New ACC levies in your Rego, info here

[boon]

Joker, the bit that pisses me off is that they already have the databases and systems in place to not be useless and ****.

The pen pusher isn't going to know the table off by heart either - it will just be a database lookup like this:

Step 1.

Is the car in the database? No - use the default table OR Yes - go lookup the specific table for that model

Step 2. What year is the car?

-> Retrieve rate

It will all be done by a computer system. Since in the rego details they already have the bloody chassis code, and someone has had to populate these tables in the first place, why don't they just do a LEFT(2) CAR.ChassisCode to retrieve the necessary and then lookup that against the table?

It would literally require the same number of lines of code, and a couple of extra ones in the table.

That's (part) of why this annoys the piss out of me.

There is NO logic behind it.

EDIT: Because I'm a litigious arsehole, if I do end up getting reamed I'm really tempted to go away and work out how to litigate this.

[boon]

Third email on the way, to ACC, to confirm whether it is in fact a typo because it makes no sense otherwise.

[johnny5]

yup i'll jump on the bandwagon Boon

[Percy]

 SpeedySub said:

Looked up my chassis code and it appears that my care was manufactured in July 1998. The change over point for Legacys is 1999. Is there any point writing to the to tell them that there is no difference between a July 1998 BH legacy and a January 1999 BH legacy? Would my car still be a MY99?

It is a tad silly that your car is apparently different from my 2000 GTB, even though the chassis is identical.

I think some herp derping has gone on at ACC or whoever was in charge of the classification debacle!

[Guest]

To be fair no they dont have the chassis info if you ran regos on a daily basis you would know half the time its in the vin, half the time its concealed, half the time its wrong and the other half irs correct. No holes in that post just too many halves.

[SpeedySub]

I think my main problem is going to be the fact its in their system and registered as a 1998 model. I will pay the higher amount if I have to, just really annoys me is all.

[B4 I was 250T]

Sorry Connor but F**K YEAH! I'm a L4!!

[boon]

 Boon']Hello,

I read the document ACC7123 recently with interest.

I have been looking forward to lower ACC levies on vehicle licensing for some time.

However, I noted something of a curiosity in the table.

I own a 2001 Subaru Impreza.

According to the table, this is in band L1.

Furthermore, a 2002 Subaru Impreza is in band L4 and accordingly pays considerably less.

I found this rather strange, because the 2001 and 2002 Impreza are the same car. Surely the range should be from 2001 onward?

I can only assume that this is due to a typo in the creation of the table.

Can you please clarify if this is the case?

Thank you for your email.

If there has been a significant change in a model with regards to its safety feature we may reclassify the band for a particular model of vehicle is has happened with Subaru Imprezas. This is the case with Impreza’s that were manufactured from September 2001 onwards.

Due to increased safety feature included in Subaru Impreza’s from 2002 onwards we have reclassified the levy risk rating to reflect the improved features in that model.

Thank you for the clarification.

Further to this - if an Impreza was manufactured after September 2001, is it therefore classified as being in the L4 band, even if it is registered as a "2001"?

Additionally, could you please tell me what the increased safety features are on a 2002 Impreza over a 2001 Impreza, that warrant it being in a different band?

I could be described as something of an enthusiast for these vehicles, and I can categorically state that they are functionally the same vehicle - completely setting aside the huge differences between the lowest spec and highest spec within the respective line.

If I (and all the other owners of 2001 Imprezas) are going to be paying an extra $90 a year over their identical 2002 brethren I would love to know the reason behind it.

Thank you for your email.

I can advise that both the 2001 and 2002 Subaru Impreza models will fall within the same band, which is band 2. Any Subaru Impreza manufactured between 1999 and 2003 will be placed into band 2. I have attached a copy of the ACC7123 Light passenger vehicles booklet, in which you can find the Subaru Impreza on page 48. A screenshot of this is also below:

For vehicles manufactured prior to 2012, we base the vehicle risk rating on real world crash data. This takes into account the relative performance of a vehicle in protecting the driver (and occupants) and other road users (other vehicles, motorcycles, cyclists and pedestrians) from fatality or serious injury in the event of a crash.

Risk rating uses real world crash data collected from over 5.5 million police reported crashes in Australia and New Zealand. It is associated only with vehicle make and model, and not driver behaviour (including experience, speed, alcohol-use, fatigue) or road design.

At this stage risk rating does not take into account the model series. Instead trends in crash data are used to determine the different cut off dates. We are currently investigating the possibility of using model series in the future.

It’s been identified that some vehicles may have been incorrectly recorded in the Motor Vehicle Register. Please check your reminder letter, or your current registration label in your car to ensure that the year, make and model are correct.

