# Vehicle Insurance



## Guest

This topic has been mentioned on other Posts so I thought as a new comer I
would ask the Forum Members.

Why is it not compulsory to have some form of Vehicle Insurance in NZ ?

I for one would prefer everyone to be coverered even if it was only Third Party.

It might even take some of the Boy Racers off the roads in their Japanese
Imports with the noisy full bore exhaust system. More work for the Police though.


----------



## ClemClan

Higgy said:


> This topic has been mentioned on other Posts so I thought as a new comer I
> would ask the Forum Members.
> 
> Why is it not compulsory to have some form of Vehicle Insurance in NZ ?
> 
> I for one would prefer everyone to be coverered even if it was only Third Party.
> 
> It might even take some of the Boy Racers off the roads in their Japanese
> Imports with the noisy full bore exhaust system. More work for the Police though.




It should be compulsory and hopefully it will be one day as apart from the boy racers hooning around, it's pretty awful if somebody ploughs their car into yours and they're not insured and your insurance has to pay for the damage. 

I agree with you and think everybody on the roads should be insured and may be if the younger generation had to pay higher premiums as they do because of their age, it may make some difference to the ones that drive recklessly on our roads - maybe?


----------



## Jimaba

Yeah, I'd agree with that as well. It's amazing how many people don't actually have any insurance to speak of for their vehicles. One wreck and it's set you back quite badly if it's your fault or if neither of you are insured. :\


----------



## Guest

Wreck - you said it. There does seem to be some "Dodgy Motors" out there.

They can afford the Alloys and alll things Bling but not Vehicle Insurance it does
seem odd in a modern day country.


----------



## anski

Not only are they not insured but they don't have current vehicle registration (road tax disc) & you have WOF (Warrant of Fitness ) checks every 6 months but some don't bother.

Of course if caught by Police or Parking Inspectors they are issued tickets & fines.

But then they do not pay the fines either!!!!!

Nothing happens unless they want to leave NZ - then they are prevented from leaving for any International Flight until their fines are paid on the spot in cash or credit card & the Police are called.

They used to jail people with unpaid fines but they don't jail people anymore for unpaid fines after a young man (with outstanding fines)died in Police custody (beaten to death in the back of the Police Van by another prisoner)

Google how much is outstanding in unpaid fines, you will be amazed that some individual s owe thousands (mostly boy racers or DUI etc. It's scary

So for others like me who do everything 100% there are those that break every law & get away with it until they want to holiday outside NZ. lane:


----------



## Song_Si

I'd have been pleased to see compulsory insurance, but it has long been on the 'one day' list, ie never a priority for the various govts. 
The only 'defence' is to have full cover yourself, on the basis almost one in ten has no cover (see below)

Found this recent (May 29 2012) Ministry of Transport report on current situation



> A report on levels of vehicle insurance in New Zealand has been developed as part of a Ministry of Transport review of the issue of compulsory third party insurance.
> 
> A survey of 4,000 New Zealanders found that 92.4 percent have some form of motor vehicle insurance, while only 7.6 percent of vehicle owners had an uninsured vehicle or did not know whether their vehicle was insured. This is a level similar to countries that have compulsory vehicle insurance.
> 
> The government is considering compulsory third party insurance as part of the development of the Safer Journeys road safety strategy to guide New Zealand to 2020.
> 
> Read the report on vehicle insurance here (PDF v7.0, 1MB, 6 pages)


a quotes from that report re the age groups:



> . . . young people did not own the majority of uninsured vehicles. While 70 percent of uninsured vehicles were owned by people under the age of 40, there was a fairly even split between those aged under 25 years and those aged over 25 years.


and this one, showing compulsory doesn't mean 100% compliance



> *How does New Zealand’s level of insurance compare to other jurisdictions?*
> 
> The report found that the level of vehicle insurance in New Zealand is comparable to countries with compulsory vehicle insurance.
> 
> In the United Kingdom where vehicle insurance is compulsory, about six percent of all motorists are estimated to be uninsured.
> Insurance requirements vary across the United States but many states have compulsory injury insurance. The national percentage of uninsured motorists is estimated to be 13.8 percent.
> Some Western European states with compulsory regimes have achieved very high levels of private vehicle insurance.
> For example, in Sweden it is estimated that less than one percent of the driving population is uninsured.



I've always been a fully-insured driver/rider and have paid huge amounts esp with motorcycles (try insuring a Harley, eye-watering stuff) in premiums; a fairly standard option used to be 10% of bike's value as annual premium, and a minimum excess of another 10%.

