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.

VIC Multiple motorcycles, one plate?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by paravion, Mar 20, 2016.

  1. Hi all,

    Has there been any movement from the motorcycling community (or really, any community involving multiple vehicles - for example antique cars) to make the registration costs/system fairer for owners of multiple bikes? Ie. the major part of any registration is the TAC levy. I own two bikes, but pay full reg for both, but I can only ever ride one of them. Why doesn't Vicroads disassociate the plate from the bike, and then I could just swap the plate over to the bike I'm riding that day, only paying for one rego? This seems fair, and also less complicated than managing the whole club plate rego thing with X number of days in a log book which has to be checked/monitored by Police...

    I appreciate the TAC and the method in which the insurance is 'baked into' the cost of registration unlike other countries, however reg is so expensive today (virtually as much as a car) for bikers it just seems like a reasonable tack to take while continuing to embed TAC costs into the rego to keep everyone covered...

  2. You want them to agree to take less money from you?? Good luck with that :p
    that would be like Insurance companies insuring drivers instead of cars/bikes/boats:eek:
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. I agree, it would be good if we could have a limited use rego or Rego on a person rather than multiple bikes/cars. Limited Use could be similar to the Club Rego Scheme only modern bikes younger that 25 years, I would be happy to run a Log Book the same as Club Rego.

    I have A bike on Standard Rego, one on the Club Rego scheme and two with no rego as it is too expensive to have multiple standard rego on bikes not over 25 years old.

    But I can't see this happening, as above you are asking an insurance company (TAC) to extort less money from you.

    Feel free to start your own campain to see if you can get any traction with VicRoads & TAC. :)
  4. Dunno how it all works in Vic. but, for NSW.....

    Hi Doctor, I have a friend who had......;)

    two 750 Kawasaki's, both basically red, one was the GT750 the other, the Turbo 750, and they shared a number plate for a number of years without any problems.

    Aye, one number plate, charged for the most expensive bike, really should be "moveable" to other, less expensive bikes.

    Same for cars.

    But, with the money grubbing, thieving, powers that be, don't hold your breath. :(
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. The Victorian club permit scheme allows members of vehicle clubs that are recognised by VicRoads to make limited use of historic vehicles. Permit fee's are already reduced.

    Link: Club Permit Fee's

    The amount the TAC pays for treatment and services is calculated per vehicle. If the TAC charge were to be applied to each person irrespective of how many vehicles he/she owned, (1) the TAC charge would be much much higher and (2), all those who own fewer vehicles would be disadvantaged.

    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. In Qld many people register bikes as single seat rego which cuts ctp costs considerably ... it is about$50 more than club rego but the bike can be used anytime rather than just on club runs. I have 2 of 3 bikes registered in this way and the third likely when next due.
  7. So what happens if you lend your 2nd bike to a mate, relative?

    Rego will alway be to the vehicle, doesn't make sense otherwise
  8. it would make sense to discount vehicles after the first, i can only drive one at a time after all!
  9. Interesting notion ... in that case how much would people be prepared to pay to be licenced for any and all vehicles?
  10. I see these posts pop up quite often. Realistically though how can you expect the owners of one vehicle to subsidise the registration costs of those with multiple vehicles?

    I have at times owned several cars and bikes, so I have quite severely experienced the pain of multiple regos, it sucks but someone has to meet the costs and if you want/need to have the benefit/enjoyment of multiple vehicles you should have to be the one to meet them.
  11. isnt the money supposed to be for accidents and road wear and tear? if i own one car or seven im going to be causing the same amount of wear and tear on the roads, and have the same chance of being involved in an accident... i personally think that rego costs should diminish as you own more vehicles, like 80% for the second, 60% for the third and 50% for all after that or something. the club rego seems like a double edged sword - lets encourage people to drive 30+ year old cars that are more likely to tear up the roads and be involved in accidents? hmm
  12. I have 2 bikes and a car in my name, and have a company car (wife drives the car in my name)

    If say I was to be registered (rather than the 2 bikes and car) how does the relevant authority know that all are not being used at the same time?

