Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.

Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
2260 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 975651 28-Jan-2014 10:46 Send private message

gzt: Going by the stupid behavior and lack of following distance on the motorway I've seen today, compulsory car insurance and income protection insurance would not change anything. Some people just believe bad driving is someone else's problem.

My observation on Auckland motorways and roads is that commuting traffic (morning and late afternoon) is very well behaved overall.

Holiday motorway traffic like today actually seems like a different bunch of people in comparison and maybe it is.


Compulsory insurance

(a) shifts the burden off the taxpayers who presently fund the consequences through ACC

(b) places severe financial strictures on drivers if they get caught speeding, get caught drink driving or cause accidents. The net effect is that people simply cannot afford the consequences of those things (which might raise insurance premiums to over $5,000 a year) so a significant majority will modify their behaviour accordingly.

(c) It seriously penalises, and thus tends to prevent, new drivers in fast and/or expensive cars, restricting most to cars of 1 litre or smaller for at least their first 5 years on the road. This tends to help reduce the idiot behaviour of a 16 year old in a Subaru WRX because he simply can't insure it and allows new drivers time to get experience

NPR (Number Plate Recognition) cameras would easily be able to tell authorities which cars were insured and which were not. No insurance, fine and impound for first offence. Ban driver and crush vehicle for second.








1006 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 42


  Reply # 975670 28-Jan-2014 11:07 Send private message

Geektastic: 

Compulsory insurance.


ACC  removes the need for such (unless you also include property damage, which is silly, if somebody wants to not insure their property against damage that should always be their choice).  

If you don't like ACC, fine, there are other less enlightened countries which do not have a no fault universal accident compensation system, try over there.

The amortised costs, both financial and social of ACC to society as a whole are far lower than the costs which would be brought about by having compulsory individual insurance cover.

ACC isn't perfect, and there are many ways it could be improved, but it's still better than the alternative. 




---
James Sleeman

My hobby - listing small amounts of interesting/useful hobby electronic components hardware and stuff on Trademe for cheap, all good geek stuff for the "maker" revolution ;-)

Tip for Trademe addicts: install an addon for your browser to get thumbs for all listings.

825 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 62


  Reply # 975685 28-Jan-2014 11:19 Send private message

freitasm:
KiwiNZ: The whole point of this video and others is to highlight something that cannot be edited out, reshot etc etc is road deaths, the overall message is what counts.




So a little white lie is ok then?

Nope. Bad form from police. The healine should be "Hero truck driver avoids even bigger problem by controlling its truck while a retard is driving on the road."



I don't agree, when I was motorcycle dispatching my rule of thumb was that there were always two parties responsible in such an incident - the party that was the cause of the incident, and the party that allowed themselves to get into such a position that they were affected by the incident.





TwoSeven

3222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1101


  Reply # 975695 28-Jan-2014 11:27 One person supports this post Send private message

sleemanj:
Geektastic: 

Compulsory insurance.


ACC  removes the need for such (unless you also include property damage, which is silly, if somebody wants to not insure their property against damage that should always be their choice).  

If you don't like ACC, fine, there are other less enlightened countries which do not have a no fault universal accident compensation system, try over there.

The amortised costs, both financial and social of ACC to society as a whole are far lower than the costs which would be brought about by having compulsory individual insurance cover.

ACC isn't perfect, and there are many ways it could be improved, but it's still better than the alternative. 


There should be a minimum of compulsory third party insurance, they may not care about their property but what about those they hit? 




Mike

 Interesting. You're afraid of insects and women. Ladybugs must render you catatonic.

1006 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 42


  Reply # 975711 28-Jan-2014 11:38 Send private message

KiwiNZ: 
There should be a minimum of compulsory third party insurance, they may not care about their property but what about those they hit? 


If the person they hit cares about their own property then THEY have insurance, and it's their insurance's problem collecting from the uninsured other party.





---
James Sleeman

My hobby - listing small amounts of interesting/useful hobby electronic components hardware and stuff on Trademe for cheap, all good geek stuff for the "maker" revolution ;-)

Tip for Trademe addicts: install an addon for your browser to get thumbs for all listings.

3222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1101


  Reply # 975714 28-Jan-2014 11:43 Send private message

sleemanj:
KiwiNZ: 
There should be a minimum of compulsory third party insurance, they may not care about their property but what about those they hit? 


If the person they hit cares about their own property then THEY have insurance, and it's their insurance's problem collecting from the uninsured other party.



They hit a bicycle?

What about excess and no claim bonus? the innocent will in many cases lose this if the other party is not covered by at least third party.

The UK has compulsory insurance and I see it as a good thing, folks lose their cars if they are not insured. 




Mike

 Interesting. You're afraid of insects and women. Ladybugs must render you catatonic.

2260 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 975723 28-Jan-2014 11:53 Send private message

KiwiNZ:
sleemanj:
Geektastic: 

Compulsory insurance.


ACC  removes the need for such (unless you also include property damage, which is silly, if somebody wants to not insure their property against damage that should always be their choice).  

If you don't like ACC, fine, there are other less enlightened countries which do not have a no fault universal accident compensation system, try over there.

The amortised costs, both financial and social of ACC to society as a whole are far lower than the costs which would be brought about by having compulsory individual insurance cover.

ACC isn't perfect, and there are many ways it could be improved, but it's still better than the alternative. 


There should be a minimum of compulsory third party insurance, they may not care about their property but what about those they hit? 


Quite. If some bogan numpty who works minimum wage in the abattoir hits your new $100k BMW, what choice do you have but to mar your own insurance record by claiming on it? It will take him 50 years to pay off his debt to you!!








Awesome
3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 561

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 975739 28-Jan-2014 12:04 Send private message

Geektastic: Quite. If some bogan numpty who works minimum wage in the abattoir hits your new $100k BMW, what choice do you have but to mar your own insurance record by claiming on it? It will take him 50 years to pay off his debt to you!!


While I am not disagreeing with the idea of requiring compulsory 3rd party insurance (I fully support this), it's worthwhile noting that as long as the at fault party can be identified, you generally don't have to pay an excess and your NCB should not be effected. It's up to your insurance company to recover costs from the at fault party. It's just a lot easier for them to do that if the other party is insured.

An iteresting aside, and I don't know if this applies in NZ as well, but last year when I was comparing car insurance here in AU, I noticed that some of the insurance companies (mostly the cheap ones), where also rating you based on not-at-fault accidents. I.e. you may not lose your NCB after a not at fault accident, but your premium goes up anyway! Playing around with some online quote tools this became very obvious, and a subsequent read of the fine print confiremd. One of them I spoke to on the phone said that if you are in an accident, regardless of fault, you become statistically more risky and therefore you pay a higher premium for it. Needless to say I went with an insurer who did not have this policy. Something to watch out for.




Twitter: ajobbins

gzt

4442 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 219

Subscriber

  Reply # 975768 28-Jan-2014 12:26 Send private message

KiwiNZ: The UK has compulsory insurance and I see it as a good thing, folks lose their cars if they are not insured.

In the UK that has also led to stupidly expensive insurance for everyone. When you make something compulsory you also have to mandate what is covered, for which you can find endless examples of what should be covered. Personally I think that the if-you-want-your-gear-insured-against-x-then-insure-your-gear is actually the best and most effective policy as far as costs are concerned.

3222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1101


  Reply # 975777 28-Jan-2014 12:34 One person supports this post Send private message

gzt:
KiwiNZ: The UK has compulsory insurance and I see it as a good thing, folks lose their cars if they are not insured.

In the UK that has also led to stupidly expensive insurance for everyone. When you make something compulsory you also have to mandate what is covered, for which you can find endless examples of what should be covered. Personally I think that the if-you-want-your-gear-insured-against-x-then-insure-your-gear is actually the best and most effective policy as far as costs are concerned.


I am fully insured, is was tail ended by a tailgating Humpty in a Golf Gti that was not insured. To get mine fixed I had to claim , stump up with the excess to uplift my repaired car. The excess and no claim bonus was eventually repaid to me after four years when the numpty finally paid my insurance company.




Mike

 Interesting. You're afraid of insects and women. Ladybugs must render you catatonic.

7321 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 402

Trusted

  Reply # 975793 28-Jan-2014 12:48 2 people support this post Send private message

re OP

the argument for me is easy. it doesn't matter whether the truck is right or wrong. if you go up against a truck thinking he's gonna see you and react appropriately you have everything to lose.

especially if you are a cyclist or a motorcylist. who wants to get home in one piece.




Apologies for poor typing standards when on Samsung S4 [swype's fault]/iPad 2 Wifi[too slow to use!]

1412 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 69


  Reply # 975794 28-Jan-2014 12:49

AFAIK the insurance industry is happy with status quo. With compulsory 3rd party they see a possible erosion of the high take up of comprehensive insurance and having to insure the bottom end increases costs on everyone. NZ has about the same % of insured cars as the UK with their compulsion. There will always be someone uninsured.

