User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: London Congestion Charge hike overturned!

  1. #1
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Thumbs up London Congestion Charge hike overturned!

    Some common sense from Boris! - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7494495.stm

    The proposed hike in CC charge to £25 for more polluting cars has been quashed by him - mainly because it would have cost TFL a fortune to defend Porsche's legal challenge, but at least it's a kick in the nuts for Livingstone who seemed to forget that he introduced a congestion charge and not an emissions charge!

    Hopefully the MPs will carry through the signs of their revolt against the hike in the VED for cars after 2001, which even they have seen is going to anger many people now that they realise their average family car is going to take a hike in VED if the proposals are carried out. The fact that it's being applied to cars since 2001 is I think the biggest reason for the anger. They're being punished in the wallet now, or soon, for buying a car that fell into certain tax/emissions then, only to have the Government move the goalposts and screw more money out of them!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South east
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Duncan, do you live in some different, alternative environment/atmosphere? What do you gain by Porsche Cayenne drivers spewing 300+ grammes of C02 per Km and not being discouraged from doing so.

    When people die of respiratory illnesses brought on by street-level pollution, do you think they lie on their death bed croaking "at least we taught Livingstone a lesson....".

    Porsche have just introduced their first ever 911 that produces less than 225 g/km of CO2 - 225 g/km being the cut-off point where the higher congestion charge would have been levied. They didn't use a single piece of technology that wasn't available 5 years ago (direct injection), so why didn't they make these changes 5 years ago? Because they coudn't be bothered, they don't give a dam about the environment and they couldn't see a profit in it. they only did it now because they were faced with a potential slump in sales in the South East because people didn't want to buy a car that would lumber them with the £25 dail congestion fee charge.

    Now that Boris has scrapped the £25 fee, do you think Porsche will bother to clean up any of their other engines? Like hell they will. Nice for Porsche shareholders, not nice at all for those that breathe the polluted air. And that includes YOU.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Ste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    ..... Driving the Jaguar XF
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Jaguar XF 3.0D V6

    Trim : Black

    Engine : 3.0D V6

    Year : 0000

    Default

    That's not really the point that Duncan (I think) was making.

    The Congestion charge was introduced to reduce London congestion, not reduce road side pollution. Having a sliding scale based on pollution emitted is against the whole ethos of introducing the charge, and how it has been a politcal football. If the charge was based on cars size, then I could see that as legitimate.

    Car pollution is a different story to congestion..

    Just my 2 pence worth.


    Oh, and they won't be 'spewing out 300+ grammes of CO2 per KM' anyway, as that is over a very prescribed duty cycle, which will not apply to crawling round London.

  4. #4
    Regular Member SignumPhil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Luton, Beds
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    And, of course, the other point is that anyone who drives a Cayenne is already paying lots of road tax and fuel duty.


    Phil

  5. #5
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebellion View Post
    Duncan, do you live in some different, alternative environment/atmosphere? What do you gain by Porsche Cayenne drivers spewing 300+ grammes of C02 per Km and not being discouraged from doing so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ste View Post
    That's not really the point that Duncan (I think) was making.
    It certainly wasn't! lol
    Quote Originally Posted by Ste View Post
    The Congestion charge was introduced to reduce London congestion, not reduce road side pollution. Having a sliding scale based on pollution emitted is against the whole ethos of introducing the charge, and how it has been a politcal football. If the charge was based on cars size, then I could see that as legitimate.
    Exactly, and what my whole point was Rebellion. It was the fact that the CC was brought in as a congestion charge and was purely and simply to deter all car drivers (regardless of whether you owned a small car or a big gas guzzzler) from driving into London and therefore reducing the congestion. Then Ken goes and tries hike it up to £25 for certain people and turn it into an emissions charge - which was not what it was introduced as in the first place. It was, and still is, a congestion charge. You don't need to be driving a Porsche which has a 300g CO2/km rating to have fallen foul of the £25 hike, as we saw in another thread a Vectra estate auto for example (forgot what engine) fell foul of it too, along with many other 'normal' cars. I wasn't condoning people driving around in extremely highly polluting vehicles, nor was I routing behind Porsche - it was simply the fact that a politician was using what was initially a Congestion Charge and turning it into something completely different for their own political agenda ad I was simply glad to see that common sense had prevailed by somebody.

    As Ste said, if it had initially been introduced as a pollution/emissions charge and they, TFL, had hiked up the rates on it then that's one thing, but it's the fact that it was introduced as, and still is, a congestion charge.

  6. #6
    Administrator Big-Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Home or in the Gym
    Problems Posted
    1
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    1
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Audi Q7

    Trim : S-Line Plus 245

    Engine : 3.0 TDV6

    Year : 2013

    Mileage : 3023

    Default

    Have you seen the amount of traffic that the congestion charge has created around the edges of the Congestion zones..?? Trying to get into the congestion charge area is a frigging joke as you have to actually battle your way thru mile after mile of traffic because everyone is trying to avoid paying the damn thing... all its done is move the congestion & pollution to the outer edges of London..
    Thinking of putting it up to £25 a day is just ridiculous..

  7. #7
    Regular Member Ste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    ..... Driving the Jaguar XF
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Jaguar XF 3.0D V6

    Trim : Black

    Engine : 3.0D V6

    Year : 0000

    Default

    If you read several articles about it, you will notice that it actually hasn't reduced congestion. All it has done is generate a lot of revenue, and heartache, from motorists

  8. #8
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Oh, but Ken said it had reduced congestion so he must be right? <goes off looking for a sarcastic smiley>

  9. #9
    Administrator Big-Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Home or in the Gym
    Problems Posted
    1
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    1
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Audi Q7

    Trim : S-Line Plus 245

    Engine : 3.0 TDV6

    Year : 2013

    Mileage : 3023

    Default

    No need to read anything, just try going down Mile end road between 6am and 9am and experience 1st hand..
    also those poxy bendy buses Ken introduced to ease congestion, try getting past one of them, they take up so much room, at a 3 lane junction the bendy bus will take up at least 2 lanes..

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South east
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Let me get this straight: Politicians shouldn't be trying to discourage use of the most heavilly polluting vehicles through financial incentives/penalties, because they method they used is "named" the congestion charge?

    THAT'S your argument? It has the wrong NAME??

    So, if the politicians held a consultation exercise, i.e. invited anyone with an opinion on this to send them an email detailing their thoughts, and then they changed the name of the charge to "Vehicle Useage Charge" - you'd all be fine with the &#163;25 levy on the most polluting vehicles taking effect? Surely you would, after all it will have removed your only issues, that the name of the charge was misleading....

    And to whomever said that Cayennes don't put out 300+ g/km of CO2 when crawling along in London - you're absolutely right, it's more like 600 g/km, as they're probably only doing 10mpg.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. congestion charge help
    By signum03 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 6th November 2009, 20:32
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12th December 2008, 23:17
  3. Local Congestion Charge
    By MLC in forum General Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21st March 2008, 16:49
  4. More London Congestion Charges..
    By lofty in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 15th February 2008, 13:24
  5. Congestion - What to do about it?
    By Spikey© in forum General Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 22nd February 2007, 00:00

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •