Wah, so many opc cheat every month

[Galantspeedz]

so if you have 50% ncd? it means you will effectively have 65% ncd? or

[Elfenstar]

Economy now very bad, so OPC owners must cheat abit to save some $$$ [Frown]

 

You think everybody is as poor as you ah??? As I said, some of us have a normal car AND a OPC.

 

Did I mention paid cash in full for both?

[Elfenstar]

Nope. It is regular rate -50% NCD, then 15% off that amount. Ends up being around 58% discount.

[Lokech34]

what to do. I think most of the OPC owners are first timer. Never own a car before .That why must ya ya papa ya lah.

 

i seen some very arrogant drive with one hand the other on the phone. Dont seem to bother if get caught.

[Galantspeedz]

like that not worth to covert my normal to OPC liao

[Elfenstar]

You do realise that in addition to the discount, you get $2200 per year (or pro rated part thereof) for the time your car is an OPC added into to your scrap value right?

 

I suspect the OPC scheme is actually a test bed for the govt's pay as you use scheme. It is to test whatever loopsholes or tricks motorists may use. Once solved, and in conjunction with the GPS based ERP, they going to say

"OK! cars are going to be cheap from now on, however if you drive between hours X and Y you have to pay $X, hours Y and Z, you pay $Y, then hours A and B you can get for free. Oh and also if you drive on roads A,B, C, D, E and F during hours P-Q you need to pay $P. One last thing, if you are going to be on a congested road, you're also going to have to pay $Z"

[Elfenstar]

You sure??? I thought its mostly honda and toyota drivers I see doing that. I also noticed luxury car drives tend to not be able to keep in lane and hog two lanes at a time...

Edited December 21, 2008 by Elfenstar

[Elfenstar]

I kinda agree with u.

It makes no sense to save only 100+ per month and get restricted.

You might end up paying more when you decide to use your car more. These are the kind of things that one cannot expect or plan.

 

Not restricted what. Just use coupon lah. It is only $20....

[Galantspeedz]

its 1.7k no meh? y 2.2k?

[Elfenstar]

I want to point out that there is an alarming things I see performed by OPC rather than a non-OPC, it could be due to experience and mentality. Then again these do not represent the major population who own OPC.

 

I say its due to your focusing on them due to your prejudices (have a look at your posts- even though you say otherwise you discriminated and indirectly attacked everyone who drives an OPC).

 

I am talking about the system, our MANAGEMENT may not have gone thru a proper trial of the OPC scheme which resulted in OPC cheats and such. Maybe if they have gone thru the same process like the ERP, things would have been different. OPC if you look at it, it is just another way to boost our reserves.

 

See my last reply to bro galantspeed.

[Elfenstar]

I don't know how they came about with that figure, but I think they factored in some sort of interest.

 

 

From LTA's website:

 

Conversion from normal car to OPC

 

You can apply to the LTA to convert your normal car to an OPC. To complete the conversion, you will need to submit the required documents as stated in the application form and the payment of a conversion fee of $100 and the applicable road tax and radio license fee. Upon successful conversion of the vehicle, you can proceed to change the car number plate to a red coloured one within 3 calendar days and have it sealed by an authorised Inspection Centre. No tax rebate on your COE quota premium and/or ARF will be given when the normal car is converted to an OPC.

 

The registered owner of a converted OPC will, however, enjoy:

1) $800 discount on the annual road tax subject to a minimum road tax payment of $50 per year; and

 

2) Additional Preferential Additional Fee (PARF) benefit on top of the normal PARF benefit may be granted if your car is de-registered before it is 10 years old and is eligible for PARF benefit. The additional PARF benefit is computed as follows:

 

Lifespan of the car as a converted OPC (in months and days) x ($2,200/12)

 

To illustrate:

 

If you had re-registered your normal car as an OPC on 1 June 2003 and used the car as an OPC up till 19 June 2006, at the point of de-registration, if the car is still eligible for PARF benefit, you would be granted an additional PARF benefit calculated as follows:

 

Period as a converted OPC is calculated as follows:

 

From 1/6/03 to 31/5/06 = 3 years or 36 months (i.e. 3 years x 12 months)

From 1/6/06 to 19/6/06 = 19 days or 0.63 months (i.e. 19 days divide by 30 days)

 

Hence, total period where the car was a converted OPC = 36.63 months. The additional PARF is thus calculated as follows:

 

Additional PARF = 36.63 x ($2,200/12)

= $6,715

[Galantspeedz]

i know the convert opc thingy... but i think changing to a new opc should be better than converting. My coe 30k

 

anyway most likely stick to normal car or go w/o car. dun like feeling restrained

[Elfenstar]

Do you math lah... see if your usage cost will be higher or lower with and OPC and how many coupons you need to use to make costs equal.

[Scoots]

Economy now very bad, so OPC owners must cheat abit to save some $$$

 

To each his own. Those who want to cheat should know full well what the consequences could be. Ignorance is a poor defence.

 

Having said that, not all OPC drivers cheat... So there are those of us who drive our OPC with no 'guilt'

[Caparo]

Let me put it in a way you will understand: Yes, I will still buy a car. (Let me try to understand your situation. Why would you want to buy a car when you said you only need it for the off peak reasons?.)

 

Btw, you have just repeated what I've remarked about you: not clarifying/making any point but just throwing out questions. (ie, snaking from point to point) (It seems like you have become the pot, I do not know you and I do not need to snake around you, I just want to let the large know my point of view).

 

So let me ask you some questiosn DIRECTLY now: (Finally, Thank you.)

 

1. How different is a OPC owners deciding not to spend and extra $17K for a 'full' car, taking into consideration that he most likely will not need the use of a car during that time, different from your asking "if it makes sense to waste resources not using it most of the time"

 

I have to ask, what do you think I was referring to when I mentioned resources? From your reply, it seems like you are referring to the 17K (correct me if I am wrong). If that is the case, just for the record - I was referring to limited parking spaces at night and LTA to verify the red plates and coloured coupons. Power of assumptions.

 

Thanks for your sympathy. But I really think you are a more deserving candicate

 

Nah, I have to give it to you.

 

I've raised my points and counter-arguments to yours on every post. Of course, if you have not read what I've been writing about before your joining into the discussion, that's hardly my fault. You, on the other hand, have not rebutted/engaged any of my points directly, only to brush it off and snake to another question/topic.

 

Strange, I do not know that it is compulsory to read your posting. I have my point of view and you for no apparent reason jumped to the conclusion that I was directing at you, why are you so defensive?

 

Obviously you have a reading disorder. I wrote:

"And when you cannot convince, you seek to confuse."

Let me enlighten you: This only means that you tried to confuse( read: did not suceed in confusing)

 

See what I meant when you twist and turn my facts? I do not know you are also qualified to be a specialist in identifying reading disorder.

 

Your words - cannot convince, you seek to confuse. Maybe you should have wrote - cannot convince, you sought to confuse? I can't believe you blamed me for your English. Another thing, why should I care if I can convince or confuse you? Are you representing the entire OPC population?

 

I have replied you decently.

[Caparo]

I have seen countless OPCs on the roads when they were not supposed to. (Right or Wrong?)

 

Fact: There are OPC cheats and there are law abiding OPC drivers.

Can you say that your observation is representative of the majority of OPCs?

 

I have to ask you to brush up on your English, I said I have seen countless. I did not say majority or even used the word "all" or "most", again, your power of assumption.

 

Furthermore, they occupy precious residential parking spaces just for some rare occasions when they need to send friends home or go shopping. (Right or Wrong?)

 

Fact: OPCs pay the same parking rate. OPCs NOT being used during restricted hours is not wrong.

Is your point that a stationary OPC in a carpark, by it's mere existance, is a 'crime'?

 

I take it that this is just a question to me. Just to let you understand my statement, OPC created a problem because often people find half the parking zone covered with OPC. Taking up space and it is in fact a waste of resources.

