Demerit points hiked for unlicensed vehicles

[scumdog]

Motorcyclists respond by puttin an increasing amount of motorcycle registrations on hold.

Income generated from relicencing (and corresponding, ACC levies) falls through the floor, to the point where they are actually getting less money than previously, while at the same time the amount of money they are forking out for motorcyclists remains more or less static.

Govt. decides this is not cool - something "has to be done" about the licensing fee issue. They speculate (without any real evidence) that the motorcyclists must be riding without registration.

They introduce demerits on unlicenced vehicles on road.

A few comments:

This demerit-for-rego-on-hold (but not for a rego that's run out - which also has a cheaper fine -and almost guaranteed compliance fyi) is part of a shoul-be-foreseen reaction.
Note: MOTORCYCLISTS WERE NOT SPECIFICALLY TARGETTED, just in case some are thinking that....

Scanner listeners (bless their socks) will vouch for this; - over the last year or two the number of vehicles getting pulled over with 'licence exemption in place until'... (name your month and year) has gone through the roof, even the Gov't noticed it...

The Gov't could have done one of three things for those continuing to ride/drive a vehicle that has the rego on hold':
Ignored it
Whacked on a really punitive fine
Cancelled the rego of that vehicle when it was detected being used running while rego 'on hold'
Inflict demerits
Require you hand over your rego plates for the 'on hold' duration

As we know it did a combo - demerits and a slightly bigger fine than you would get if you were riding/driving with your rego ran out.

I have yet to hear any comment about the fine being half what it use to be for no rego
Or how the fine for using a vehicle while 'on hold' is only 75% of the old fine.

Tell me how y'all would expect the Gov't to react in a way that would prevent people continuing to use their vehicle while 'on hold' - and still please the plebs?

[Ocean1]

Tell me how y'all would expect the Gov't to react in a way that would prevent people continuing to use their vehicle while 'on hold' - and still please the plebs?

Give them something of value for their money?

[riffer]

Tell me how y'all would expect the Gov't to react in a way that would prevent people continuing to use their vehicle while 'on hold' - and still please the plebs?

How about some of these:

1. recognise that the lifting the ACC fee through the roof was a ridiculous idea, and that this was always going to happen. Reduce the ACC component back to the level where motorcycle users will relicence their bikes again.
2. Remove ACC levy from motor vehicle registrations COMPLETELY. Put the ACC levy on petrol and diesel instead. Rego per year becomes approx $50 per year.
3. Introduce a UK-style tax disc that blatantly shows that the rego has been paid. Make it a different colour for each year. You pay for the rego for the entire year, or a proportion thereof, but the rego is for the entire year. That way its obvious if you ain't paid it, and people like me avoid being pulled over for checks.
4. Stop trying to use HM Police as revenue enforcement agents. Let's get back to having police actually protect and serve. Unpaid regos (with a WOF) should be a warning (pay within 28 days and fine/demerits will be dropped) not a penalisable offence.

[riffer]

I'm really hot on the concept of pay for the entire year.

Reduce the cost to $50 per annum, and you pay up until 31 Dec. People can pay any time, but it will always be from the date of payment up until end of year.

If you reduce the ACC from it I don't think anyone would mind paying for the entire year.

Another possible alternative is to pay for the RIGHT TO RIDE on the road for the year. Although this is a pain for people with multiple licences I reckon it is fairer - want to drive on our roads - pay a licence. Want to ride - pay a licence.

Reduce the ACC levy out of the picture and people will be happy to pay for it IMO.

What say ye all? Would you happily pay:-

1. $50 per annum for right to drive that calendar year
2. $50 per annum (on top of right to drive) to also ride that calendar year if you want to drive and ride
3. $0.15 extra per litre on petrol and diesel to cover the ACC levy.

[scumdog]

How about some of these:

1. recognise that the lifting the ACC fee through the roof was a ridiculous idea, and that this was always going to happen. Reduce the ACC component back to the level where motorcycle users will relicence their bikes again.
2. Remove ACC levy from motor vehicle registrations COMPLETELY. Put the ACC levy on petrol and diesel instead. Rego per year becomes approx $50 per year.
3. Introduce a UK-style tax disc that blatantly shows that the rego has been paid. Make it a different colour for each year. You pay for the rego for the entire year, or a proportion thereof, but the rego is for the entire year. That way its obvious if you ain't paid it, and people like me avoid being pulled over for checks.
4. Stop trying to use HM Police as revenue enforcement agents. Let's get back to having police actually protect and serve. Unpaid regos (with a WOF) should be a warning (pay within 28 days and fine/demerits will be dropped) not a penalisable offence.

All great.

Now try and convince the Gov't

Oh and that last one??

Warnings-shwarmings, they only work for 'nice' people, take my word for it.

And as mentioned, while you can get a ticket for no WOF or rego you are almost certain to get a 'compliance ticket' for them - as long as the WOF is less than a month old and with the rego it MAY be as many as 3 - 4 months out of date and you could still get compliance...sort of a Claytons warning.

So no $$$ into the Gov't coffers.

No doubt certain KBers would manage to talk their way out of any compliance...

