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.

[NSW] To ban re-repairable writes of

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Zbike, Apr 8, 2010.

  1. The re-registration of written-off vehicles will soon be banned in NSW, in an effort to curb vehicle theft and protect unwitting drivers from unsafe repair jobs.


    im pissed of, most of my business is write offs, this is going to send me and other panel shops and smaller wreckers broke. ASAP

    while more vehicles will just get sent to Canberra Melbourne and Brisbane. fuickin **** of a geverment

    press release
  2. how many panel shops and wreckers sell primary frames?

    In other words, how much of a wreckers business comes from the only part with the VIN plate on it?
  3. Does this affect vehicles that are 'written-off' by insurance companies due to the cost of repair?

    I know a few people who have had their bikes written off by insurance companies because the cost of repairing/replacing the fairing and tank was so high but 'bought' the bike back and repaired it streetfighter style, themselves.
  4. Ur missing the point bonox i know at least 2 wreckers personaly whos income is largley dependant on selling writes offs, most of the frames the wreckers have would be written of frames anyway,

    b12 it covers everything except hail damage and classic cars
  5. Well there goes all those project ideas.

    Goes to the wole nanny state thing.

    Still it might mean the price of these things will drop at auction and thus insurance companies will be less likely to write off in the first place.

    Also likely to see a drop in prices for parts at wreckers.

    Yeah it would be interesting to know how this is going to work as a repairable write of is still a workable vehicle. How does the government make an insurance company declare the status in that manner?
  6. That's just crap then. I understand the need to protect the public from criminals but at what cost. A blanket ban such as this is just as unreasonable and stupid as "Speed Kills".

    It's definitely time for a change of Government, but I wonder if the Libs would be any better?
  7. I don't know if that's a totally good thing either.
  8. My Blackbird was written off, But I told them not to include the mufflers as they were built by me, saving $3000-00 on the repair bill, They repaired my Bird then, Nothing wrong with the bike itself, But the fairings were Totally stuffed, Next time I drop it, I will fix it myself,
    Full set of Chinese fairings $655-00 includes double bubble and heat shield and paint and Logo's, minus $400-00 excess, =$255-00 to repair my Bird out of my pocket and I still retain my Rating 1 for a big bingle if I ever have one,
    Worth the effort I think.
  9. What a poorly written article on smh's part. Uninformative, misleading and downright wrong in many parts..

    Should be good for people in the market for track bikes though since they're only making the reregistration of them illegal, not their sale (they're relying on the fact that no one would buy them since they can't be sold as 'reregisterable').
  10. You seem surprised by that.....
  11. Actually the SMH bit is OK. Most of the article is quotes from the ignorant transport minister.
  12. Saw a brief report on this on the news thismorning, with Cambpell in front of a rebirthed Corolla. They lifted the bonnet and the firewall and suspension tower surrounds were crumpled. Do people really buy these things without looking at them at all?
  13. not the way I read it.

    You aren't allowed to sell the VIN basically. The whole idea of rebirthing is getting a legitimate registerable identity. None of this will have any influence on the general parts market - just frames. (and rebirths may not even use the wrecked frame - they'll just move the legitimate plate to a stolen one).

    Read the RTA release. There is nothing in it that mentions anything about stopping parts sales, only the frame. And again, how much business to wreckers in general get from selling frames? If much of your business revolves around selling rolling wrecks or frames you are a dealer, not a wrecker (based on the limited number of frame sales wreckers can make every year without a motor vehicle dealer license).

    Stop the frame number being used again, and you slow the general whole stolen car back on the road stuff. This is poorly written - there is still nothing stopping you from using dodgy repairs or parts to anyones vehicle. Besides - unless the vehicle is in small bits at the scene, you could just drag it away yourself and do it up and no-one would ever know it was crashed - still jobs for quick towies and dodgy owners!

    And finally, this is only for registration anyway. The non-registration (or indeed those who ride it on the road without registration anyway) will mean sales for trackbikes won't even get touched.

    I think you're beating this up over nothing.
  14. bonox you dont have a clue,
    plenty of smaller wreckers sell plenty of frames (entire bikes) and now they wont be able to for road use. go to any wrecker they all have 8-20 bikes out the front for sale complete.

    this policy is bs its going to hit wreckers, panel shops streetfighter builders ect hard

    also it should hike prices up of all 2nd hand bikes considering how easily they get written of, and prices of parts should fall abit, probaly raise premiums aswell as insurance will not be able to recoupe as much back from wrecked bikes (at least not in NSW)
  15. hmm - my impression its that privately repaired (crashed , and then repaired and not on REVS etc) cars or rebirthed cars/chassis are the culprits? Nothing to do with legit repairable write offs -
  16. Wreckers who deal in selling many repaired bikes need a motor vehicle dealers license not just a second hand dealer license and in my opinion can therefore be lumped in the same basket as every other second hand vehicle dealer - you are in essence, not a wrecker but a smash repairer who is allowed to pass on title.

    You might as well complain about all the smash repairers who will immediately have to close the doors due to lack of business.

    Or, you could work your way around the problem like all the other business entrepreneurs do. That, after all, is the nature of business. If you want to fight it, then do so based on a system of inspections or whatever you need to pass a repaired vehicle as satisfactory. After all, if someone like AAMI can't get it back on the road using their "nail them down to the lowest cent tender criteria", then how do you propose to get it back on the road for less cost than a new one?

    If you want to argue that bikes are far different to cars thanks to exposed frames that get written off purely because of the amount of labour required to replace it, then you'll also have to prove why you're not a part of the problem below:

    They are trying to reduce the number of these things:
    page 2 - backyard dealer
  17. Repairing a bike with possibly stolen parts (in order to make a profit on the final sale) is similar to saying you should be allowed to continue importing possibly counterfeit goods on the cheap from china in order to carry on your business. If it were possible to repair it to good order using proper parts then it wouldn't have been written off in the first place.

    If you don't believe this is the case, and can build an argument for it, then get the exemptions list expanded.
  18. Not true for a few reasons:

    Firstly (and mainly) as an individual I can do the work myself. So an insurance company can't afford to rebuild it, because they have to pay labour, but I don't, thus saving potentially thousands.

    The second reason is the rules of repair. Most insurance companies have a new and factory component policy. If I am willing accept a welded fairing or an aftermarket ABS set, for example, then I can save more there.

    The third reason is the standard of repair. An insurance company cannot accept minor cosmetic damage because their client wont. As in individual I may be willing to accept that and the flow on consequences of that.

    So the conclusion is that individuals can have a safe and registrable motorcycle despite the fact that a company finds it not to be financially viable.

    Safety and accountancy are not directly linked in this instance.
  19. +1

    As far as theft goes im not the one contributing to the problem unless you count the amount of bikes i've had stolen from me, the problem is incompetant mechanics and RTA identity checks that cost $400 and cant tell the diffrence between a rebirth and a legit car,

    bussiness wise this well reduce the overall market and there are going to be people pushed out by a artificaily inflated market due to a incompetant goverment.

    Also my last 3 cars where writes of, probably 5 out of my 7 last bikes where writes of aswell, i hate the fact that i will be thousands worse of everytime i buy a vehicle cause dickheads in the goverment reckon they know whats best for me.
  20. Silly idea IMO. I understand the motivation but it is a bit blunt in the way it is done. I would prefer to see that any repaired write off requires an engineer's certificate. This would allow me to buy a written off bike and turn it into the bobber of my dreams if I so wish. But it does hamper stolen bikes and cars being rebirthed.

    Tough one really.