***

Don't know what the answer is; if you'd asked me a few years back I'd have been in favour of public stoning or hanging (possibly both!). 
Riding along through a rural town at 30-35km/h, hit side-on by a local driver in a hurry for a u-turn, couldn't check his mirrors as had a high-side tandem trailer wider than his uninsured and unregistered car. So just turned anyway. He was fined $150 for no registration, and $150 for the 'accident'. 
I estimated the costs to me, the Accident Compensation scheme, my employer, my insurer ($8000) exceeded $25,000. Add in the local volunteer fire brigade who cleared the scene and the free volunteer ambulance service . . . at least my insurer was no problem, up to them to try to recover losses, though even as it was proven a 'no fault' they did remove my no claims bonus (20% premium reduction for being accident free).


----------



## Song_Si

Higgy said:


> They can afford the Alloys and alll things Bling but not Vehicle Insurance it does seem odd in a modern day country.


I think it's not just a 'can't afford' but just as often 'can't be bothered' as penalties not great enough; also wonder if the level of modification that is permitted would rule out an insurance company giving them full cover? 
So on one hand a car can be lowered/over-powered etc and still get a Warrant of Fitness, but those same modifications may be outside what an insurance company would allow?
I don't have the answers.


----------



## Guest

The 7.6% of Uninsured New Zealanders must all be in Subaru Go Faster cars in 
the Hamilton area as someone else mentioned how dear they are to Insure.

The UK Insurance costs for young drivers just encourages some of them to forego
any form of cover. You are talking thousands of UK Pounds for the yougsters.

Thanks for all the replies.


----------



## carosapien

I recall reading something that said that New Zealand insurance companies didn't want the burden of having compulsory car insurance and that most drivers were insured anyway. 

Don't know if that's true or not, but many people don't have contents insurance either so I'd take that with a good pinch of salt. After the Christchurch earthquake it emerged that quite a few don't have building insurance.


----------



## topcat83

carosapien said:


> I recall reading something that said that New Zealand insurance companies didn't want the burden of having compulsory car insurance and that most drivers were insured anyway.
> 
> Don't know if that's true or not, but many people don't have contents insurance either so I'd take that with a good pinch of salt. After the Christchurch earthquake it emerged that quite a few don't have building insurance.


I worked for an insurance company for 3 years when we first arrived, and they certainly wanted people to take out 3rd party insurance as a minimum. More money in policies for them! No burden...


----------



## anski

In Australia it is completely different & on my opinion a far better way of doing things.

Firstly I was amazed at how cheap it was to register a car when I first arrived it was less than $200 a year compared to Australia where it cost Au$600

So the procedure is in Australia 12 months you go for a vehicle inspection & if it passes all safety checks & rust etc you get a Pink Slip which is similar to the WOF (Warrant of Fitness here)

Then you have to go & buy a Green Slip from a choice of insurance companies & the cost varies from State to State etc. The green slip is compulsory & costs in the region of Au$400 or more.
The Green slip covers yourself & others for personal injury.
After that you buy car insurance which covers damage to the other persons vehicle only in the case of 3rd Party insurance, or cover for your vehicle & the other persons vehicle damage.

Once you have all this paperwork in place then you go to the Dept of Motor Transport & buy your registration 9which enables you to drive the car on the road for the next 12 months) However they do a computer check to see if there are any outstanding fines & if o you have to pay these in FULL before they issue your vehicle registration.

I am not saying people drive & avoid all these costs because a few do but if caught they face hefty penalties.
Before this fines check came in a friend of mine had a very embarrassing situation, she was a model & had moved in with a wealthy business she was hoping to marry, one day when her OH was out the police came around because of her huge amount of outstanding fines. They made her go with them to the Police Station & along the way (not sure how but she got the $2,000) she picked up the money which she was able to pay the outstanding fines at the Police Station & evade arrest!

So when I arrived in NZ I was shocked that AAC is covered in the low registration cost & in spite of that the number of drivers that do not take responsibility for their negligence.


----------



## Guest

*Car Insurance*

I have just had a quote for car insurance and it is over £100 dearer than in the UK. 

We are bringing ours over, same drivers as in the UK plus we specified no-one under 25 would be allowed to drive. $600. 52 cents.

AA who did the quote said it is an extra $100 for driving on a UK Driving Licence as stats show
we are more likely to have a bump ( more likely to get hit buy someone uninsured)

State wanted ne to get it valued before insuring it at my own cost. rofl


----------



## pookienuffnuff

Higgy said:


> I have just had a quote for car insurance and it is over £100 dearer than in the UK.
> 
> We are bringing ours over, same drivers as in the UK plus we specified no-one under 25 would be allowed to drive. $600. 52 cents.
> 
> AA who did the quote said it is an extra $100 for driving on a UK Driving Licence as stats show
> we are more likely to have a bump ( more likely to get hit buy someone uninsured)
> 
> State wanted ne to get it valued before insuring it at my own cost. rofl


The AA didnt charge me extra for having UK licence but the excess was higher 'for non NZ licence holders'. Then I noticed that this had been amended (so I wondered if they had been told they couldnt do that). But my insurance is definately cheaper (am with AA). Perhaps you are moving from a 'safe' postcode in UK to a less safe one in NZ eg moving from countryside in UK to Auckland would do that.
Or as the cars are non standard imports (I had a grey import in UK and used to get stung by insurers as it wasnt 'on their list').

