemnts in the past is damning to us, and turning around now and insisting on "equality" is going to look dumb. Even though it is fair.

Yes, we have accepted the slap in the face in the past. What they're trying to do now is more like a full-blown punch in the face with knuckle dusters attached.

If someone threathens you with a feather are you really going to worry about it? We all have our own threshold where we say enough is enough. The fact that we didn't speak up earlier in no way weakens our current position. Ignoring a wrong does not make it right.