Insurance premiums

[yachtie10]

I was at the meeting with Nicks myth last night and was disappointed in one comment in particular made by the minister

"That insurance premiums for motorcycles are about 3-4 times higher than for cars of the same value". This I find hard to believe as in my case my motorcycle is significantly cheaper to insure by value

I have made a google spreadsheet that we can all list this information
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?k...vaEwwMGc&hl=en

please add your details

If this is too hard then please post the details here and I will add them for you

please add fill all the fields if you can so the data is meaningful

Cheers

[FastBikeGear]

I was at the meeting with Nicks myth last night and was disappointed in one comment in particular made by the minister

"That insurance premiums for motorcycles are about 3-4 times higher than for cars of the same value". This I find hard to believe as in my case my motorcycle is significantly cheaper to insure by value

If this is too hard then please post the details here and I will add them for you

Yachtie10 unfortunately neither of my Linux browsers support google apps. Can you please add my costs to your spreadsheet. Please note my third party insurance from AMI does not include fire and theft.

My third party motorcycle insurance for both my 250 commuter (just sold) and my big sports bike is a flat rate of $27.36 per annum from AMI. For third party insurance they don't take the value of the bike, cc rating or my rider experience into consideration.

My third party insurance on my van is $226.07 from AMI.

My car insurance costs 826% more than my bike insurance!!

The logic behind this is that they either think I have less chance of hitting something and making a third party claim on my bike

or

that they think any claim made for third party damage when riding my motorbike will be much less than a third party damamge claim made when I drive my van.



The thing to note is that an insurance company which is what Nick Smith repeatedly insisted ACC is last night, charges me a premium that is calculated on the damage I can do to another party. By claiming that ACC is an insurance company the inference is that ACC is providing personal injury accident insurance.



If AMI used this same logic to provide full personal injury accident insurance, then a premium for such an insurance for a motorcyclist would again be many times less than a car driver's.

Why?

Because when a motorcylist is at fault in an accident with a car driver there is less chance of personal injury to the car driver. Therefore the motorcyclist's insurance company only has to pay out for damage to the motorcyclist.

When a car driver is at fault in an accident with a motorcyclist there is much more chance of personal injury to motorcylist. Therefore the motorcyclist's insurance company doesn't have to pay out anything from their own pocket as they subrogate (sue on the 1st parties behalf) to recover the costs of the injury to the motorcylist from either the motorist or the motorist insurance company.

If ACC is an Insurance company as Nick Smith says then our premiums (levies should be many times less than for a car driver) and we and insurance companies require the right to sue.

If Nick decides that ACC is a no-fault insurance company he is creating a new concept in insurance companies. It's a great idea. We would then have the World's only no-fault insurance company then a car drivers and motorcylists levies should be identical. (Nice thing about this scenario is theire is not need for any party to sue any other party.

Nick Smith is making a very strong case for a single flat rate ACC Insurance premium!

[p.dath]

That's going to be a difficult comparison to make.

For instance, my bike insurance includes cover for track days, replacement for some of my bike gear, and a basic death cover (for the funeral).

My car insurance only covers the car for on-road use.

[FastBikeGear]

That's going to be a difficult comparison to make.

For instance, my bike insurance includes cover for track days, replacement for some of my bike gear, and a basic death cover (for the funeral).

My car insurance only covers the car for on-road use.

P.dath why don't you get off your lazy arse and ring your insurance company and ask them for an over the phone quote for comparitive insurance?

[cowboyz]

not that I think it is true.. myself, my bike and car are within $20 per year of each other. (both around $400). I think the point of insurance is they have to weigh up the chances of it being stolen or falling over and breaking expensive fairings. Nothing to do with ACC. ACC is not an insurance company. How about we compare ACC levies to the export price of apples in the past 10 years?

[yachtie10]

not that I think it is true.. myself, my bike and car are within $20 per year of each other. (both around $400). I think the point of insurance is they have to weigh up the chances of it being stolen or falling over and breaking expensive fairings. Nothing to do with ACC. ACC is not an insurance company. How about we compare ACC levies to the export price of apples in the past 10 years?

I am trying to have evidence to refute the ministers claims that M/C are riskier in insurance terms.
I would love to have some figures from the US as its a purer system (no ACC)
but Some local figures is a start
Thanks for your figures

[yachtie10]

could whomever filled in row 3 check there car insured value as $20 seems incorrect

Cheers

[yachtie10]

bump bump bump

[FastBikeGear]

Yachtie10, can you add my figures from the second post to your spread sheet. I think you are exposing a very interesting angle.

[caseye]

Done Yachtie, and so far still no 3-4 times more expensive ANYWHERE.

[GOONR]

Done, The quotes that I had for my car are way more expensive than my bike!

[yachtie10]

Yachtie10, can you add my figures from the second post to your spread sheet. I think you are exposing a very interesting angle.

Done

yours is the most extreme due to your insurance being only third party (no fire and theft)
Seems that Mr smith may have made a mistake. Or maybe he is using misleading figures on purpose. Surely not

[caseye]

Stop calling us Shirley! of course he bloody well IS using misleading and unproveable figures, how else could he stay in front of us and lie with such conviction.
Nice work here Yachtie, the proof is in the pudding eat f;;;ing hmble pie nicks Myth! I hope it chokes you.

[Oscar]

I was at the meeting with Nicks myth last night and was disappointed in one comment in particular made by the minister

"That insurance premiums for motorcycles are about 3-4 times higher than for cars of the same value". This I find hard to believe as in my case my motorcycle is significantly cheaper to insure by value

I have made a google spreadsheet that we can all list this information
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?k...vaEwwMGc&hl=en

please add your details

If this is too hard then please post the details here and I will add them for you

please add fill all the fields if you can so the data is meaningful

Cheers

Smith's comment was stupid and trying to compare data is a waste of time.

Both premiums are frontloaded for third party insurance and based on a number of different factors including age, claims history and vehicle type.

The only thing a comparison will prove is that the premiums for lower cost vehicles are higher as a rate % - for example a $5,000 bike will carry most of the premium that a $15,000 does (not a third, as you would expect). This is because the average claim does not really relate to the sum insured.

[FastBikeGear]

Done

yours is the most extreme due to your insurance being only third party (no fire and theft)
Seems that Mr smith may have made a mistake. Or maybe he is using misleading figures on purpose. Surely not

I think when we all told him that this was bullshit, it was the only time that he looked suprised at the meeting.

He then said he had been told this by insurnace companies but I also saw him make a note and I bet the note was for him to check it out.