 

I have also seen FT in OPC sending husband to work at 8.30 am on a Tuesday morning.

This, I do not think you can see because you do not stay there.

 

Fact:(tying in with the first question) This is 1 (spelt:O-N-E) OPC cheat. Again are you implying that majority/all of OPCs are cheaters?

 

I am so tired of asking you to do something with your English, I wrote "I have also seen FT in OPC sending husband to work" or did you see "I have also seen FTs in OPCs sending husbands to work"? Again, defensive and assuming.

 

In addition, I have also witness a few incidents where OPCs performed road hogs, illegal U-Turns, driving in excess of speed limits, etc.

If you are on the road more often than me, you will see what I mean

 

Fact:Normal plate cars are equally capable of committing those above offences. No logic dictates that OPCs commit those offences more than other vehicle

 

Fact:By acknowleding that "please do not assume I am saying non-OPCs do not have the same issues" just makes your arguments more nonsensical.

You blame OPCs as a source of those offenses, while acknowledging that "non-OPC" have the same issues (ie, equally guilty)... where's the logic in that?

 

I am trying to put a fair statement when I mentioned the above, you choose to think otherwise. I have pointed out that I have witnessed a few incidents, did I mentioned I witnessed a lot of incidents? The only logic is that you chose what to read and assumed.

[Galantspeedz]

hard lar, usage of car irregular de

[Scoots]

Let me try to understand your situation. Why would you want to buy a car when you said you only need it for the off peak reasons?.

Fair question so I shall enlighten you with my considerations:

1.I want a car to ferry around my family members when needed. Train/taxi not viable option for when you prepare for prenancy, child and aging parents.

2.I don't see a need to use of the car during peak hours. Hence the option for OPC

 

It seems like you have become the pot, I do not know you and I do not need to snake around you, I just want to let the large know my point of view

See here's the thing: WHAT is your point of view? It CHANGES when it's validity has been proven to be weak.... so do you HAVE a point of view? Or pregudice? There is a difference. Until you clarify that, there's only one black kettle here.

 

I have to ask, what do you think I was referring to when I mentioned resources? From your reply, it seems like you are referring to the 17K (correct me if I am wrong). If that is the case, just for the record - I was referring to limited parking spaces at night and LTA to verify the red plates and coloured coupons. Power of assumptions.

I won't correct you because it is one of the reasons I considered as resource. And I did factor in parking lots. However, your reasoning is flawed. Some food for thought: Imagine if we were without the OPC system, will the parking lots be more. Mind you, you've endorsed other form of car ownership, 2nd hand cars, COE cars... so these cars do not tatke up space? Or are you thinking that people who buy these cars will be driving them out very regularly? Power of assumption...

 

Strange, I do not know that it is compulsory to read your posting. I have my point of view and you for no apparent reason jumped to the conclusion that I was directing at you, why are you so defensive?

I am defensive because I am offended by your skewed and biased accusations of OPC drivers

 

See what I meant when you twist and turn my facts? I do not know you are also qualified to be a specialist in identifying reading disorder.

 

Your words - cannot convince, you seek to confuse. Maybe you should have wrote - cannot convince, you sought to confuse? I can't believe you blamed me for your English. Another thing, why should I care if I can convince or confuse you? Are you representing the entire OPC population?

Feeble escape attempt here.

For one, my challenge to you to show my "twist and turn " of facts was before this last post. As such, you have not proven what you are accusing me of.

 

Secondly, I don't see how my pointing out your attempt at confusing us did not succeed is "twist and turn" of facts. The facts are still the same, even if my english is less than perfect.

 

Thirdly, (and I hate to point out to you again) you are turing to attacking my english now. That just reaffirms my point about you snaking from point-to-point.

 

No, I do represent the entire OPC population. But your accusation is towards ALL OPC drivers.... me included. So don't you think I have the right to respond?

Edited December 22, 2008 by Scoots