Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Fly direct from
Canberra to New Zealand

The Motorists on CTP

By johnboy - 15 August 2012 13

We’ve had a media release in from Chic Henry on behalf of the Australian Motorists Party on the Compulsory Third Party issue:

As the Australian Motorist Party, we aim to establish the best possible situation for ACT drivers by:

· Ensuring the Government of the day thoroughly investigates the value of at least one additional provider of CTP; the aim being to reduce costs through competition.

· We will work with the ACT Law Society to ensure ACT residents are properly compensated for injuries as a result of motor-vehicle accidents and that there is full and effective rehabilitation service for accident victims.

· Whilst ever the NRMA are the sole provider of CTP, we will pressure the Government to insist that the NRMA does more from its “super profits” opportunity towards greater driver education in the ACT and insist that there are very active driver education programs into schools way beyond what is already done.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
13 Responses to
The Motorists on CTP
davo101 1:49 pm 16 Aug 12

Elizabethany said :

There is a difference between being able to charge to cover costs/profits and being forced to charge a fee based on a ministers decision (and low fees are popular with the electorate). There is also a difference in being the insurer for all commonwealth territories and just the ACT.

I’m not convinced that data from before self government or price deregulation are that applicable here.

Sorry what’s your point? Are you saying we only have one insurer because the minister has forced our premiums to be too low?

Pork Hunt 9:17 pm 15 Aug 12

cranky said :

Pork Hunt said :

The mind boggles why we still have a state/territory based rego system. We (allegedly) have national road rules and motor vehicles have had to comply with ADR’s since for ever.
Make rego national and tie the cost into the price of petrol and diesel so that the user pays.

I have a high level of interest in what are called ‘ICVs’.These are Independantly Constructed Vehicles and seem to be the bain of all the State Rego authorites. We are talking about ‘Kit’ cars and home builts which are assessed by engineers to be roadworthy and compliant with the ADR’s, but not made by the Holdens, Fords and Toyotas of this world.

Each State treats them diferently, and until recently NSW were so paranoid that allowing one of these vehicles to hit the road, and possibly cause damage, would impact on the NSW Treasury, was so great that they decided non could be registered.

It is high time for the Federal Government to step in and establish the rules that ICV’s should be required to comply with, Australia wide. No-one wants some backyard shitbox to be registered, but many of these same builders are producing excellent vehicles, complying with the necessary ADR’s. They all require professional engineering sign-off before even approaching registration, effectively transferring the blame game from the Gov to the (insured) engineer.

Perhaps you should talk to people who are in the light aircraft game. These guys have lobbied the aviation authorities to gain changes to the aviation regs for their toys.
For example, light sport aircraft, I believe, have had their category redefined with regard to take off weight and engine power. These aircraft were largely US imports so our regs were changed to match theirs.
If a particular kit vehicle can be registered in it’s country of origin then why not here?

Aeek 8:05 pm 15 Aug 12

Follow the lead of Pedal Power and organise 3rd Party through a broker for members?

Alternatively, is it constitutional to say that if you want to sell any sort of insurance here, you need to offer the same range here as you do everywhere else. Sure, CTP conditions are different here, but the housing risks are different here as against, say, Queensland.

liability 7:50 pm 15 Aug 12

Pork Hunt said :

The mind boggles why we still have a state/territory based rego system. We (allegedly) have national road rules and motor vehicles have had to comply with ADR’s since for ever.
Make rego national and tie the cost into the price of petrol and diesel so that the user pays.

National rego? You must be joking! When was the last time all the states and territories agreed on anything?

While the Australian Road Rules are a step in the right direction there are small variations, such as the Victorian funny hook turn, because the states and territories couldn’t agree to agree.

Elizabethany 7:48 pm 15 Aug 12

davo101 said :

liability said :

NRMA was originally the sole designated CTP insurer in the ACT, but they market was opened up to all and sundry a few years ago. Unfortunately no other insurer was interested.

According to this in 1948 there were 16 insurers but by 1980 the only one left was NRMA. So I don’t think that NRMA was even given a monopoly, they just got one by being the last remaining.

