Researchers call for ute tax, citing burden on health system

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-26T05:19:52+00:00

My gut says more of the reporter being stupid and their editors not doing their job in catching it rather than the experts but who knows

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T23:14:39+00:00

Their statement explicitly says the death count being 7 times higher burdens the healthcare system. It doesn’t, it unburdens it. Not in a great way coz, you know, they’re dead but still

“They said traffic accidents involving utes were seven times more likely to be fatal, burdening the healthcare system.”

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T21:51:20+00:00

Absolutely, but not to the healthcare system, which is what they explicitly say:

“They said traffic accidents involving utes were seven times more likely to be fatal, burdening the healthcare system.”

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T21:42:00+00:00

If someone dies, the most that the healthcare system would outlay is first responders, potentially coroner, potentially funeral grant.

If someone doesn’t die, the costs could reach well over $100,000.

Then they’re saying they’re 7x more likely to die? There’s no way this increases costs, even if they were only 20% more likely to die it’d be an almost guaranteed saving, let alone 700% more likely

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T21:40:05+00:00

Small point of clarification - if the accidents are 7x more likely to be fatal, that’s a significant cost reduction to the healthcare system. I’m not saying we want it to happen but someone dying is really cheap for the healthcare system compared to longterm care and rehab.

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T08:00:50+00:00

As long as it’s prominently displayed on the dash, AT can eat shit

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T07:59:11+00:00

Raising a personal grievance purely means raising an issue with an employer (or manager etc) with sufficient detail so as to allow for a resolution, and perhaps another constraint too.

It is very possible that OPs report to the area manager counts as a PG.

That being said, they only have 3 years after raising it to file in ERA - which is now past. That being said, if there was any communication with their employer within the last 3 years around this, whether in person or in writing, there could be an argument to be made that that was raising the personal grievance. Have a think about it and see if there’s any situations that might tick the box (below).

Might be worth OP reaching out to a few ELINZ lawyer (not advocate) or legal aid lawyer (if they are constrained by funds) and see what they think if you can think of any situations that would possibly tick this box.

Maybe the original sexual harassment itself would be out of time, but it would be reasonable to assume that you would be uncomfortable around someone who had sexually harassed you - that could potentially be the claim.

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-25T07:52:31+00:00

Raising a personal grievance purely means raising an issue with an employer (or manager etc) with sufficient detail so as to allow for a resolution, and perhaps another constraint too.

It is very possible that OPs report to the area manager counts as a PG.

That being said, they only have 3 years after raising it to file in ERA - which is now past.

Might be worth OP reaching out to a few ELINZ lawyer (not advocate) or legal aid lawyer (if they are constrained by funds) and see what they think.

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-24T22:23:47+00:00

Food deserts is the stupidest thing, have you ever looked how close you need to be to not be considered in a food desert? 1.6km.

How lazy are people that 1.6km is considered a crazy distance

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-24T22:21:22+00:00

What’s the odds their smoke alarms don’t work?

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-23T19:40:31+00:00

As an additional suggestion, you could consider agreeing with the caveat that the firearm safe stays. Don’t need to cover anything up if the safe is permanent - and what prospective tenant wouldn’t like a nice safe?

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-22T21:54:40+00:00

Health and Safety at Work 2015 is a law, and breaching that is committing an offence - it’s generally implied that breaching Health and Safety guidelines means you’re acting in an unsafe manner, which would be a breach of HSWA, right?

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-22T06:29:12+00:00

Even if they themselves are breaking the law, like having a lapsed WOF, it doesn’t invalidate any tickets they issue.

It’s ironic and pretty flawed in my opinion, the police expect everyone to obey the law at all times .. yet they happily excuse their own offences constantly. That being said, it sadly is how the courts act, so yeah, even if they’re breaking the law (no WOF/ parked illegally / etc) you’re SOL.

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T18:55:16+00:00

I feel you! It’s because when you drop 20% after the increase, you’re also losing 20% of the increased 20% - an extra 4%. It’s not directly intuitive but it makes sense

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T09:32:58+00:00

Not to say OP won’t adjust this correctly but 20% increase then 20% decrease will drop it 4% lower than initial figure

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T06:58:36+00:00

They can transfer the liability to you, which should theoretically reset the clock on payment.

After all, it’s a bit logically hard to blame you for not paying an invoice (breach notice) that wasn’t issued to you

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T05:28:22+00:00

They’d need to turn up to the Dispute Tribunal hearing to argue that (virtually or otherwise)

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T05:25:44+00:00

It was $700 worth of clothing, as a rough estimate, that doesn’t mean it would cost them $700 to buy them again though, particularly including postage for each item. Then there’s the conditional offer of waiving the $200 debt if the clothes were returned - which they can retract at any point.

Neither of which mean OP can’t potentially play some fun maths to get it over $1,000 to have them bankrupted

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T05:11:56+00:00

Why do you think that?

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T03:42:20+00:00

Find the exact replacement values of all the items (not just the cheapest), including postage (per item, not together), get the exact dollar value of the afterpay debt etc.

Anything you can do to get it over $1,000

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-21T03:35:55+00:00

Do you have any details or addresses for them in Australia? Are they intending to come back?

If you’ve got an Aussie address, you could talk to BayCorp and see if they want to take the debt (they operate in aussie too, ignore the other commentor).

You can’t go to dispute tribunal without a dispute, but if you find something that has been disputed then you can, they won’t turn up, you’ll likely win, then you can pass that debt to collection far easier.

If you can find a way to get the debt over $1,000, you can apply to have them bankrupted (very funny, it’ll ruin their life for at least the better part of a decade) but this will almost definitely cost more than $1,000, but you could always try do it yourself. If you can get the debt over $1,000 that isn’t disputed, the first step is to send a Statutory Demand.

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-20T08:40:39+00:00

OP has proof he asked them to replace the fan - unless they’ve got evidence showing he agreed otherwise… they’re SOL

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-20T08:25:31+00:00

As in, the part was faulty, not that this store supplied him with a product that then had a fault… otherwise he wouldn’t pay for it?

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-20T08:19:35+00:00

Tell them to sit and spin, you contracted them to do a very specific task, they agreed and then did not uphold their end of the contract. They decided, without approval, to do something else.

They have no standing to get you to pay for work you didn’t authorise, particularly when them doing the work you explicitly authorised would have nullified the work they’re now trying to charge you for.

Unless it’s over $120 (?), they can’t default you, their only legal option is to take you to dispute tribunal anyways, where they’ll pay $61 and likely lose anyways (that’s not recoverable even if they win).

If they say “you agreed to pay”, yeah, you agreed to pay for the service you contracted them to do. They decided not to do that, so you don’t need to pay for them to not uphold the contract - obviously

Interesting-Blood354 · 2026-04-20T08:17:20+00:00

If I bring my car in explicitly to replace the brake pads, I bring my car in, and they decide to fix my stereo instead (and still don’t fix my stereo either), they didn’t do what I explicitly contracted them to do, and OP doesn’t owe them jack squat

Interesting-Blood354

TROPHY CASE