Campaign to Exempt Motorhomes from LEZ Charges (2 Viewers)

[Barchetta47]

It doesn't matter how long they last or how many miles it does, if all those miles are in a city with lez then it may pollute more than a higher mileage vehicle that only goes into the lez once in its life and if it never goes out of the lez then again it pollutes more in the area.

I would suggest what you’re describing isn’t typical MH usage!! Typical MH usage, I would have thought, would entail only briefly visiting LEZ either transiting or going to/from home.

In the round we are only talking about a small number of vehicles c.220k, say c.50% pre Euro6 c.100k. I accept the clean air debate but nothing is absolute and how much pollution will 100k vehicles with only very limited entry into urban LEZ really have?

I have to declare my cards here as I have a 2004 MH which does everything I need! I’m also not on the low usage end of typical doing 64k miles in 6.5 years…..

 

[Pausim]

If you exempt motorhomes from LEZ charges people would buy and use old ones for deliveries, trade and commuting.

Most people don’t like our big white boxes (motorhomes and caravans). They don’t like them parked up at the seaside or beauty spots. They don’t like them parked where they can see them from their homes. They don’t like following them on the open road or queuing behind them on busy roads. They only tolerate white delivery vans because they love Amazon. I suspect the wider public would happily see motorhomes even more restricted. It is a leisure activity not an essential service or something that people rely on for trade. Sometimes it is better to keep your head down because the backlash might be unpleasant.

I love motorhoming but I don’t think the general public or our politicians would have any sympathy for LEZ exemptions.

 

[PaulyP]

Have a word with your lungs about diesel particulates.

London is many times over the WHO maximum standards.
Hence schools have to close playgrounds and sporting fixtures have to be moved every time you get a period without a steady breeze.

If they were serious about pollution then the mot on vehicles would be much more stringent on emissions, thereby taking loads of vehicles off the road and seriously lowering pollution, but they would lose so much money in charges that they would rather keep them on the road.

 

[ivorantony]

But arent+3,5T motorhomes exempt in the khan's ulez?

Unfortunately the exact opposite Gus, my 3900 kg MH will cost me £200 a day to use in ULEZ,

I am 200 yds inside the expanded Zone but with 32 cameras within 2 miles of me it’s impossible to move without paying,
So I’m forced to park outside the zone and pay for that privilege,

 

[Brains]

If they were serious about pollution then the mot on vehicles would be much more stringent on emissions, thereby taking loads of vehicles off the road and seriously lowering pollution, but they would lose so much money in charges that they would rather keep them on the road.

There is a lot more to this.

The entire global Diesel emissions Scandal was first proven at the Blackwall Tunnel Approach as the traffic rolls past slowly. Every vehicle is recorded on ANPR and they were able to cross reference the supposed diesel emissions with the actual diesel emissions and that is where they realised they did not match.

One of the proposed solutions was to simply ban all of the most heavily polluting vehicles immediately.
However the outcry would have been massive, as large sections of the transport industry would have shut down, shops with no food, no local deliveries, and hundreds of thousands of cars unable to be moved and would have to be shipped out of the area and sold.

That would be the sort of bad planning that brings down governments.

Hence they went with the progressive roll out, which achieves a similar solution, but takes a decade (and raises a bit of money on the side)

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

I'm fine with motorhomes being kept out of city centres, pollution is pollution. A good motorhome friendly park and ride would be good though. Maybe double down and make it an aire?

 

[Brains]

I'm fine with motorhomes being kept out of city centres, pollution is pollution. A good motorhome friendly park and ride would be good though. Maybe double down and make it an aire?

Not In My Back Yard ! etc. etc etc.

 

[nicholsong]

Unfortunately the exact opposite Gus, my 3900 kg MH will cost me £200 a day to use in ULEZ,

I am 200 yds inside the expanded Zone but with 32 cameras within 2 miles of me it’s impossible to move without paying,
So I’m forced to park outside the zone and pay for that privilege,

Before the expanded ULEZ you would have been inside the LEZ and the charge is for that, isn't it?

 

[nicholsong]

Emission zone charges could be exempt for residents for say two/three round trips in/out of the zone.

This would cause a minimum of emissions but at the same time not allowing regular pollution by commercial users.