But its easy to get NZ licence...I traded mine in (still get to keep UK one so can use elsewhere). Small fee, eye test...that it. As UK test similar to NZ so no need to be tested.

ps perhaps this should be moved to a different thread 'car insurance'?


----------



## escapedtonz

pookienuffnuff said:


> The AA didnt charge me extra for having UK licence but the excess was higher 'for non NZ licence holders'. Then I noticed that this had been amended (so I wondered if they had been told they couldnt do that). But my insurance is definately cheaper (am with AA). Perhaps you are moving from a 'safe' postcode in UK to a less safe one in NZ eg moving from countryside in UK to Auckland would do that.
> Or as the cars are non standard imports (I had a grey import in UK and used to get stung by insurers as it wasnt 'on their list').
> 
> But its easy to get NZ licence...I traded mine in (still get to keep UK one so can use elsewhere). Small fee, eye test...that it. As UK test similar to NZ so no need to be tested.
> 
> ps perhaps this should be moved to a different thread 'car insurance'?


Yeah car insurance definitely cheaper here & in my experience at least 50%.

I was paying £600 comprehensive in the UK for me & the wife with £0 excess on a 2005 Seat Toledo 2.0TDi DSG 140bhp worth £4k both with clean UK licenses.
Now I'm here in Wellington I have a 2006 Subaru Legacy 3.0ltr R spec B with SI Tiptronic 250bhp worth $20000 still comprehensive for both of us $0 excess and our premium $550 and we are insured on our UK licenses even tho we've now got the NZ licenses also.
So as I say half the price for a car that's worth more, more powerful and is high on the list of car crime and that's with Tower Insurance.
Was originally with ANZ bank car insurance but for the same car and same details it was $575 and with a $500 excess so that policy cancelled within the 30 days cooling off period.
AA quote was well over $600 and with a high excess if I remember correctly.
Never understood where insurance companies come up with their premiums. There just doesn't seem to be any consistency.


----------



## Song_Si

escapedtonz said:


> Never understood where insurance companies come up with their premiums. There just doesn't seem to be any consistency.


Good question! but does highlight how worthwhile it can be 'shopping around' the different companies, also consider some offer extra discounts if you have more than one policy with them eg home, or contents, plus vehicle insurance. 

I had motorbikes - always full cover - some companies simply would not insure under any circumstances (mention Harley and they hang up!), some had such extreme premium/excess deals, I settled on one company and stayed with them over 15yrs. The ideal customer for them with just one vehicle claim in that time, and they recovered that from other party. 

Other things to consider in the policy - glass/windscreen coverage is important imo, having had two cracked windscreens both replaced at no cost and no excess or premium increase; also see if they cover loss or theft of car keys - may seem minor but replacing ignition/keys is expensive. The fine print!


----------



## Song_Si

insurance again - found this site which gives some comparisons/examples showing different cars/values and the premiums/excess that apply; of interest is how the premium varies by location, eg their first example of a Toyota Corolla valued at $12,000, garaged. no alarm, full No-Claims-Bonus, owned by couple over 65 years.

They're just examples, with many variables, but does highlight the differences, eg

lowest being with Tower in Dunedin - $174.34, highest $706.21 with Ansvar for Browns Bay, Auckland.


----------



## YoungsSpecialLondon

Possibly part of the reason why car insurance isn't compulsory in NZ is because ACC already provides cover for personal injury. In most countries you can sue a person who accidentally drives over your leg, and car insurance policies cover this. In NZ, the victim gets ACC. The quid pro quo is that the victim can't sue the perpetrator.


----------



## topcat83

YoungsSpecialLondon said:


> Possibly part of the reason why car insurance isn't compulsory in NZ is because ACC already provides cover for personal injury. In most countries you can sue a person who accidentally drives over your leg, and car insurance policies cover this. In NZ, the victim gets ACC. The quid pro quo is that the victim can't sue the perpetrator.


Yes that's the thinking. So in theory if you are injured then you are covered in all circumstances. 
But that doesn't cover the vehicle. 
Many people in the past have said 'but my vehicle isn't worth insuring'. They forget that if the accident is their fault then they are liable for the damage to the other vehicle. Many have ended up with huge bills that they can't afford to pay.
I think that third party insurance as a minimum should be compulsory, so that I know that if I am hit by another car I won't be fighting for my money.


----------

