We won't know for a few weeks, so for many it will be too late and scrap their car anyway.
Expanded ULEZ
- Thread starter Mottie
- Start date
Sponsored Links
They're discussing this on Nicky Campbell's radio show now. It certainly divides opinion.
Maybe it's part of a plan to further gentrify these towns/cities i.e. they want the 'scum' out. As with any scheme like this, it only detrimentally effects those on lower incomes who either can't afford the charge or to buy a compliant vehicle.
People should have been given a decades notice to at least give them a fighting chance to prepare whether from a personal and/or business perspective. And the charge should have been lower.
I also expect, depending on the cost to implement, we'll see these schemes rolled out to smaller towns in years to come.
Maybe it's part of a plan to further gentrify these towns/cities i.e. they want the 'scum' out. As with any scheme like this, it only detrimentally effects those on lower incomes who either can't afford the charge or to buy a compliant vehicle.
People should have been given a decades notice to at least give them a fighting chance to prepare whether from a personal and/or business perspective. And the charge should have been lower.
I also expect, depending on the cost to implement, we'll see these schemes rolled out to smaller towns in years to come.
I heard that once the cameras have served their purpose, they will then be used to charging per mile you drive.
I think a charge per mile is being considered as a replacement for road tax.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,446
- Reaction score
- 2,647
- Country
We really don't need cameras for that, it can be integrated in to the MOT fee. If they are to be used for charge per mile, then we are effectively making the whole of London a toll road network. I wonder if he has the authority to do that?
.
How would that work? What happens if you sell the car? Disconnect the speedo? Take your car abroad and drive thousands of miles?
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,446
- Reaction score
- 2,647
- Country
or fit cloned plates, or obscure the plate etc.. short of demanding you have a GPS tracker installed (which can be blocked), it would cost a lot less to take the mileage and charge for the difference between last year as part of a road tax on use.
But Khan wants to charge much more. I suspect he'd be thinking along the lines of 25p - 50p per mile to drive in London.
Plus they only care about taxing 95% who don't break the law.
But Khan wants to charge much more. I suspect he'd be thinking along the lines of 25p - 50p per mile to drive in London.
Plus they only care about taxing 95% who don't break the law.
We've had decades of personal car ownership being welcomed and encouraged, with governments and local councils doing the necessary (as much as they could) to keep vehicles moving e.g. extensive road building projects, out of town shopping centres etc.
Over the coming decades we'll see the reverse of that and as we know, it's already started.
Over the coming decades we'll see the reverse of that and as we know, it's already started.
Exeter town centre is already in decline, empty shops etc, if the council introduce LEZ then it will be another nail in the coffin of businesses in the city. It used to be a lovely vibrant city but parking so expensive and public transport poor to say the least we avoid going in unless we have to, on top of that the twa**sh council are closing roads 15 minute city style, won't work as a lot of people who would come into the centre are from rural areas.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,446
- Reaction score
- 2,647
- Country
The sort of people who are councillors and council employees aren't the sort of people who have experienced driving 100s of miles for customer appointments, delivery, service etc with targets to hit.
Yes as with any change like this, there'll be winners and losers. Not great for those in the latter camp.
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 12,537
- Reaction score
- 983
- Country
What about those cars that don't need an mot?
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,480
- Reaction score
- 3,371
- Country
My wife's car is ULEZ compliant, it is nearly 20 years old and is probably worth its weight in scrap. It passes its MOT annually with minimal fuss and cost, it is a petrol car though, but would be cheap for someone wanting a ULEZ compliant car, there must be dozens more like it out there. The ones who will suffer are those that followed Government guidance and bought a diesel car. 7 or 8 year old cars with plenty of life left in them will not be ULEZ compliant, so what to do? Get rid of your nice comfortable efficient car to buy a nigh on 20 year old nail just so you can appease a vindictive man with little man syndrome?
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,786
- Reaction score
- 704
- Country
@Ihvavenojob - Interesting - what car's that?
A lot of cars have manufacture-fitted trackers, particularly Jap an German I think. Toyota were rumbled in a court case ago years in the US where Toyota proved their cars were not accelerating by themselves and they knew where the cars were.
It makes a lot of sense. It's big-brotherish but on balance I wouldn't object to them being mandatory. Easy to check on routinely like road toll scanners do from bridges, roadsides etc.
I was surprised to see how cheap trackers are, now. A mate asked me if I could make one harder to find, the problem being that they use the same bands as phones, and are easy to locate, on a car, by thieves. My best suggestion was to hide the thing in the moulding at the top of his SUV's tailgate, only getting to operate when the brake lights (adjacent) are on. If you were going to scan a car for the transmissions, you wouldn't usually have the brake lights on. But the owner would have logged where the car was when it was moving. There are more sophisticated ways, but that would do as a cheap modification to a cheap device. Good comms if it's only behind plastic, too.
Stick another under the bonnet for something to find.
A lot of cars have manufacture-fitted trackers, particularly Jap an German I think. Toyota were rumbled in a court case ago years in the US where Toyota proved their cars were not accelerating by themselves and they knew where the cars were.
It makes a lot of sense. It's big-brotherish but on balance I wouldn't object to them being mandatory. Easy to check on routinely like road toll scanners do from bridges, roadsides etc.
I was surprised to see how cheap trackers are, now. A mate asked me if I could make one harder to find, the problem being that they use the same bands as phones, and are easy to locate, on a car, by thieves. My best suggestion was to hide the thing in the moulding at the top of his SUV's tailgate, only getting to operate when the brake lights (adjacent) are on. If you were going to scan a car for the transmissions, you wouldn't usually have the brake lights on. But the owner would have logged where the car was when it was moving. There are more sophisticated ways, but that would do as a cheap modification to a cheap device. Good comms if it's only behind plastic, too.
Stick another under the bonnet for something to find.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,480
- Reaction score
- 3,371
- Country
2005 Hyundai Getz. I had a 2007 Santa Fe diesel, TFL shows that as being compliant.
Sponsored Links
