I think its time the LTSA were called out on this business of sending a notice saying a whole years vehicle licensing is overdue when your vehicle has run out of license.
The whole $287.75 is NOT overdue at all only the few days worth outstanding when the letter is sent.
If a private company tried this they could be hauled over the coal's for breaching the fair trading act or fraud.
Why are we letting our government departments treat us like fools and blatantly try to defraud us!
These departments work for US the people and are supposed to make life safer and easier, not try to make us feel like criminals while they openly attempt to rip us off.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 10:33am
I agree the period from when the license ran out to the date of the letter is "overdue" thus keeping the vehicle licensed at all times. However they are trying to charge you for almost the full 12 months ahead and charge that as overdue. Which is misleading, and if a private company tried it they would be in serious trouble.
For example:
* Vehicle license runs out on January 1 * Letter arrives dated January 10 saying your vehicle is unlicensed and there is a big red OVERDUE with $271 under it.
How can $271 be overdue when if I go and pay a small fraction of that (say I license the vehicle for a month) the overdue letters go away.
The only overdue amount is the 10 days worth between the license running out and the issuance of the letter. (as of the date of the letter anyway).
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 10:35am
Or to put it another way. Say someone has a credit card and they miss making a monthly payment. The bank can't send a letter a few days after the payment was due claiming that a whole years interest is overdue. If they did they would be in serious breach of the law.
richardmayes,
Nov 8, 10:42am
You pay for your licensing in advance. So they are correct in saying that payment is overdue. They are incorrect in saying that 12 month's worth is overdue.
But on a scale of 1 to 10; where 10 is you're a starving african child and the other tribe has just disemboweled your mother and father and 5 brothers right in front of you; and 1 is you can't decide between the hotcakes combo or a sausage & egg McMuffin; how serious do you really feel this problem is!
pollymay,
Nov 8, 10:56am
12
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 11:01am
8 for me. Its not the scale of the crime its who is committing it and why.
I see it a bit like catching a high court judge eating a chocolate bar from the supermarket as they shop and leaving without paying for it.
lugee,
Nov 8, 12:35pm
I don't really see the issue here. If you were to pay for the asked for 12 months licensing, you get your 12 months licensing. If you pay for 1 month you get 1 month. Either way the licensing is no longer overdue and you got what you paid for.
smac,
Nov 8, 6:25pm
Jazz give it up. Firstly it's NZTA, not LTSA. Secondly, you have to be licensed at all times (ok the car does), so when you have gone for an entire year unlicensed then the whole year is overdue. Yes you could argue one day of it is 1 year overdue, and one day of it is just a couple days overdue, and the rest in between, but it's still all overdue.
kazbanz,
Nov 8, 6:49pm
jazz why on earth are you wasteing your valueable time and effort on some silly motoring message board. Gosh darn it given that the entire police force has such huge policy issues and the NZTA clearly requires a major overhaul. Why on earth arent you RIGHT NOW out there with your placards and hitting the campaghn trail >It is after all the time of year where you can get voted into parliment and actually make a difference. hey mon I'm actually serious here-noit having a laugh at your expense. If you genuinely and passionately believe that there are issues thendo something about it.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 11:23pm
I agree that at least the ACC portion should be. If it were up to me everyone would have to have either an "ACC Card" or an equivalent private insurers card.
Just like a license that card would have endorsements for Car, Motorcycle, Rugby Club membership, Appropriate Occupation etc.
Simple and much more cost effective.
johnf_456,
Nov 8, 11:25pm
Totally user pays and the more the risk the more you pay.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 11:27pm
I would love to Kaz, but while I am much better these days I am not quite up for that level of activity. I would dearly love to be the Police Minister andturn them into an efficient machine that "serves and protects" instead of"swerves and collects" and once more enjoys the respect and support of the public.
We are a little island with a small population and no where to run, in today's connected world there is no reason why crime couldn't be greatly reduced simply by being efficient and utilizing the tools available.
johnf_456,
Nov 8, 11:27pm
Totally, I have said that for years. It is also more fair to people that have cars that get used a few times.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 11:29pm
For once, I couldn't agree more. The other key thing here is allowing the choice of a private insurer as well, and not just for a portion but allowing the private option as a complete alternative.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 8, 11:33pm
You have this all completely wrong. Go back and read again as thats not what I am arguing at all.
You get the letter demanding a whole years license fee when the car has been unlicensed for just a few days not a whole year.
If you got the letter as you say after a year of being unlicensed that would be absolutely fine.
johnf_456,
Nov 8, 11:44pm
Yup, I for one hate paying huge acc amounts for something I have never claimed on.
thejazzpianoma,
Nov 9, 12:20am
There is a new problem now too, if you need to legitimately claim you may find they won't pay out.
While I support moves to get some of the "hangers on" off ACC I have seen with my own eyes that its going too far. People with legitimate injuries that prevent them from working are being cut off and left with no income. These people can "challenge" the decision but they are then left for months on end still with no income and possibly nothing at the end of it all.
At least with a private insurer you have an independent ombudsman to fall back on and the Government on your side to assist.
Also, ACC falls short in area's of cover like the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome I have which while I was genetically pre-disposed with was triggered off by work stress. I fell through the cracks and got no financial assistance because ACC dosn't cover it, and neither does any other department. At best if I was on my own I could have got a sickness benefit but would have still had to sell the house etc and start again as it would not replace the income I had.
dr.doolittle,
Nov 9, 12:56am
Perhaps if you didnt post so much negative crap you might start to feel better about life in general.
johnf_456,
Nov 9, 1:42am
Totally its just a matter of finding the perfect balance.
smac,
Nov 9, 5:34am
Nowhere does a reminder say it is a payment demand for an entire years licensing. You need some bigger things to worry about.
richard198,
Feb 11, 4:11pm
I agree with you jazz. The devil is in the detail. To say that $271 is overdue is misleading. Since the minimum payment required is one month, they should either quote that amount or just say overdue without an amount.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.