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.

Press Release MCC of NSW re: Greenslip Pricing

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Toecutter, Jun 22, 2010.

    22 June 2010

    The Motorcycle Council of NSW (MCC of NSW) has today described the planned increases in motorcycle CTP premiums from July 1st, as further evidence of the failure of Governments to recognise motorcycles as a unique and independent road user group. Whilst the MCC of NSW understands that changes to the old CTP system were necessary, and even worked with the Motor Accidents Authority (MAA) on these changes, the MCC of NSW has not been provided with any evidence that those drivers or riders causing CTP claims, can justify such extreme increases in prices in some classifications.

    Increases of 84% for younger riders on smaller 250cc motorcycles or even smaller scooters are being reported. The MCC of NSW can only assume that RTA crash statistics have been used erroneously to set the new CTP premiums, as they can find no publicly available data of the demographics of those riders or drivers whose at-fault crash has caused a CTP claim to arise.

    With urban areas seeing an explosion in scooter and small bike usage due to environmental and economic reasons, many riders are now likely to reconsider their choice of transport, possibly unleashing up to 100,000 more cars back onto Sydneys’ congested roadways.

    The Motorcycle Council of NSW calls on the NSW Government to ask the insurance industry to justify these planned increases of motorcycle CTP premiums as a matter of urgency.

    Rob Colligan
    MCC of NSW
  2. Did the MUARC do the crash research? Looks like the sort of findings they would come up with.

  3. As per above, it was www.maa.nsw.gov.au
  4. most likely - or the centre for road safety which seems to be a muarc clone/government brown nose
  5. The breakdown should have been for LAMS and non-LAMS. It makes a lot more sense than an arbitrary capacity limit.
  6. they've been taking lesson from the MUARC in how to skew figures in order to maximise profits rather than tell the truth.
    Ferengi the lot of them.
  7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi

  8. Needs polishing but I expect the releases will get better with practise.
  9. Where did the 100,000 number come from, a bit of over estimating one would think....
  10. Exaggeration for effect.
  11. We need to send a message to them

    We need to organise a day MID-WEEK to absoloutely clog the CBD of every major city in every state. How would we get the message out? If they want to treat us like cars, as in England, we need to act like them if we are going to be charged this amount!
  12. Like hell it does. How many people are injured by other riders? We tend to hurt ourselves, and from what I understand, CTP doesn't cover the rider, just the imaginary people he hurts.
  13. you willing to lead the way?
  14. If you build it, they will come, but do some research 1st :)
  15. In regards to my own experience, CTP covers the cost of the medical bills which have resulted from the other party being at fault and using that as an example there's really no grounds to apply a price category based on engine capacity.
    If a large proportion of motorcycle accidents where to follow the same pattern, other vehicle at fault - motorcycle in wrong place etc, then shouldn't the argument be that one price fits all with the brackets being based on how many persons can fit on the bike, solo/duo, thus allowing for the potential medical costs based on bums on seats.
  16. The CTP scheme has provided up to $5000 cover for medical expenses and loss of income to anyone injured in an accident, regardless of who was at fault, since April.

    Since there's more people who are eligible to claim, changes obviously need to be made to the premium calculations so that they more accurately reflect the categories of vehicles that are going to make the most - and the most expensive - claims.

    For those who are sufficiently masochistic the MAA has the 2010 premium relativities report on its website, which goes into a fair bit of detail about just how the relative premiums for each class of vehicle are calculated:

  17. I sure will, but how the hell do you organise a protest with so many different motorcycling communities?
  18. Well if they only cover $5k, and they're charging $400 or so per person, they're expecting to issue the maximum payout to 1 out of every 12.5 people… or they're ripping people off with government assistance.
  19. $5000 is the amount that's available to everyone, regardless of who is to blame. If you're not the at-fault party then you can claim far more than that.

    Don't forget that the final premiums also include a component for funding the Lifetime Care and Support Scheme, which funds treatment, care and rehabilitation for people with catastrophic injuries (again, regardless of who is at fault)