    I can think of a few instances where both my bikes were being ridden at the same time
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  13. and what's to stop one person registering 20 vehicles, and "lending" them out to family/friends? (ie, to people who, technically, have no regoed vehicle, only bare licence)

    only the owner can drive the multiple vehicles and no-one else?
    only one of those vehicles can be on the road at any one time?
    a limit on how many cars one person can register?

    what penalty would you propose for breaching the above to prevent system rorting?

    if you went other way and the rego cost is built into the licence, surely more people would just drive with no licence (as thousands do now anyway)
  14. #14 intrancewetrust, Mar 20, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2016
    probably logic?

    each human can only operate one vehicle at once. if multiple registrations became cheaper, everyone would own more cars, more drivers wouldnt materialise out of thin air
  15. #15 oldcorollas, Mar 20, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2016
    logic says that if there is no penalty or deterrent, people and/or companies will find a way to minimise cost.

    if I can register 50 vehicles at no extra cost, then other people pay me a small sum on the side for the use of their.. I mean my vehicles.. why wouldn't I?
    where do you draw the line?

    just "hoping" people only multiple register their own personal use vehicles is fine, but in no ay reflects the reality of what would happen with an unrestrained system

    logic also suggests that if you can afford multiple vehicles worth thousands, tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.. then you can afford a couple of hundred bucks a year for rego.
    if you can't, maybe you can't really afford the vehicles :p

    I'd like the option to do maybe 3/6 month regos, where 12 month greenslip(NSW) can be transferred across vehicles.. and no requirement for Blueslip at re-rego if it passes a pink slip every 12 months..
    then I could alternate between cars/bikes every 3/6 months..
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. #16 intrancewetrust, Mar 20, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 21, 2016
    so your going buy 50 cars and lend them to complete strangers for 50 bucks a year? sounds feasible

    or did you mean 50 random strangers would transfer ownership of their vehicle into your name, trusting you wont just sell the car out from under them, in order to save like $200 a year?
  17. well duh.. why wouldn't you band together and do that?
    except.. 50 people you know... or a car/bike club, or whatever
    or your close family and friends or relos.. doesn't need to be 50.

    50strangers.. not sure of that logic :)
  18. No the argument is ridiculous as its been taken to the extreme. On a practical level taking my family for example it would mean that all of my families vehicles would probably be registered in my fathers name. The cars of my parents and siblings, plus motorcycles would all be stuck under the one name, thereby saving multiple rego costs. Do you really think this would not happen?

    The costs of rego would then become prohibitive as the rego cost per person would have to increase. Therefore the owners of a single vehicle are subsidising owners of multiple vehicles. Thats really not fair. Sometimes we have to big enough people to accept that things should be done away that doesn't necessarily advantage us.

    That said an argument could be made that CTP insurance goes with the driver, it could be feasible that a license number was tied with a CTP policy, however it would be exceedingly more difficult to calculate risk, it would also put individuals who have a class of license (e.g. heavy vehicle) that they have attained but no longer use at a disadvantage. In my view the current system of insurance that is tied to a vehicle even once it is sold (in NSW at least) is quite peculiar.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. would you honestly transfer ownership of your vehicle into someone elses name to save, say 50% of your rego? And just trust they will do the right thing?

    Sure I think within families you would see this sort of thing, Im not really opposed to that, its not that different from getting your car insured under your parents name to save some money in my opinion. It doesnt mean the owners of single vehicles are necessarily subsidising people who own one vehicle, I mean it would surely benefit you, even if you just owned one vehicle right? you literally need to trust the person enough to basically give them your car/bike for free! So I just dont think abuse of the system would be that widespread.

    Would the cost of rego need to increase? thats a big assumption, i think you might see stability or even an increase in revenue if rego was cheaper for multiple vehicles, i personally have a sort of annual limit to how much rego i can feasibly pay per annum, and i own as many vehicles as this allows. I dont think thats an unusual situation, cheaper rego would mean more vehicles but i would still pay the same basic figure every year. if each vehicle costs less its easier to justify "just one more".

    anyway, im not some moustache twirling villian with a fleet of luxury cars parked under my mansion, i just think its a bit excessive that my 250cc bike that i ride less than once a week costs $600 a year in rego, the same as my car which i use almost every day. i use my car for work so its always dusty and shitty and full of tools, i would like to have a "nice" car as well for use on the weekends but i just cant justify paying three full regos @ $600 a year.
  20. i thought registration doesn't imply ownership? JustusJustus ?