There is a difference between being able to charge to cover costs/profits and being forced to charge a fee based on a ministers decision (and low fees are popular with the electorate). There is also a difference in being the insurer for all commonwealth territories and just the ACT.

I’m not convinced that data from before self government or price deregulation are that applicable here.

cranky 7:44 pm 15 Aug 12

Pork Hunt said :

The mind boggles why we still have a state/territory based rego system. We (allegedly) have national road rules and motor vehicles have had to comply with ADR’s since for ever.
Make rego national and tie the cost into the price of petrol and diesel so that the user pays.

I have a high level of interest in what are called ‘ICVs’.These are Independantly Constructed Vehicles and seem to be the bain of all the State Rego authorites. We are talking about ‘Kit’ cars and home builts which are assessed by engineers to be roadworthy and compliant with the ADR’s, but not made by the Holdens, Fords and Toyotas of this world.

Each State treats them diferently, and until recently NSW were so paranoid that allowing one of these vehicles to hit the road, and possibly cause damage, would impact on the NSW Treasury, was so great that they decided non could be registered.

It is high time for the Federal Government to step in and establish the rules that ICV’s should be required to comply with, Australia wide. No-one wants some backyard shitbox to be registered, but many of these same builders are producing excellent vehicles, complying with the necessary ADR’s. They all require professional engineering sign-off before even approaching registration, effectively transferring the blame game from the Gov to the (insured) engineer.

LSWCHP 7:12 pm 15 Aug 12

liability said :

davo101 said :

I thought the history of CTP in the ACT was that all of the other insurers pulled out until then NRMA was the last insurer left.

NRMA was originally the sole designated CTP insurer in the ACT, but they market was opened up to all and sundry a few years ago. Unfortunately no other insurer was interested. I would imagine it is simply not worth any other insurer getting into the ACT CTP market, given how small it is.

The ACT Courts also seem much more generous in regards to damages awards than other states.

I was smashed up fairly badly in a crash in the 80’s. I was a passenger, so it was definitely a CTP deal, and I thought it was pretty straightforward. It took about 4 years for it all to be sorted, and my ambulance chasing lawyers got about a third of my not-very-large compensation payment for writing a few letters on my behalf.

Assuming the system is still the same, calling it crap is being unkind to crap.

Pork Hunt 6:03 pm 15 Aug 12

The mind boggles why we still have a state/territory based rego system. We (allegedly) have national road rules and motor vehicles have had to comply with ADR’s since for ever.
Make rego national and tie the cost into the price of petrol and diesel so that the user pays.

davo101 6:01 pm 15 Aug 12

liability said :

NRMA was originally the sole designated CTP insurer in the ACT, but they market was opened up to all and sundry a few years ago. Unfortunately no other insurer was interested.

According to this in 1948 there were 16 insurers but by 1980 the only one left was NRMA. So I don’t think that NRMA was even given a monopoly, they just got one by being the last remaining.

liability 5:09 pm 15 Aug 12

davo101 said :

I thought the history of CTP in the ACT was that all of the other insurers pulled out until then NRMA was the last insurer left.

NRMA was originally the sole designated CTP insurer in the ACT, but they market was opened up to all and sundry a few years ago. Unfortunately no other insurer was interested. I would imagine it is simply not worth any other insurer getting into the ACT CTP market, given how small it is.

The ACT Courts also seem much more generous in regards to damages awards than other states.

davo101 4:01 pm 15 Aug 12

Keijidosha said :

CTP costs in the ACT are ridiculous, I suspect largely because our citizens drive with the ability of muppets and sue with the determination of Erin Brockovich.

Probably more likely due to the fact that other jurisdictions have gone to statutory systems and the ACT is still using a common law system.

Keijidosha 3:51 pm 15 Aug 12

CTP costs in the ACT are rediculous, I suspect largely because our citizens drive with the ability of muppets and sue with the determination of Erin Brockovich.

davo101 3:16 pm 15 Aug 12

I thought the history of CTP in the ACT was that all of the other insurers pulled out until then NRMA was the last insurer left.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site