London ULEZ

Johno100

AdrianC wrote: »

The OP's Range Rover met the applicable standards 8 years ago, when it was new. It may be one of the last Euro 4 emission standard vehicles (2005 standard), or it may be one of the first Euro 5a standard (2009 standard). The standards have been tightened twice (5b, 2011 standard; 6, 2014 standard) From next year, the ULEZ will require diesels to be Euro 6 - the oldest compatible cars will be 5 years old.

All correct, but why should the OP be penalised and limited in where he/she can drive on the public highway because of the perfectly legal vehicle he/she chose to buy before all this nonsense came in?

AdrianC wrote: »

Why is the only option to scrap it? The ULEZ only affects vehicles used in the central London Congestion Charge zone. That's a very, very small number of cars - and there are plenty of options for going around it - the trunk routes forming its borders are outside the scope, for a start.

So he/she sells it on and puts another car on the road as well, that's not very eco is it.

AdrianC wrote: »

The OP is driving £15-20k of 3.6 or 4.4 litre v8, 275 or 310bhp, 2.75 ton, 2m wide, 5m long, 1.9m tall 4wd regularly through the very heart of one of the most polluted cities in the UK. He's paying over £500 in VED per year because of the emissions.

...instead of taking public transport.

You or I have no idea why they have that particular vehicle or whether public transport would be suitable or practical for the OP's needs. Sounds more like eco snobbery.

AdrianC

Johno100 wrote: »

All correct, but why should the OP be penalised and limited in where he/she can drive on the public highway because of the perfectly legal vehicle he/she chose to buy before all this nonsense came in?

He bought it five years ago. The first consultations on "this nonsense" started two years ago. The first emission-restrictions in London started ten years ago.

You or I have no idea why they have that particular vehicle or whether public transport would be suitable or practical for the OP's needs.

Yes, we do. He's already told us. He fancied a nicer vehicle to remind him of his rural background, so chose to upgrade from a Mondeo, and he carries a toolbox sometimes - and, yes, uses PT other times.

reeac

I was a passenger in a taxi recently travelling from Chelsea to East Finchley. The driver made a cryptic comment about "school run time" as we approached Hampstead and lol and behold platoons of Range Rovers appeared from side streets each, I suspect, carrying one child. Reminded me of synchronised swimming.

unholyangel

I believe part of the issue with reselling the car is that lots of other areas are bringing in LEZs also.

What I don't get is why they discriminate purely based on what vehicle you have rather than how much emissions you're actually releasing in that area. Someone doing 10k miles in a brand new car will contribute far more emissions than I will in mine doing 2k. Yet if my car doesn't meet modern standards, I'd be penalised, not them.

Although you have to wonder - if their aim is clean energy - why they've decided against clean renewable energy and instead went with environment polluting sources. And also why those places and other businesses that pollute haven't been levied with any charges.

Typical government policy though - out of touch with reality and ineffective.

Car_54

unholyangel wrote: »

Although you have to wonder - if their aim is clean energy - why they've decided against clean renewable energy and instead went with environment polluting sources. And also why those places and other businesses that pollute haven't been levied with any charges.

The aim is clean air, not clean energy. As for other places and businesses, they've been subject to the Clean Air Acts since 1956.

unholyangel

Car_54 wrote: »

The aim is clean air, not clean energy. As for other places and businesses, they've been subject to the Clean Air Acts since 1956.

So why hasn't it been updated in 25 years (at least last I looked at it it hadnt been updated)? Why are they still being held to the same standard? Why aren't they being levied with a charge for the pollution they still spew. One I know of, there is a huge increase in respiratory problems amongst residents and has been since at least the 80's if not before. What has the local government done since then? Invited more companies the same to contribute more pollution - and are still doing so despite being one of the areas where a new LEZ will need to be made.

All I'm saying is that if they're after cleaner air then they should be going after the biggest polluters in terms of pollution actually contributed and it shouldn't be a case of "its okay to pollute as long as you're a business or pay us £x per day in hush money".

jimjames

mikeyranson wrote: »

London is such a grind, i needed to have comfort during jams, sighting from the drivers seat, pot holes, speed humps and protect myself from cyclists. .

So you need comfort yet would drive a tractor? Hardly sounds like the most comfortable drive

Robisere

This kind of Thread makes me happy to have been brought up in one village and now living since 2000 in another, even more rural. Where there are lots of tractors and other massive agricultural machinery.

This is only ruined at holiday times, when the fleets of caravans, mobile homes and coaches come through the village. Many tow cars are 4x4 diesels, hammering through the village well above the limit.

mikeyranson

jimjames wrote: »

So you need comfort yet would drive a tractor? Hardly sounds like the most comfortable drive

You be surprised how comfortable a tractor is to drive. Has everything from an air/sprung seat to aircon, full media system, automatic box as well as manual, reclining seat, full 360 vision and plenty of diesel soot.

mikeyranson

I'm having a rant hat what i want to do is being made illegal. I have a need for the car that i have to transport lots of tools, materials and equipment but at the same time, the comfort as dealing with london traffic. I do use public transport as much as i can but not always practicable. What alot of people dont understand from a drivers point of view is how worse the streets of london have been made by the placement of cycle lanes. Taking traffic lanes out from two or even three lanes down to one lane has significantly increased pollution by standing traffic. There is a massive amount of cyclists who still ignore the cycle lanes and still ride on the roads causing traffic chaos and also putting their own safety at risk.
I have three years grace before i need to replace my car. I had intentions of keeping my range for another four years as it is a damn good car and fault free. But now being forced to replace it earlier than i intended to but will replace it for another 4x4. No need to go 4 ltr or 5 ltr, as i have no need for a big engine. another 3 ltr will be sufficient and LR do produce a 2 ltr sport so i will look into that even, as long as it has power, i'll be happy.
The government, TFL and that loser mayor Khan we have ended up with (must have been voting corruption there somewhere) have no clue on the reality of the world we live in. To cut down on pollution, you need to synchronise lights to make traffic flow, widen junctions not make them smaller, so less cars can get through a junction and make sequences longer so more traffic can flow through them. Hauliers will refuse to enter london due to the excessive charges and soon the shelves will be empty.