Compulsory car insurance on cards

dj_jyno

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
5,106
Reaction score
1,464
Location
Cape Town
Johannesburg - The government is considering making third party insurance for motorists compulsory, but the project is still in its early stages.

Chief director of road transport regulation, John Motsatsing, said the project was still in its "brainstorming" stage, reported Business Day newspaper.

Transport Minister Sibusiso Ndebele said in reply to a question in Parliament on Thursday that the government is looking into it, but it would require careful consideration.

Between 65 and 70% of the estimated 9.4 million vehicles on SA roads do not have third party insurance, reported Beeld newspaper.

Ndebele said his department would first have to draw up a strategy which would take into account the financial status of vehicle owners and the existing fuel levy.

Source

Think this is a good thing, since the risk will now be more evenly distributed, lowering the average insurance premium. Also read a while ago that insured drivers are more responsible on the roads.
 
Source

Think this is a good thing, since the risk will now be more evenly distributed, lowering the average insurance premium. Also read a while ago that insured drivers are more responsible on the roads.

Do you have any idea how expensive insurance is in the UK? I suspect is mainly because it's compulsory.
 
Think this is a good thing, since the risk will now be more evenly distributed, lowering the average insurance premium. Also read a while ago that insured drivers are more responsible on the roads.
I think this is a step in the right direction. Insurance companies should also insist on annual certificates of roadworthyness if the government isn't prepared to go the distance and make it a condition of the vehicle's licence renewal.
 
Johannesburg - The government is considering making third party insurance for motorists compulsory, but the project is still in its early stages.

Chief director of road transport regulation, John Motsatsing, said the project was still in its "brainstorming" stage, reported Business Day newspaper.

Transport Minister Sibusiso Ndebele said in reply to a question in Parliament on Thursday that the government is looking into it, but it would require careful consideration.

Between 65 and 70% of the estimated 9.4 million vehicles on SA roads do not have third party insurance, reported Beeld newspaper.

Ndebele said his department would first have to draw up a strategy which would take into account the financial status of vehicle owners and the existing fuel levy.
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Compulsory-car-insurance-on-cards-20100625

About time I say. Wish they'd speed up the process a bit.
 
Government has to first provide a reliable and affordable alternate transport system.

Otherwise I will simply say that:
- I have a right to earn a living.
- This is my only means of transport, which is a requirement to me earning a living, and insuring it is not a viable option, because of the ludicrous premium rates.
 
Stuff them.

I can't afford that.

They can start with the taxi's first.

How can they justify enforcing this on people who already are struggling to make ends meet? :sick:
 
Government has to first provide a reliable and affordable alternate transport system.

Otherwise I will simply say that:
- I have a right to earn a living.
- This is my only means of transport, which is a requirement to me earning a living, and insuring it is not a viable option, because of the ludicrous premium rates.

+1
 
Government has to first provide a reliable and affordable alternate transport system.

Otherwise I will simply say that:
- I have a right to earn a living.
- This is my only means of transport, which is a requirement to me earning a living, and insuring it is not a viable option, because of the ludicrous premium rates.
Sure, but consider this:
- The tosser that causes an accident no longer gets off scott free, leaving you to foot the bill
- It will make people more considerate drivers when they realise that their premiums will be increased for repeatedly causing accidents
- 3rd party cover is a helluva lot less than full cover
- Insurers will in all likelihood not insure drivers of heaps of junk, thereby removing them from the road.
 
And in other news, short-term insurance CEOs just jizzed in their pants...

:D
 
Sure, but consider this:
- The tosser that causes an accident no longer gets off scott free, leaving you to foot the bill
- It will make people more considerate drivers when they realise that their premiums will be increased for repeatedly causing accidents
- 3rd party cover is a helluva lot less than full cover
- Insurers will in all likelihood not insure drivers of heaps of junk, thereby removing them from the road.
Lets take a different look at this:

When a person driving a R450 000 is dinged by a person driving a R40 000 vehicle, the R40 000 vehicle will typically have R4000 damage, and the R450 000 vehicle will have R40 000 damage.
Surely it is completely unfair to expect the insurance company of the R40 000 vehicle to cover that difference, and somehow expect 3rd party premiums to become affordable.

If 2 uninsured people are driving R40 000 vehicles, and then ding each other, then they get to deal with the cost of repairs between themselves.

If 2 insured people are driving R450 000 vehicles, and then ding each other, the guilty party's insurance pays.

Is it not a far better and logical system to include the cost of somebody smashing into you as part of your insurance costs?
Therefore, if you own a R450 000 vehicle, you get to pay more because your vehicle costs more to repair.
 
Is it not a far better and logical system to include the cost of somebody smashing into you as part of your insurance costs?
Therefore, if you own a R450 000 vehicle, you get to pay more because your vehicle costs more to repair.

It is included? :confused:

But just because some guy can't afford insurance shouldn't mean I must cover his risk.
 
this is definitely a good idea .... the prob is enforcement though .... maybe make it part of the licence??
in any case .. this will benefit everyone and will cost very little!!
 
I was under the impression that this was already the case; i fully support this, its hardly fair to have some d00s crash into u and be left screwed over cuz they didnt filfull their responsibilities
 
About bloody time, I had a guy ram into me about 2 years ago, no bloody insurance but was like oh he will make a deal etc... Disappeared gone poof.
 
Insurance for a NEW car is compulsory, not for older or 2nd hand cars.

3rd party insurance was mandatory in the old days if I recall correctly, can't remember all the details though, to long ago.
It would make sense to force a 3rd party insurance on your car, but then they need to act like doom and death, chop of the head, dismember the persons who do not have this.
It is of little use if the taxi's are not going to adhere to this, if they do not introduce some extremely heavy penalties then only the law abiding citizen will be milked and then I'm against it with every fiber of my being!
 
It is included? :confused:

But just because some guy can't afford insurance shouldn't mean I must cover his risk.
I don't understand what you mean by: It is included?

As a flip-side; just because you drive a R9 000 000 000 vehicle does not mean that I must sell my house to cover my risk if I happen to scratch your car door with my mirror, these are public roads and I have just as much right to be there with my respectable, well maintained R40 000 vehicle as you do with your R9 billion rand space-ship.
 
This is a good idea. Third party insurance is not nearly as high as your regular insurance premiums. You will be glad about that the day some dick drives into you. ;)
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X