Farking Greenslip ripoffs

insurance company will send you a bill for the difference when you change
address.

Nev..
'03 ZX12R
'02 CBR1100XX

 

insurance yes
will also give you a refund if applicable

greenslip no change

 

Hey everybody come look; the geeks are talking funny-talk again!
Clem,
~

it asks if you want to set up ntp, of course I didn't have network at the
time, so it didn't work, bloody nvidia

 

~
Was he?
Hmmm... (I was with him but I can't remember... Bloody 440ml beer-cans!)
Clem

 

And to go back to the original topic - it just cost me the exact same amount for
a greenslip for the Daimler as it did for a greenslip for the Bandit - now given
this is insurance against causing *injury* to a 3rd party can someone explain to
me how 2tonnes of gentleman's express is the same insurance risk as 240Kg of
hooligan metal to OTHER people. The odds of damaging another person on the bike
cannot possibly be equal to the car's - what a goddamn ripoff

Sheesh !

JL

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 15 Jan 2004 21:52:37 +1100

Yeah.... and that's been the argument lobby groups have been making,
time out of mind.

Some years ago in SA, the MRA managed to get the 3rd party premiums
committee to recognise this, and they told SGIO to take a long walk off
a short pier when SGIO asked for a bike premium rise.

The figures are quite clear. The claims against bikes - from car
drivers/passengers, pillions, other riders - are few, and even though
most pillion ones are big, they aren't *that* big.

Basically, we are cash cows.

Zebee

 

Should we beat them up or tie them to one of those chairs with wheels on it
and play "Space Commander"?

Hammo

 

Heh, I'm amazed I made it, after the night before. There were people
falling over, black eyes, broken glasses and spilt beer!

Hammo

 

So why hasn't someone, sometime had an independant actuary look at the real
figures to work out what is realistic then?

I know, all the governments simply want to dissuade people from riding, but
then why that? What's in it for any government to stop people riding bikes
against driving cars.

Al

 

All par for the course.

TAXI!

-----sharks

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 15 Jan 2004 23:07:11 GMT

why would they?

Small subsection of society, no electoral clout.

and they can't decide not to insure.

So why on earth *would* either an insurer or a government give a shit?

As riders are more likely to get hurt in a crash, it makes sense as far
as those paying for hospitals are concerned to get people off the bikes.
That they would be better served by reducing the number of crashes
either hasn't occurred to them, or else is too hard.

That bikes might be better for congestion is heavily resisted for some
reason.

But in the end... there's no reason for them to give a shit about
bikes, or to change anything about that cash cow.

Zebee