BUS PREMIUMS.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 12, 15 January 1929, Page 16

BUS PREMIUMS.

THE COMPENSATION FACTOR

It •will be noted that premiums in respect* of taxis, service cars and buses are mtnch higher than for private care and rise in accordance with seating capacity. This has brought forth some protest from owners of such vehicles, but the-Act gives much greater cover to owners, of vehicles for hire.

Passengers in private cars are not covered, passengers in public vehicles are, and the Act further provides for the repeal of the clauses in the Motor Omnibus Act which require owners to insure against injury to passengers. It appears probable that in the balancing 75>— the new premiums to be paid iioner the Motor Insurance Act' against the non-payment of premiums which were paid under the Motor Omnibus Act—owners of public vehicles will come out rather on the right side. Local bodies which operate buses and provide their own cover will have to take out a cover under the new Actj one reason for their inclusion was to keep the average premium down. There is no limit to the amount of compensation which an injured third party may claim or obtain; this figure would be determined, as at present, in the courts,, if agreement could not be otherwise reached, but there is a* limitation of the amount which may he claimed by a, passenger injured while travelling in a, taxi or bus. This is fixed at £2000 per passenger, or £20,000 in an accident where many passengers are injured, as in a bad bus smash.

It is anticipated that the premiums paid under the new legislation will return between-. £180,000 and £200,000 per annum, a figure that will increase with the number of vehicles.

Arguments Against the Scheme. Opponents to the scheme have quoted the experience of Massachusetts, U.S.A., which State lias, with Sweden, the closest parallel, to the New Zealand scheme, as showing that premiums are more likely to be increased than reduced. In September last premium rates for care i» that State were practically doubled owing to losses by the companies writing the policies, but it is an argument which, can only hold good where circumstances are similar. Another argument advanced against the scheme is that, though it may be designed to give protection to the man who, through no fault of his own, is injured, it is ate interference by the State in the affairs of the individual. To that the. Honse replied that there have already been far too many cases of persons, many of them breadwinners, maimed and unable to obtain a penny of compensation from a car owner driving on a full pettka tank, but an empty purse. There is another ajrgument again: that compulsory insurance will tend to make drivers lees careful. Theoretically that mey be so, but, cover or no cover, is one driver among x a hundred thousand going to do injury any the more willingly? It may correctly be argued that a compulsory insurance scheme will not make drivers more careful, but hardly that it will, make drivers less careful.

The compulsory clauses of the Act, nominally already in force,- need not concern owners until next June. When they apply for new number plates the position will be dear enough—they must then comply or ge* no plates.

BRAKES. EFFICIENXY TESTS. The British National Safety First Association has prepared statistics showing the distances in which a motor vehicle under proper control and with its brakes in good order, should be able to come to a complete stop while driving at fixed speeds. Those distances afe as follows:— Speed Average die. Average dls. M.P.H. Ord. brakes. 4-wheel bks. 10 9ft 6ft IS 20ft 14ft 20 35ft 25ft These figures show approximate distances, and are for level ground, undei average road conditions. On a falling gradient, or on slippery or greasy roads naturally a greater distance will be required to stop. The distance also increases very rapidly in proportion to the speed. Thus, from a study of these figures at the moderate speeds quoted it will be seen that it varies with the square, of the speed, so that at twenty miles an hour the same car will require four times the distance to come to a standstill that it would at ten miles, while at forty miles an hour the distance is increased by sixteen times. It has frequently been asserted that a majority of accidents at road junctions and intersections was directly traceable to excessive speed, and these facts regarding the distance required to stop the car from known speeds will perhaps render it possible for car drivers inclined to take unnecessary risks and depend upon the powers of their brakes to get them out of difficulties, to realise why they meet with disaster.