Rego costs ridiculous

[mikeey01]

$321/year under the old charges x 10,000 bikes = $3,210,000
$580/year under the new charges x 5,000 bikes = $2,900,000

Lolz. Didn't really think that one through did they?

LOL I love it!

On another note. Hey Nick Get Fucked!

[barno]

Yeah - as motorbikes put out less emissions, do less damage to the roads... we can expect our rego charges to go down again soon right, MPs?

Tossers.

[warewolf]

What does it work out at?

$12 a week or something like that..

As opposed to $4/wk for my big hulking 4wd, or even the rip-off $5/wk that bikes used to pay before the latest hike. And that is per bike, not per rider, so your $12/wk could actually be $24 or $36 or more.

Would you like a 140% pay rise? or a 60% cut? Not significant you say?

And when I use mine on average twice a month, that's $24 per ride! Hmmm, doesn't really seem that cheap to me.

Me neither. I'm averaging less than one day on-road per month avg so far this year which makes it fcukin expensive! It's about time all the fees were scrapped and just lumped in with petrol. It's the one thing you can't avoid using. The more you ride, the more risk, the more you pay.

And it would encourage people out of cars and on to bikes (powered or no) which is A Good Thing™.

[geoffm]

I have 3 road bikes, and a scooter. All regoed the cost would be $2 k/year - and th eRG andLC get used a few times a year to date - mainly to go and get a WOF,
They are on hold and will stay that way - I used to rego them "just in case", but no more. The others - we will see what I feel like when they expire. The miles I do (hence exposure to risk) is unchanged, but ACC is now getting less money than they did a year back.

[\m/]

If insurance becomes compulsory, we can expect premiums to go up. Insurance companies are arseholes, when they have you by the balls they will bleed you dry.

[popelli]

If insurance becomes compulsory, we can expect premiums to go up. Insurance companies are arseholes, when they have you by the balls they will bleed you dry.

Just like the acc premiums are at present except with acc there is no competition

At least with insurance companies, even if they are all in the same price fixing boat there is still some (limited) competition

[awayatc]

insurance in netherlands is compulsive........

3rd party on small cage in 1981 with 60% no claim was $800 a year....

I am quite happy to insure myself on voluntary basis....

don't want to find out if insurance companies can handle captive market.

[p.dath]

That system works everywhere else in the developed world.

What other country in the world would you consider has a successfully working private accident scheme? I don't know of one. They all have major issues. Far worse than ACC.

Did you know that NZ used to operate private accident insurance before ACC came in? It was a disaster. That's why they changed it. Something like 30% of all claim pay outs were consumed in legal fees. The actual claim pay out ratio was also very low, because in many cases the insurance companies challenged it in court, and the injured person wasn't in a state or position to force the insurance company to do the pay out - or they desperately needed money to feed their family and had to accept any offer made.

Compulsory insurance would mean that 15 or 16 year old kids couldn't legally hoon around in 5-litre vehicles and would have to drive something appropriate to their experience and budget.

Did you see the study the Government did into compulsory insurance about two years ago? They found the insurance rate was already something like 95%. The remainder of those without insurance - couldn't get insurance. They were mostly repeat drink drivers and the like.

So they found that introducing compulsory insurance would make almost no difference to the number of insured vehicles on the road - but it was going to make everyone's insurance go up due to compliance costs.
So the idea was dropped - who wants to make more for exactly what we have now?

Insurance premiums would rise and I guess that for those NZers whom are used to a Rolls Royce service, they would pay more.

When ACC was introduced it was considerably cheaper than the private accident insurance that existed.
Also remember that if no company wants to insurance someone on a motorbike, then suddenly using a motorbike in your scheme would become illegal.

I have suggested this more than one time however no one acknowledges that it is an answer of any kind; so thanks

Because what you suggest is close to what we previously had in NZ, and it was far far worse.

[unstuck]

I love riding bikes and can afford to pay my rego,and am happy to do so.I love NZ but it seems there are alot of whingers and crybabys. Great to live in a country where we have the choice to make more money if we want to.

[Maha]

I love riding bikes and can afford to pay my rego,and am happy to do so.I love NZ but it seems there are alot of whingers and crybabys. Great to live in a country where we have the choice to make more money if we want to.

Ageed, if you afford to own multi vehicles then surely you can afford to keep them legal?
I love my bike and what it does for me. I dont care what it costs me to keep on the road.
Bit like a smoker, they dont care how much cigarettes go up, they will still buy them cos' they like smoking. The TAX on them is horrendous.

[scumdog]

$321/year under the old charges x 10,000 bikes = $3,210,000
$580/year under the new charges x 5,000 bikes = $2,900,000

Lolz. Didn't really think that one through did they?

But the DID think it out - less motorbike related ACC claims!!

[Swoop]

It is interesting to see the amount of folks who are "putting the bike on hold over winter" or similar reasons. Please remember that your "hold period" only occurs when your current rego period runs out.

It makes it far more important to think about the amount of time that you wish to register your bike for, to avoid the periods when you do not intend to ride.

Avoid paying Nick'sMyth one cent more than you intend to!

[Gremlin]

Avoid paying Nick'sMyth one cent more than you intend to!

So uh... if I rode every day for the last few weeks... uh

No car... ride more, you get better value for money... I like this fixed rate tax, instead of on petrol or something

[oneofsix]

But the DID think it out - less motorbike related ACC claims!!

plus new riders, which Nick reconised as part of the issue, will just see the rego as being the cost it is and part of the cost of motorcycling, never having paid the lower one. He will also know most of the older riders will get sick of putting their rego on hold and will also start infighting thus weakening their stance. Can't say I've noticed any infighting around here

[ukusa]

Ageed, if you afford to own multi vehicles then surely you can afford to keep them legal?
I love my bike and what it does for me. I dont care what it costs me to keep on the road.

Bollocks! I could easily afford to own another 5 x $2K vehicles, doesn't mean I could afford the 5 x regos. 10 grand on vehicles doesn't make me a millionaire!
Loving to ride means fuck all when there is a growing class of people who also love to ride but can't afford to ride. People seem to be giving it (riding) away in droves because of the costs. But I suppose that was the ultimate aim of the new costs - to push riders away from riding to lower the road toll, rather than to encourage, educate & train riders young & old.
I gather you wouldn't have a problem if rego went up to $1000/year or more because you love to ride?
As I said in an earlier post, It cost me around $24 per ride on average (at 2 per month), and it doesn't matter if I do 2kms or 200kms on that ride.