Toyspeed.org.nz Message Board

Lets put it to the vote. In aussie it has been like this for years.

Be nice to know of those who are for and against, which actually have insurance currently

I vote for

I dont want to have some $&#$% rearend my car and then lose my no claims etc cos he has no insurance and can barely afford to fill his piece of shit let alone pay for repairs

Shouldn't affect me as I have 3rd party on all my cars anyway, as long as the premiums don't go up.
Even if most retards don't get cover, at least it will increase the chances of the person running into you having 3rd party cover.

ChaosAD wrote:I and then lose my no claims etc cos he has no insurance and can barely afford to fill his piece of sh*t let alone pay for repairs

You shouldn't lose your no claims bonus if you're not at fault.

great idea. I always insure what I drive on the road. which is only 1 third of my cars

Im for

Definately For, if it's done right.

I'm in 2 minds. From what I understand, premiums WILL go up significantly, however I think its a good idea that you're protected if someone with a tinny old POS hits your nice car and pays you $10 a week for the rest of their life.

Adamal wrote:I'm in 2 minds. From what I understand, premiums WILL go up significantly, however I think its a good idea that you're protected if someone with a tinny old POS hits your nice car and pays you $10 a week for the rest of their life.

Id have to say im definately in 2 minds as well. Obviously everyone having insurance would be good, but then since im always fully insured i dont have the problem of getting paid back $10 a week. My insurance will pay me and sort out getting the money from the other party. So infact id end up paying more for insurance, when it doesnt do anything to help me..

Don't forget it's compulsory Third Party insurance meaning that you still need the person who hit you to make a claim, meaning if Johnny Scumbag hits you while you're not at your car and doesn't leave details, or decides to do a runner because he's drunk/unlicensed/unwofed whatever(which may invalidate his insurance anyway), and you don't get a plate you're still up a creek.

In theory, communism works too.

If prices only go up ~$29/year (NZ Insurance Council) then I'm for...but when it's compulsary, insurance companies no longer have to convince you it's a good idea to have insurance by offering low premiums.
The end result will more than likely amount to price fixing between the insurance companies to maximise returns for shareholders.

im against because it gives the insurance companys too much power because they know you NEED it, in other contrys dont they have it as part of your rego?

drftnmaz wrote:im against because it gives the insurance companys too much power because they know you NEED it

+1

i think its a good idea in principal but weather or not it can be introduced so as to not significantly increase premiums is another story.

i vote a cautious yes, and i already have 3rd party though westpac

I don't want compulsory insurance. If you don't want a product, why should you be forced to buy it?

With compulsory 3rd party, the insurers now have to insure the retards who wouldn't normally get insurance. Which means I have to pay even more for my insurance.

I have full cover on both our cars, the BMW is cheap, the Clio Sport is fricken expensive

i dont think it will make a differnce, now the fines will just go up, ie no wof no rego no insurance = $600 (going off it been same cost as no wof no rego)

and these guys will just tick it up

i hate to think what the cost of my insurance would be, under 21 modded car etc,

Definitely against this one. For several reasons.
a) I already have full insurance so I'm covered anyway.
b) They want to introduce this to get rid of boyracers, which obviously won't work as it is already compuulsory to have warrants, follow license conditions, follow road rules etc etc. And a large amount of people seem perfectly capable of ignoring those.
c) Insurance will go through the roof in the same way it has overseas.
d) Harry Duynhoven

tsoob wrote:Lets put it to the vote. In aussie it has been like this for years.

You mean where the minimum third party insurance that you're required to have does what ACC covers here, AKA what we already pay for via registration?

RomanV wrote:

tsoob wrote:Lets put it to the vote. In aussie it has been like this for years.

You mean where the minimum third party insurance that you're required to have does what ACC covers here, AKA what we already pay for via registration?

yes its 3rd party personal injury cover, i should had specified that at the start.

I am for, because of what has happend to people like Barry's first car and many others that through the fault of some idiot they no longer have a car, where they may have only had the money to pay for 3rd party themselves so it they make a mistake they are not paying it off for years.