These risk bands are reviewed each year and as more crash data is received, we are able to update this information. Any suggestions can be submitted to ACC during the Levy Consultation period which takes place around September – October each year.

[quote name='Boon said:

Thank you for the email. It goes some way to clarify how the bands are decided, although I'm still not entirely sure it makes sense to me.

Even if the band is in fact 1999-2003 it still doesn't make sense, since the 2003 and 2004 Imprezas are identical and logically their relative performance in a crash in terms of protecting the occupants and other road users will inherently be identical, while the 1999 Impreza is, relative to the 2000-onward car, a loosely assembled pile of tinfoil.

However, to stick to the original query, re. my 2001 Impreza, the version of ACC7123 on the ACC website - at url]http://www.acc.co.nz/for-individuals/other-motorists/WPC137267[/url] - states that the range will be 1992-2001, and appears to be a later document than the one you have sent me.

Could you please confirm which version is correct?

The current risk rating model seems incredibly flawed. The statistics that apparently decide the ratings are directly contradicted by the immutable fact that the cars are identical and therefore they are inherently incorrect.

Waiting on next response.....

[Joker]

F

[syphe]

I'm guessing that cutoff is intended to be for V6->V7, but because they've gone for model year they've completely f'd it up, I was worried I'd see the same thing on my 2003 legacy but seems the 3rd gens are rated higher anyway so no probs there.

[94 Leone]

 boon said:

Waiting on next response.....

Hey hey, 99 and 2000 are the same. I even have twin airbags!

Its the early GC8's that are tinfoil.

[Joker]

I wouldn't like to be in the ACC office right now, you'd have "enthusiasts" for every single make there is writing similar letters when all they did was look at their statistics & 'manufacturer provided information

you're still 'saving' money & I'm not even mad about it

[Kiwi_Fozze]

The difference was between the gc/gf chassis code and the gd/gg chassis code. But yeah.... every enthusiast will be in there claiming this chassis revision is safer than that one bla bla bla....

[SpeedySub]

 syphe said:

I'm guessing that cutoff is intended to be for V6->V7, but because they've gone for model year they've completely f'd it up, I was worried I'd see the same thing on my 2003 legacy but seems the 3rd gens are rated higher anyway so no probs there.

I have a gen 3 legacy but as mine was manufactured in 1998 it is going to cost more, even though it is the same as a 1999-2000. So I end up paying more because of when it was manufactured.

[B4 I was 250T]

What Connor said. He has a 1998 BH, I have a 1999 BE. Mines cheaper but they're relatively the same age and design

[Joker]

May? 1998 was changeover date for design Gen II > Gen III

[SpeedySub]

 Joker said:

May? 1998 was changeover date for design Gen II > Gen III

According to the info I found online with my Chassis code it was July 1998. The ACC website just gives the year, so as mine is 1998 even though Gen 3 it comes under the different category (change over date is 1999)

[johnny5]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11471960

Well they ****ed that up us Bugeye owners can attest to this

[boon]

 johnny5 said:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11471960

Well they ****ed that up us Bugeye owners can attest to this

Yes, the whole thing is a debacle really.

I wonder if that changes anything for us?

EDIT: Because I'm a c0ck I've written a nice bleat to the reporter that wrote that article, if he's in the mood to give ACC a bit of a kicking then hopefully he'll get stuck in some more.

Edited June 28, 2015 by boon

[4G63B8]

Waiting to see what happens with this, i have a 2001 V7 but first registered brand new in NZ in 2002 wonder what they will charge me....

[boon]

 4G63B8 said:

Waiting to see what happens with this, i have a 2001 V7 but first registered brand new in NZ in 2002 wonder what they will charge me....

2002, if that's what it's registered as.

Because it's obviously much safer due to spending a bit longer getting here.

[boon]

Well, interesting development.

Maybe see tomorrows Herald for some epic bleating.

[sobanoodle]

Right now on One News (or watch on OnDemand later). Re: ACC refunds and newer Skylines in particular.

[boon]

 sobanoodle said:

Right now on One News (or watch on OnDemand later). Re: ACC refunds and newer Skylines in particular.

Yup, just watched it, sounds like we should be sorted.

Anything in the Herald tomorrow is likely just going to put the boot in.

Kinda disappointed that it took this level of media attention for them to do something about it, but also stoked with the result. I'm quietly assuming this means that us 2001 Impreza owners (and a bunch of Legacy owners too?) will be paying the cheaper rate

[sobanoodle]

Funny thing I thought about while watching the news - that '08 Skyline is not ok, yet my 01 GT-B is alright for band 4, so is 01 SF5 turbo Forester. Stuffed up system from the start.