Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

MCIS????? [NSW]

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by ibast, Oct 17, 2008.

  1. What a rort!!! "Medical Care and Injury Services Levy".

    Isn't that what a greenslip is for? I smell bovine methane.

  2. Green slip prices in NSW $ucken ridiculous :mad:

    MCIS been on MCC radar for a few years http://www.mccofnsw.org.au/a/203.html

    There's also a review into CTP and why other states so much cheaper.
  3. should be written as "the at fault equivalent part of the Victorian TAC scheme for which we charge you 50% (for a bike - 40% for a car) more and still don't have a scheme that works.
  4. At least here the motorcycle levy is clearly defined as such - it looks like NSW has a levy by another name.
  5. it applies to all registered vehicles Tony - not just bikes as your levy does. It was stated in parliament to be an average of $20 per vehicle from my recollection and is now 50% of the base premium for all bikes in sydney - Given the base premium is $250+, it is a little dissapointing to see that some people must be paying a dollar to even out the statistics.

    The MCIS Levy first appeared as a separate item on Green Slips in 2006 with the introduction of the Lifetime Care and Support scheme. This scheme provides medical care, treatment, rehabilitation, attendant care and support to anyone catastrophically injured (such as severe spinal cord and/or a traumatic brain injury) for the rest of their life
  6. Anyone with finance on their motorcycle, should call their finance company and ask if they have a 'fleet or similar' CTP arrangement with an insurer.

    My CTP is with Allianz, and it's half the price of normal through a fleet policy.

    Somehow, I'm still paying all required levies and covered for the same level of liability... it's just half-price.

    Sure hope insurance companies aren't rotton, thieving, price-fixing cahns, ay!
  7. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

    Please forgive me - but I couldn't resist. So this is why you NSW riders are so upset and grumpy. You are getting shafted.......:bannanabutt:

    Tony is correct - at least we have some say (and significant control) about how our money is spent. You guys up north are in all sorts of crap.

    I sure am glad I live south of the border :p :p

    At least we know that the bureaucrats include motorcycles in their planning in Victoria, because they are accountable for the money we pay them via the levy ( :shock: :shock:). The levy may not be liked very much - but at least it puts us in a better position than you poor sods up north....
  8. your "education" or "safety" or whatever you call it levy for bikes is completely different from MCIS John.

    If we got such a levy it would be on top of what we already pay, not as a component of MCIS. We have no say about what happens to the MCIS levy in the same way that you don't have any say in what happens to TAC payouts. The grumpy bit (imo) really just comes from the blatent lying about how much it would be (6+ times higher than stated in other words). And it was 6 times higher right from the start - there is no bracket creep going on here. This is the bit contested by the mccofnsw in the link posted by toecutter above.
  9. I quite agree - and just as you NSW people fail to understand what's going on in Vic - so do we fail to understand what's going on in NSW.

    Sorry, but I just see this as an interesting aside to what is being said by the likes of certain NSW people.... about the relative state of play which exists in what are essentially two different countries....... when it comes to how we are treated by the powers that be.

    I realize it has nothing to do with MCIS but the similarities are there.
  10. It's more similar to TAC premium than the bike levy. As far as I know, motorcyclists in NSW aren't singled out to pay for general road upgrades that should be paid for by all motorists through the excessive taxes they already pay.

    As for the NSW people you mentioned, it may be worth pointing out that they write for magazines with national coverage, hence titles such as "Australian Motorcycle News" and "Australian Road Rider." Victoria is still part of Australia so it makes sence that as the 2nd most populated state, we should get some coverage.

    If those magazines aren't painting yourself or the MRA(Vic) in a positive light then maybe you should re-think your attitude towards the media. Your e-mail discussion with Peter Thoeming (which was circulated electronically some time ago and recently printed in ARR) showed nothing but contempt for the magazine and it's readers (many are Victorian). You portayed yourself as secretive and arrogant when friendly and eager to provide information may have been more beneficial to you. "Ner ner, my state's better than your's" comments like you made above don't help your situation much either, it's just childish. :)
  11. But Seany - they started it by trying to judge Victoria - without being first knowledgable about the facts or even trying to understand what is really going on in Victoria.

    I'm sick of their antics, and I'm just not prepared to put up with it any more.

    Apologies for the rant.

    As for the "secretive" - no they made that call. I wasn't able to answer them due to the rules imposed by the Vic Govt that relate to information from VMAC.

    MRA pushed for information to be released and that now comes out in the format of the VMAC Communique. What more do you guys want?

    I have made every attempt that I can to be as transparent as is possible - you and others like you just don't want to accept that fact. :mad: :mad:
  12. Do we really NEED the constant us vs theem from the HEAD of the MRA in Victoria?
    Come on John is it any wonder you guys are seen with such derision
    It's about time you all grew up and started WORKING TOGETHER and forget about this us vs them mentality.
    If this was a corporation heads would have rolled ages ago.
    Stop burning bridges. :roll:
  13. Just to further clarify what the MCIS was designed to cover......the compulsory third party laws that operate in NSW provide medical cover for people in accidents where there is an at-fault party. If there is no at-fault party, then no-one is covered. True story. The MCC found this out when they tried to lobby on behalf of a rider and pillion who had a serious accident when the valve on the rear tyre exploded and they crashed. It was deemed a no-fault accident by the Police and the CTP insurer refused to pay for the medical costs leaving them in the shit financially. When this was tested, the insurer was found to be within their rights to refuse the claim as there was no at-fault party. The MCIS levy was supposed to cover these situations. When it was first introduced into parliament, they even stated that the scheme would immediately provide for children injured in no-fault crashes with adults to follow about 18 months later(about 2006 I think).

    So, it was a good idea that needed to be implemented but only because they had to cover a f^&*-up when they first created the CTP system in NSW. But then, as has been stated, the estimated costs to the individuals that were stated in parliament to get the bill passed bear no resemblance to what has EVER been the case when it came time to pay CTP. Yet another Iemma government lie.
  14. I don't care.

    I'm a teacher and hear that line every day, it won't wash with me. [-X I'm not interested in who started what. The issue you need to focus on is, what can you do to de-escalate and solve the problem? :?: :)
  15. Sorry JDK I'm with Sean here.
    With the caveat that the NSW bretheren appear NOT TO WANT TO LISTEN to anything we say!