Oh, and listen to the screams from the transport industry if the ACC levy went totally onto petrol & diesel..whew...

[riffer]

Oh, and listen to the screams from the transport industry if the ACC levy went totally onto petrol & diesel..whew...

You're not wrong there. I've already had that very same conversation with Chris Hipkins.

[Ocean1]

I reckon people affected by the extra Registration costs fall broadly into two groups.

Those for whom economy is a primary reason for bike ownership. And that's them fuckt, to coin a phrase they'll be gone by lunchtime. Or at least as soon as they can sell the bike. Total revenue increase? minus rather a lot.

Those who's bikes are predominantly recreational devices. These guys are the real targets of the changes, 'cause all fiscal rationalisation aside they're the ones officious sorts, (official and otherwise) get grumpy about. How dare they have disposable income. How dare they dispose of it in a manner I find offensive.

These second lot didn't come to be able to afford such toys by imprudent fiscal behavior, they'll cut their cloth to fit their budget. That means that while there may very well still be a modest suficiency of toys in the gargre the government will see no more unjust taxation now than they did before the changes. Ideally less.

Me? I pay enough tax already, I bought more bikes, but they'll never cost me a dime in registration fees.



Oh, and those officious sorts?

Big black dog up ya.

[thepom]

bang on riffer,you run for parliament cos you,d get my vote,.....fucking coppers should be ashamed of themselves......

[Max Preload]

A few comments:

This demerit-for-rego-on-hold (but not for a rego that's run out - which also has a cheaper fine -and almost guaranteed compliance fyi) is part of a shoul-be-foreseen reaction.
Note: MOTORCYCLISTS WERE NOT SPECIFICALLY TARGETTED, just in case some are thinking that....

If you're saying that there are demerits only for operating an unlicensed motor vehicle while it is on exemption from continuous licensing but not when it is simply expired, you are sadly mistaken.

Land Transport (Motor Vehicle Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2011 - Schedule 7
Land Transport Act 1998 No 110 - Section 242

The Gov't could have done one of three things for those continuing to ride/drive a vehicle that has the rego on hold':
Ignored it
Whacked on a really punitive fine
Cancelled the rego of that vehicle when it was detected being used running while rego 'on hold'
Inflict demerits
Require you hand over your rego plates for the 'on hold' duration

As we know it did a combo - demerits and a slightly bigger fine than you would get if you were riding/driving with your rego ran out.

Plus empowering the NZTA to require you to surrender the plates if they wish...

Give them something of value for their money?

Crazy talk!

[scumdog]

If you're saying that there are demerits only for operating an unlicensed motor vehicle while it is on exemption from continuous licensing but not when it is simply expired, you are sadly mistaken.

Land Transport (Motor Vehicle Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2011 - Schedule 7
Land Transport Act 1998 No 110 - Section 242

Plus empowering the NZTA to require you to surrender the plates if they wish...

My bad.

Shows you how many of those ticket I write out...

[bogan]

Tell me how y'all would expect the Gov't to react in a way that would prevent people continuing to use their vehicle while 'on hold' - and still please the plebs?

Implement a fair pricing system would be a bloody good start. I don't pay what I am supposed to, because what I am supposed to pay is well over twice what others are supposed to pay, who have similar 'risk factor' :sic: and road useage.

[Max Preload]

My bad.

Shows you how many of those ticket I write out...

Not really. But I'll take your word for it. In any case, the NZTA apply the demerits regardless of what's entered on the ION which is really only for information purposes of the person it's issued to.

I have to say it seems to be rather the norm these days for cops to not know about the specific legislation changes and how it affects the IONs they issue. People are still getting the $400 for breach of licence conditions ones! Then the NZTA apply the demerits too! LOL

[FJRider]

I reckon people affected by the extra Registration costs fall broadly into two groups.

Those for whom economy is a primary reason for bike ownership.

Those who's bikes are predominantly recreational devices.

In reality ... aside from scooters, a small car is probably more economical than a bike.

Recreational devices ... ??? quite funny ... considering that MOST purely recreational bikes are not used on the road and are not subject to the levy. Most of the summer sunday scratchers only rego for summer anyway ...

Me? I pay enough tax already, I bought more bikes, but they'll never cost me a dime in registration fees.

Off road bike's huh ...

[tigertim20]

They feeling a revenue loss already ?



Driving an unlicensed vehicle could soon see you banned from the road.
The fines for those driving unlicensed vehicles will be reduced and offenders instead handed demerit points, Transport Minister Steven Joyce has just announced.
He said the changes to vehicle licensing regulations will be a deterrent to those who try to dodge payment.
"We know there are people who would currently rather risk the fine than pay their licensing fees," Joyce said.

From May 1 the NZ Transport Agency could require people to surrender licence plates when putting their licensing on hold

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...nlicensed-cars

soo, bikers can get fucked by having to pay unreasonable and unfair levies, and they can get doublke fucked if they dare challenge the brainless idiots behind such ideas, and protest by not paying their rego. cunts.

[Max Preload]

In reality ... aside from scooters, a small car is probably more economical than a bike.

Depends if you're having to pay for parking... and what your time is worth sitting in traffic.