4 x 4s hit by Richmond Council with higher parking charges

Rubyru_3

How many times does this arguement rear its head.

I have a range rover and its not status ,we do go off road (work purposes not pleasure although dh would like to).We bought it because we wanted it.It suits our needs .We have 3 kids so the space side of it is handy especially when we go away.(It stops them arguing about being squashed!!)

I dont see how anybody has the right to judge people on there choice of car.

I am yet to run anyone over.
I have never had an accident in it.
Why dsome people have a problem with women driving them is beyond me.

iwanttosave_2

Rubyru wrote:

Why dsome people have a problem with women driving them is beyond me.

Because they are bloody useless, most can't do a 3-point turn in a fiesta, let alone a freelander. :rotfl:

But if you use the car for what it is intended for, then why are you biting? The argument people are proposing, doesn't apply to you.

Rubyru_3

iwanttosave wrote:

Because they are bloody useless, most can't do a 3-point turn in a fiesta, let alone a freelander. :rotfl:

But if you use the car for what it is intended for, then why are you biting? The argument people are proposing, doesn't apply to you.

We probably only use the car off road 1 week. What I am trying to get across is that it has got nothing to do with anyone else what other people choose to drive.

P.s I can do a three point turn no problem in a fiesta, rangerover, luton van and road sweeper.

BernadetteN

I do hope that Richmond council's proposals becomoe a reality. I dislike SUVs 4*4s when they are not used for their original purpose. I also dislike people buying large MPVs to "protect" their one or two loved ones, with all those unused seat.

What business is it of mine? It is every car driver's responsibility to protect their fellow car users and pedestrians as well as themselves. I see cars our car as a lethal weapon and would really prefer not to have one at all. However, husband likes to have a car and it does make my journey to work quicker (20 minutes instead of 2 hours by public transport and then by foot). So when we came to deciding on what car we bought, we had to balance price with safety and environmental impact. We chose a VW Touran diesel (not best for environment) because it does 60 mpg so cuts down on fossil fuel consumption, because it is a compact car for our family of six and we still get plenty of space and manage to fit our suitcases in the unused seat space, and also because it has the best adult occupant (5 *) and pedestrian (3 *) ratings of any MPV. I would not even consider a car with less than 3 * pedestrian rating.

I also agree with taxing according to usage - from a selfish point of view we would benefit as a familiy as we do less than 10000 miles per year, of which around 250 miles per year is made up of journeys of less than 10 miles, the other 9975 is made up mainly of 10 mile commutes to work and 700 mile round trips to the grandparents.

zorber

Is this not discrimination in a democratic society. If you wish to purchase and drive a 4x4 then surely it should be up to you and not the goverment to try and stop this by high taxes.
After all this whole debate about trying to make the environment greener by taxing big 4x4 is just a smoke screen, they use the arguement as a cover knowing it will not have an effect on the environment but will rake in lots more taxes. Same arguement for speed cameras only there to raise money.

I dont own a 4x4 but wish i could, i am a caravaner and i quite often get stuck on wet fields were a 4x4 often comes to my rescue. 4x4s are excellant tow vehicals due to their weight and power!!

We live in a supposive free state so its freedom of choice!!!

livinginhope

iwanttosave wrote:

I love it when people decide that we don't like something because we are too poor to own one. :rotfl:

What????,I am POOR,my huge 4x4 cost £2495 to buy 2 years ago,it does 35mpg,runs on bio diesel at 77p/L,insurance is £187/year fully comp.
So believe me you don't have to be rich to own one.We NEED ours for work,but unless you knew us you wouldn't know that would you,but then again I suppose you are going to say that this argument doesn't involve my 4x4 as it's OLD?
Live and let live,I will drive what I please,where I please and when I please.

iwanttosave_2

zorber wrote:

I dont own a 4x4 but wish i could, i am a caravaner and i quite often get stuck on wet fields were a 4x4 often comes to my rescue. 4x4s are excellant tow vehicals due to their weight and power!!

You don't need a big 4x4 to pull caravan You get a car with a decent amount of torque, weight means nothing.

Don't get me started on caravans :rotfl:


Actually, I love them, MIL lives in one, although she thinks caravans ar for commoners and calls hers a bungalow. :rotfl:

chilli_dog

Lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with 4x4 drivers, its just another tax from this government.

When you have George W Bush who thinks that Kyoto is a type of ice cream and the USA and China kicking out more dangerous emissions what will taxing some mother do because she drives a 4X4?

I drive a 4X4, its not a new £25,000 its an older and a lot cheaper one. I drive it because it pulls my caravan easily something my old car couldnt do.

We own a caravan because it gives us access to cheap and regular holidays. We dont like going abroad in the current climate so we enjoy England. If Bush and Blair stopped invading countries and sticking there nose in around the world then maybe i'd be driving a Astra holidaying in Egypt.

My 4X4 was mot'd last month and the tester said the emissions were fantastic, really low, why? because its gets serviced regularly and looked after.

I work and i pay a hell of a lot of tax. Let me chose what i do with my wages after Gordons finished with them!!!

iwanttosave_2

livinginhope wrote:

What????,I am POOR,my huge 4x4 cost £2495 to buy 2 years ago,it does 35mpg,runs on bio diesel at 77p/L,insurance is £187/year fully comp.
So believe me you don't have to be rich to own one.We NEED ours for work,but unless you knew us you wouldn't know that would you,but then again I suppose you are going to say that this argument doesn't involve my 4x4 as it's OLD?
Live and let live,I will drive what I please,where I please and when I please.

No not because its old, but because its needed. If its is actually needed then its fullfilling its use, or do you not get that?

And I never said that you had to be rich to own one, it was gordan britas who implied that, christ, when you can get an izuzu for £200 it's hardly screaming out to the elite is it. :rotfl:

livinginhope

iwanttosave wrote:

No not because its old, but because its needed. If its is actually needed then its fullfilling its use, or do you not get that?

And I never said that you had to be rich to own one, it was gordan britas who implied that, christ, when you can get an izuzu for £200 it's hardly screaming out to the elite is it. :rotfl:

How do you know and what right does anyone have,to decide who is allowed a 4x4 based on their needs? one person's reasons for owning one is going to be different to anothers,I agree with a 4x4 tugging a caravan,they can get out of all sorts of situations with 4x4.Just because someone lives in Richmond doesn't mean they don't NEED a 4x4,as I said on the other thread about this,if you saw DH coming home from work in ours you would think we don't need one,the fact that he gives it a thorough clean before he can park it on the drive means anyone would think it never goes off road when in fact it does most days.Just because I live in a remote area doesn't mean I have to stay there,I am FREE to travel and if that means the city then why not? or do I have to hire a car to visit the city?
No-one has a right to decide who drives what,and yes I think it does come down to jelousy,I know I would LOVE a brand new top of the range Mercedes 4x4,but it aint gonna happen,apart from the money I would be frightened to get it dirty :rolleyes: