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.




13324 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

# 243462 12-Dec-2018 16:37
3 people support this post
Send private message

I see the safety based system, introduced at great expense no doubt, is being binned for no good reason at all.





View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2 | 3
14247 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2144393 12-Dec-2018 16:52
Send private message

It is said that those who cannot afford the latest, greatest and safest cars (except Mustangs, Jeeps and Fiat Pandas) are paying an unfair higher price for registration and I agree with that. The change is to make the burden more fair.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 


1793 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2144397 12-Dec-2018 17:19
Send private message

I'll end up paying more, but agree it will make the burden fairer.

 

Under current system people are being penalized for not being able to afford a more expensive car.

 

 


 
 
 
 




13324 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2144400 12-Dec-2018 17:23
5 people support this post
Send private message

I don't agree it is fairer.

 

 

 

If you are in a safer car, ACC are less likely to incur costs or, of they do, the costs are likely to be lower.

 

 

 

I don't regard people's ability to pay as relevant to the equation. 

 

 

 

Where is the government's proof that the current system (barely 2 years old) does not result in lower ACC costs for those in safer cars and that therefore it is not fair their ACC cost should fall - which is the only aspect of fairness relevant?






768 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2144408 12-Dec-2018 17:32
3 people support this post
Send private message

MikeB4:

It is said that those who cannot afford the latest, greatest and safest cars (except Mustangs, Jeeps and Fiat Pandas) are paying an unfair higher price for registration and I agree with that. The change is to make the burden more fair.


That's not true. My 15 year old Honda Civic qualified for the cheapest rate. It's currently worth no more than $1500.

1382 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2144410 12-Dec-2018 17:33
Send private message

rugrat:

I'll end up paying more, but agree it will make the burden fairer.


Under current system people are being penalized for not being able to afford a more expensive car.


 



For the sake of argument - why ?





Software Engineer

 


958 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2144413 12-Dec-2018 17:51
2 people support this post
Send private message

Geektastic: I see the safety based system, introduced at great expense no doubt, is being binned for no good reason at all.

 

I'm pleased to see it go. The new system was fundamentally flawed. It wasn't based on safety, it was based on crash statistics.

 

As someone who drives a cheap car with a high safety rating, I was being penalised because of other users of similar vehicles - corporate fleets and rental companies. My two year old car went from having the lowest ACC levy one year, to the highest the next!


1793 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2144423 12-Dec-2018 18:08
Send private message

TwoSeven:
rugrat:

 

I'll end up paying more, but agree it will make the burden fairer.

 

 

 

Under current system people are being penalized for not being able to afford a more expensive car.

 

 

 

 

 



For the sake of argument - why ?

 

Why what? I was assuming a more expensive car would have higher safely in a crash, the $1500 car post though blew that out the water.

 

I don't think a extra $30 or so a year is going to influence what car people buy, at the higher end cost of cars, if there are cars at lower prices that get the lowest ACC, then it could.

 

If there are $1500 cars that get the full benefit then current system is fine, but if it's only more expensive cars it is penalizing people on lower incomes in my view. Guess it depends on the view if it should be user pays in all situations, or if there are some situations where costs should be averaged more.

 

 


 
 
 
 


236 posts

Master Geek


  # 2144429 12-Dec-2018 18:46
3 people support this post
Send private message

While I’m all for promoting safer cars I suspect that any increased death and injury statistics related to older cars is not wholly due to their lesser safety features.

Older cars are more likely to be owned by poorer, less educated people who won’t maintain them as well and who are generally, I suspect, more likely to have accidents.

3885 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2144430 12-Dec-2018 18:49
One person supports this post

There were massive flaws in the system. Biggest being that if no crash safety data is available for a model. They would apply the cost based on the age of the vehicle.

This meant that late model forward control vans were getting rated as being in the safest class. Even though 20+ year old cars would still likely be safer than them in a head on crash.

NZ new and used imports of the same year often had different safety features and ratings.

Some safety features were often optional. My 2002 Mercedes Vito is a classic example of that. It has dual airbags (some were only single airbag). But it doesn't have ABS brakes or stability control. As they were extra cost options.

You would need detailed access to the original options sheets of all vehicles in the fleet to be able to get accurate crash safety data.

And the system didn't even cover vehicles registered as commercial use AFAIK. Which also caused problems.


It would have been a good system if they had been able to get reliable data. But poor data just caused too many problems. So it was no help for someone replacing say a 20 year old car with a 10 to 15 year old one. As if the 20 year old car is say a high end (in its day) European car. And the 10 year old car a cheap little hatchback. The older car might actually be safer.







13324 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2144500 12-Dec-2018 20:24
Send private message

They'd be better off basing the cost on emissions.





8874 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  # 2144506 12-Dec-2018 20:54
2 people support this post
Send private message

Geektastic: They'd be better off basing the cost on emissions.

 

and when do you measure those?

 

half of the 2 year old diesels have more visible emissions than a well maintained 1990 corolla


2998 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2144574 13-Dec-2018 06:05
One person supports this post
Send private message

How did the ratings actually correlate with ACC costs? Perversely surviving a crash could mean a lifetime of cost to ACC vs a one off death benefit.

It's not what we are driving, it's how we are driving. I have a 2008 car with ABS. I know it works on grass but in 10 years I haven't been able to provoke it on the road meaning I could stop faster. To need to stop faster I would have to have been going faster.

14247 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2144599 13-Dec-2018 07:41
2 people support this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

I don't agree it is fairer.

 

 

 

If you are in a safer car, ACC are less likely to incur costs or, of they do, the costs are likely to be lower.

 

 

 

I don't regard people's ability to pay as relevant to the equation. 

 

 

 

Where is the government's proof that the current system (barely 2 years old) does not result in lower ACC costs for those in safer cars and that therefore it is not fair their ACC cost should fall - which is the only aspect of fairness relevant?

 

 

 

 

Driving a modern expensive car with lots of airbags etc does not make a driver better, and does not stop a bad driver causing injury. Being well off does not make a good driver.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 


2225 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2144659 13-Dec-2018 09:43
Send private message

This will even it out in my house - an old Nissan and an equally old Volvo - the Nissan being a LOT more expensive to register than the Volvo, due to the perceived safety of my Swedish Brick...

 

 

 

That being said, my wife's Nissan hatchback (1.5l CVT) is capable of far less speed than my brick, which has a 5cyl turbocharged 2.5l engine...

 

So if they get it right this time, it's not that big a deal for me, but I can understand the frustration for those that feel that it may just add to the cost of car ownership. 





Handsome Dan Has Spoken.

1391 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2144692 13-Dec-2018 10:37
2 people support this post
Send private message

Phased out due to equity concerns.

 

Meanwhile, the fuel taxes which hit those with older, less efficient engines continue to increase year on year. No one seemed to care about the equity argument then, did they? 


 1 | 2 | 3
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter and LinkedIn »



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 »

Arlo unveils its first video doorbell
Posted 21-Oct-2019 08:27


New Zealand students shortlisted for James Dyson Award
Posted 21-Oct-2019 08:18


Norton LifeLock Launches Norton 360
Posted 21-Oct-2019 08:11


Microsoft New Zealand Partner Awards results
Posted 18-Oct-2019 10:18


Logitech introduces new Made for Google keyboard and mouse devices
Posted 16-Oct-2019 13:36


MATTR launches to accelerate decentralised identity
Posted 16-Oct-2019 10:28


Vodafone X-Squad powers up for customers
Posted 16-Oct-2019 08:15


D Link ANZ launches EXO Smart Mesh Wi Fi Routers with McAfee protection
Posted 15-Oct-2019 11:31


Major Japanese retailer partners with smart New Zealand technology IMAGR
Posted 14-Oct-2019 10:29


Ola pioneers one-time passcode feature to fight rideshare fraud
Posted 14-Oct-2019 10:24


Spark Sport new home of NZC matches from 2020
Posted 10-Oct-2019 09:59


Meet Nola, Noel Leeming's new digital employee
Posted 4-Oct-2019 08:07


Registrations for Sprout Accelerator open for 2020 season
Posted 4-Oct-2019 08:02


Teletrac Navman welcomes AI tech leader Jens Meggers as new President
Posted 4-Oct-2019 07:41


Vodafone makes voice of 4G (VoLTE) official
Posted 4-Oct-2019 07:36



Geekzone Live »

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


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



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.