Car Registration Fees seem inconsistent

mohaka, Aug 2, 6:05pm
Just looking at the rego for a car through the years and the fees vary from $100 to $150-acc levy doubles(because of a years diff(94-95),can't see any changes in body re safety).Actually the safety rating is relatively poor right up to 2015 for corollas according to ANCAP
farwest, Aug 2, 6:09pm
My 96 Corolla was only $100, last month.
mohaka, Aug 2, 6:12pm
yep it goes down by $50(about 150 to 100) from a 94 to 95 model
nzmax, Aug 2, 6:49pm
I note that with my current car, 2003 A33 Nissan Maxima 3.0, it has the same registration fee as the later shape 2003 J31 Maxima 3.5, which has numerous extra safety features as standard compared to my car. When I checked the 2002 A33 Maxima using random plate numbers of TM, the registration fee is slightly dearer, even though the A33 model was unchanged between 2002 and 03, other than different patterned alloy wheels, stereo etc. I am guessing that if your car is the older model in a changeover/update year, the fees applied automatically default to the newer version?
franc123, Aug 2, 8:21pm
This is very much the case, I questioned NZTA about this very issue, why someone who owns say a 2007 version of a particular car pays more than an identical 2008 registered version all because that model line was replaced with an all new one in the last two months of 2008. The license fee should be based on what model it is not what date it was first registered, but that is all too hard for them.
westwyn, Aug 2, 9:03pm
Franc, a good point, but the reaity was that structuring the ACC levies based upon safety rated "groups" turned in to a nightmare to work through, an absolute, living nightmare for ACC, MOT (rule makers) and NZTA (rule enforcers). There were so comparable but not identical ratings year-on-year, model-on-model, country of origin vs country first sold, etc etc, that the whole project was almost derailed until we spent the best part of three months working through the issues with ACC and determining better formulas and algorithms for calculating rating groups. It was (and is now) accepted as not being perfect, but the best that could be realistically achieved within the timeframes give and without reinventing the wheel.

ACC will still look at glaring cases of model incompatibility if it is drawn to their attention.
jason_247, Aug 2, 9:09pm
Alot of it is based on actual crash statistics in nz.

If your car is safer but for some reason has been involved in more injury crashes over the years the stats will say it is less safe.

Only part of it but it does effect the results.

Bottom line is rego is cheaper for everyone than a few years back
franc123, Aug 2, 10:24pm
Yes I understand that, it certainly wasn't helped by the fact that JDM models that we get variants of here which are sold NZ new have very different release dates and often very different safety specs.
joanie04, Aug 2, 11:05pm
The pink Cadillac (older Nissan Sentra) now costs more to register than it is worth. Not sure if the brothers still have it lol.
next-to-normal, Aug 3, 10:39am
not happy that my 1992 190d merc with abs brakes an air bag seatbelt tensioners ect and built well is a class one was a 3 and 1/2 star rating, is now as unsafe as a morrie minor
axelvonduisberg, Aug 3, 10:55am
I registerred my 2007 Honda Odyssey last week for the year and it only cost me $76.92Acouple of years back i was paying $181.00 odd from memory.
apollo11, Aug 3, 11:11am
Yeah the drop in fees for my Mondeo help offset the $520 for my motorcycle lol.
supernova2, Aug 3, 11:18am
So if we follow the logic that the fees are based on safety ratings and risk of injury it must be about time bus rego went up to about a zillon $ per year.
Surely it would have made more sense to rate the vehicle based on model number codes rather than the date it was made. Do they care if it was a JDM or NZ new - apparently not so its not based on what safety features there may be in any particular car.
comsolve, Aug 3, 11:23am
My G11 Bluebird has a 6-star safety rating in Japan NCAP. It wasn't sold new in NZ/AU so no ANCAP. The rego was around $90 last time, but Rightcar says it should now be $76.92.
dublo, Aug 3, 12:06pm
I can see what a headache it must have been, so I won't complain about our 1999 Accord V6's rego costing almost $100 while son's 2002 4-cylinder one with its identical body and safety features is only a little over $70. (But it annoys me that the low-km V6 requires 6 - monthly WoFs when we see so many post-2000 cars on the road with failed lights and bald tyres. )
gazzat22, Aug 3, 4:25pm
The ACC took figures from Monash University statistics which meant the more cars the more accidents they had so ACC part of premium was higher the more of a particular model on the road at least thats my understanding .It meant a car with no ABS or Airbags showed up as safer because there were less of them still on the road.
westwyn, Aug 3, 9:06pm
No, Monash-supplied statistics were indeed used (since we don't crash test cars here or research crash survivability) but numbers involved in accidents weren't any part of the calculations- volumes merely made it easier to intepret individual real-world crash data, and paradoxically, harder to interpret low-volume cars since data was often missing, or incomplete.

Monash information was at least partly dismissed once ACC realised that Australian-spec cars are not necessarily NZ-specs, and there were models / variants that were sold here not available in Australia but sharing a similar model badge.

It took months of intensive analysis to sort out these errors and inject reason in to the calculations. Even model codes (as suggested above) are not an indicator of safety, since manufacturers refine safety features during a model lifespan, not just at a model (and model-code) changeover.
supernova2, Aug 5, 1:43am
A problem with using dates is that you could end up with an early model (with less features) being registered after a later model (with more safety features).
Is the data regarding progressive upgrades actually available to the public or is a lot of it guess work?
As for the 6mth/12mth WEOF rules i still think that should have been a sliding goalpost. ie 12monthly up to say 10yrs then onto 6monthly. With the present 2000 onward there is a lot of old high mileage junk running about now. Yeah yeah I know the driver is responsible for vehicle safety but often the types who own a 18 yr old junker dont/wont/cant.
franc123, Aug 5, 4:00am
What I see a lot of these days is a group of mainly older drivers who still own cars in the 1995-99 bracket who do bugger all kms between WoF's who are generally pretty good with maintaining their cars and have no good reason to upgrade them being unfairly penalised by the current system. They simply don't need to be subject to 6 mth inspections. IMO.
afer_daily, Aug 5, 6:04am
it doesnt matter what rating your car has it is only as safe as the capability of the driver.
mcfc11, Aug 8, 6:33pm
Porsche 911 costs me $76.92. For 1 year.
flack88, Aug 8, 7:34pm
#20 to a point unless some person whos grasp of engrish and knowledge of our road rules is zip and they slam into you in an 018 Highlander rental suv it could be important then what you are driving eh?!
db.price, Oct 29, 12:54pm
Our CX 5 is $80 for a year. Can't complain about that!