ACC Levies

[Rhubarb]

Well, it might seem expensive to ride a bike when you add it all up, but...............DAMN IT'S WORTH IT!!!

[Grahameeboy]

Harden up. Riding a bike is an ungodly privilege and worth every penny. Why do you think motorbikes are greener than cars? They consume almost the same amount of fuel as a car, more tires, more oil, greater emissions.

Go National!

Agree the pleasure is worth more than the extra dough.....cheaper than a prostitute which never lasts as long and no money back guarantee...did I just say that!!!!

[Rhubarb]

It's not really that expensive when you ride a reliable old hack like mine.

[vinnieh]

Harden up. Riding a bike is an ungodly privilege and worth every penny. Why do you think motorbikes are greener than cars? They consume almost the same amount of fuel as a car, more tires, more oil, greater emissions.

Go National!

Hey steved,

I think riding a bike on the road is as much of a privilege as driving a car. To me, a privilige is something that you earn, whereas to ride a bike all you need to do is front up the cash.

Bikes are greener because instead of me using my 800kg 1300cc car to get me to school I can ride something that has a 100cc or even 250cc engine that doesn't have to pull a whole lot of extra shite, just a frame, engine and me. Next time you are sitting at the lights in the morning traffic, take a look and see how many cars have only one person in them - most of them have only one. If everyone rode some form of motorbike or cycled or whatever, legislation like the carbon emissions trading scheme might not affect us as much as it will. I think the govt should encourage people to ride bikes and also make the roads safer for motocyclists.

And if I am going to pay shitloads of money over the years in taxes and levies etc, the least they could do is build roads that are designed to last longer. My father was a civil engineer and a lot of roads are only designed to last for 5 years to cut back on costs.

Road safety experts from overseas have looked at NZs roads and said that the killer on our roads are not speeders but that dumbasses that build roads that are cheap, but not safe.

Anyway I'm getting off track. I just think that its bullshit how expensive it is to run a bike. Basically I don't have the money to run a bike and get my license, which is a problem which hardening up will not solve for me. Maybe one day when I'm not a student.

Good to see another national supporter

[The Stranger:Me]

ACC is supposed to be a no blame system - the sole exception is motorcycles.

The stats on cost are largely bullshit.
They are collected by the doctor. You go in for an accident and say the word motorcycle and the doctor ticks the motorcycle box - even though off road motorcycle injuries should not be included here - neither should farm bike injuries.
Then they take the total bill (including the off road injuries etc) and divide it by the number of registered motorcycles and set our levy accordingly.

[popelli]

Are we better for the environment? Do we lessen the impact on the balance of trade on account of our bikes are way cheaper than a basic car, and we use way-less gas?

wrong on both counts

modern jap bikes use more fuel than modern cars in many cases

average life expectancy of a car in 100 - 150,000 miles

life expectancy for most bikes is well under 50,000 miles so you need 3 times as many bikes to do the same mileage

[Max Preload]

The whole philosophy under-pinning the scheme is that it's a 'no fault - no blame' system. The idea of 'fault' hasn't been missed. It's been deliberately removed from the equation. You get hurt ... you get compensated regardless of if it was due to your own idiocy or someone else's.

That's a complete falsehood. Fault and blame is being aportioned in the levies themselves by rather than charging every man woman and child in the country he exact same amount, they're differentiating between people based on how many vehicles they own, their income and their profession. Now tell me again how it's a 'no fault - no blame' system - I love a good belly laugh!

[MarkH]

So I have both a car and a bike. Since I ride a bike I am more 'at risk' and have to pay a higher ACC levy. How do I claim back the lower ACC levy that I pay when I reg my car? How is it fair to have to pay 2 ACC levies when I never operate both vehicles at once? What about the forum members that list several bikes - if they are all registered then that is a shit-load of ACC levies!

Why the hell aren't the ACC levies per driver/rider rather than per vehicle? If I have 7 cars that I called Monday, Tuesday, ... then how am I more 'at risk' then the guy that has one car that he uses everyday?

[jaykay]

Also don't forget that diesel vehicles pay more rego than petrol, which following government logic must mean they are more dangerous.

One solution to this strange logic would be:
1. Compulsory third party insurance
2. An ACC levy as a fixed percentage of this cost.

Insurance companies would decide what risk you are (perhaps for a couple of bikes and a car), and then you pay ACC levies at (for example) 50% of the quoted figure. The lower the risk, the less insurance and ACC to pay - lower claims would lead to lower costs.

IIRC Ruth Dyson said something like "If you want lower ACC levies then improve your driving", unfortunately at present the ACC levy is nothing to do with how well any particular person drives. However if you are perceived to be a high risk by an insurance company you will pay more - at present of course it's the high risk drivers who don't get insurance. And because they don't have to get insurance there is no real reason for a bad driver to improve.

[Ixion]

That is because the cost of petrol includes an ACC levy component , whilst diesel does not. So the extra 'rego' cost is to make up the shortfall on the fuel. Which actually is logical.

[Motig]

So you'll be pleased to see that a notice of the proposed new ACC levy increases is in todays papers.

[CookMySock]

Try flying a fucken cessna, that will make your eyes water. Bikes are worth it.

Steve

[Slingshot]

I've just had the consultation documents sent through from ACC, (I emailed them weeks ago to get a copy).

The last couple of the attachment will probably be of interest, ACC is proposing a $60ish increase in motorcycle levy and they justify it with this footnote:

Note that the motorcycle levy is subsidised by the other vehicle classes. An analysis of the ‘true’ levy for motorcycles shows that if ACC charged motorcycles an unsubsidised levy this would increase the currently proposed rate of $262.75 ($392.09 for non-petrol-driven motorcycles) to approximately $1,500.

Fuckers, now I just need to find the business card of my local PM so she can hear all about this.

[Ixion]

That $1500 claim is bollocks. It's an urban myth promoted by the ACC based on some highly dodgy calculations carried out years ago, which extrapolated the decrease in motorcycle registrations that occured in the 90s out into the future and concluded that by 2014 there'd only be 2 bikes left on the road, which would have to pay for all the previous injuries (not quite, but you get the idea).

ACC ever since have sententiously trotted out the figure to justify clobbering bikes, despite the fact that the decrease in registrations has in fact reversed, and registrations are now massively increasing each year (so that the cost is spread over a greater number). Requests for them to justify the claim are met by "OK, but it's going to cost you $100000 "

[MarkH]

That $1500 claim is bollocks.

I would have to agree - ACC is really paying out an average of $1500 in claims per registered motorcycle per year? That is some serious outlay! Wait a minute - more than $1500 surely, the ACC levy on petrol + the work ACC paid for the riders that are also employees also goes into the ACC fund. We would have to be talking about maybe over $2000 in ACC costs on average per registered motorcycle per year.

That really sounds a bit too high to be accurate.
Also: to the degree that car drivers cause accidents that injure motorcyclists they should be subsidising the ACC payouts to motorcyclists, so the ACC levy for cars should incorporate some of the cost to keep things fair.