2260 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 975961 28-Jan-2014 15:01 One person supports this post Send private message

ajobbins:
Geektastic: Quite. If some bogan numpty who works minimum wage in the abattoir hits your new $100k BMW, what choice do you have but to mar your own insurance record by claiming on it? It will take him 50 years to pay off his debt to you!!


While I am not disagreeing with the idea of requiring compulsory 3rd party insurance (I fully support this), it's worthwhile noting that as long as the at fault party can be identified, you generally don't have to pay an excess and your NCB should not be effected. It's up to your insurance company to recover costs from the at fault party. It's just a lot easier for them to do that if the other party is insured.

An iteresting aside, and I don't know if this applies in NZ as well, but last year when I was comparing car insurance here in AU, I noticed that some of the insurance companies (mostly the cheap ones), where also rating you based on not-at-fault accidents. I.e. you may not lose your NCB after a not at fault accident, but your premium goes up anyway! Playing around with some online quote tools this became very obvious, and a subsequent read of the fine print confiremd. One of them I spoke to on the phone said that if you are in an accident, regardless of fault, you become statistically more risky and therefore you pay a higher premium for it. Needless to say I went with an insurer who did not have this policy. Something to watch out for.


Indeed but if they cannot recover it then that cost is written off and the loss is recovered one way or another - usually through higher premiums all round. So we all end up paying. Except the bogan numpties.








2260 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 975963 28-Jan-2014 15:01 Send private message

Bung: AFAIK the insurance industry is happy with status quo. With compulsory 3rd party they see a possible erosion of the high take up of comprehensive insurance and having to insure the bottom end increases costs on everyone. NZ has about the same % of insured cars as the UK with their compulsion. There will always be someone uninsured.


But at least in the UK they are classed as criminals and punished when caught.








2260 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 975968 28-Jan-2014 15:06 Send private message

gzt:
KiwiNZ: The UK has compulsory insurance and I see it as a good thing, folks lose their cars if they are not insured.

In the UK that has also led to stupidly expensive insurance for everyone. When you make something compulsory you also have to mandate what is covered, for which you can find endless examples of what should be covered. Personally I think that the if-you-want-your-gear-insured-against-x-then-insure-your-gear is actually the best and most effective policy as far as costs are concerned.


It's not stupidly expensive for good drivers. My last car there, a new VW Passat station wagon worth about $50,000 equivalent, cost me just under $900 equivalent a year fully comp. My car here, worth about $35,000, costs me $800 a year.

Remember that insurance there covers the paraplegic you created in an accident suing you for $10 million. Here it doesn't because we fob that off on the taxpayer instead of the at fault driver.

I would change the law so that at least third party was required and place a statutory obligation on ACC to sue for recovery from the at fault driver's insurance where Police determine there is fault. This would at least have consequences for the premiums of bad drivers as well as reducing the burden on taxpayers who presently have to fund the consequences.








1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




Twitter »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:




News »

Trending now »
Hot discussions in our forums right now:

Moment of Truth?
Created by BarTender, last reply by Geektastic on 19-Sep-2014 06:54 (368 replies)
Pages... 23 24 25


10 Iphone 128gb 6+ iphones this weekend at auckland airport
Created by frysie, last reply by TimA on 17-Sep-2014 22:02 (36 replies)
Pages... 2 3


Mr. Key to extradite Kim Dotcom?
Created by TimA, last reply by SaltyNZ on 18-Sep-2014 09:20 (126 replies)
Pages... 7 8 9


Spark DNS Issues - Amazing - Broadband Service Alert
Created by PeteS, last reply by Demeter on 15-Sep-2014 14:13 (307 replies)
Pages... 19 20 21


IOS8 - Network Load
Created by FireEngine, last reply by FireEngine on 19-Sep-2014 06:20 (37 replies)
Pages... 2 3


2014 Holden SS (V8) or Ford XR6-T (in-line 6 turbo)
Created by joker97, last reply by ilovemusic on 16-Sep-2014 14:34 (71 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Is there anyone who would not upgrade to iphone 6 bcos it only has 1gb ram?
Created by joker97, last reply by joker97 on 18-Sep-2014 23:18 (16 replies)
Pages... 2


Maybe some politicians should go back to school?
Created by jarledb, last reply by DarthKermit on 18-Sep-2014 18:27 (31 replies)
Pages... 2 3



Geekzone Live »
Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.