Too simple?

 

[Guigsy]

Emission zone charges could be exempt for residents for say two/three round trips in/out of the zone.

This would cause a minimum of emissions but at the same time not allowing regular pollution by commercial users.

Too simple?

Per day? Most car trips are local. If you exempt residents, in the larger schemes like London, it pretty much invalidates the point of the scheme.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[nicholsong]

Per day? Most car trips are local. If you exempt residents, in the larger schemes like London, it pretty much invalidates the point of the scheme.

Sorry, I should have written for non-exempt MHs and per year.

 

[ivorantony]

Before the expanded ULEZ you would have been inside the LEZ and the charge is for that, isn't it?

No it is not, I have a certificates from transport for London stating my motorhome complied
With the LEZ when I originally brought it in 2010,
When the ULEZ was expanded out to the M25 then my vehicle Euro 4 suddenly became non compliant,
It’s a money making racket to exploit the motorist, and when the revenue falls as it will then it’s an easy step to pay per mile for every one as the cameras are already installed,

 

[Guigsy]

No it is not, I have a certificates from transport for London stating my motorhome complied
With the LEZ when I originally brought it in 2010,
When the ULEZ was expanded out to the M25 then my vehicle Euro 4 suddenly became non compliant,
It’s a money making racket to exploit the motorist, and when the revenue falls as it will then it’s an easy step to pay per mile for every one as the cameras are already installed,

14 years ago?

 

[ivorantony]

It’s good that you can count, this Motorhome is perfect for us and I have no intention of selling her,
As I have said it met the requirements for the LEZ when brought and Khan has moved the goalposts to screw the motorists
If you think it’s going to stop there then you are delusional, pay per mile is just around the corner for every one, there are over 2000 ULEZ camera's in Greater London now and the cost for that will be shouldered by the motorist,
Below is a map of my area, red marks are local cameras to me, many more further in, yellow line is the edge of the ULEZ zone,
If you think this whole infrastructure can be maintained with a dwindling clientele as people are forced to replace there vehicles, then think again,

 

[Guigsy]

It’s good that you can count, this Motorhome is perfect for us and I have no intention of selling her,
As I have said it met the requirements for the LEZ when brought and Khan has moved the goalposts to screw the motorists
If you think it’s going to stop there then you are delusional, pay per mile is just around the corner for every one, there are over 2000 ULEZ camera's in Greater London now and the cost for that will be shouldered by the motorist,
Below is a map of my area, red marks are local cameras to me, many more further in, yellow line is the edge of the ULEZ zone,
If you think this whole infrastructure can be maintained with a dwindling clientele as people are forced to replace there vehicles, then think again,View attachment 914223

I think you'll find that it's time that's moved the goalposts. Something that was good enough 14 years ago doesn't meet current standards. It's hardly a shock. Things don't last forever. If they wanted to make money, there are far better ways. The scheme is expected to cost more to run than it generates in only a couple more years. They'd have made far more by enforcing bus lanes.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[enark]

Totally agree, longer usage vehicles have a lower carbon footprint than the use, throw away culture….


But think the next government may see things differently, a leisure vehicle tax may be on the cards…

Or maybe we need a Nicola for PM campaign? All N&Bs free….

 

[Pausim]

LEZ restrictions have nothing to do with carbon emissions or carbon footprint. They are about NOX and particulates that directly affect peoples health.

 

[RM_Marine]

I'm happy as mine is exempt

 

[gus-lopez]

Have a word with your lungs about diesel particulates.

London is many times over the WHO maximum standards.

Even when I am standing there bring told the air is seriously polluted it has never had any effect on me?

However a tax that reduces by a double figure percentage year on year.
Give it a decade and the amount they will be collecting will be tiny in comparison as the vast majority of vehicles will be compliant.

Cc zone usage is now far in excess of what it was when the congestion charge was introduced.
Itdoes not affect Rich people, company vehicles or self employed. All are tax deductable

Why should a MH be exempt? The idea is to make the air cleaner in the area, the last thing you want is a dirty big white box polluting?

Which proves that being able to pay means it has nothing to do with cleaning up emissions.
A straight "ban everything", like in most other countries should be the normal.

It's doesn't pollute if you pay.. BUSBY

Exactly.

They only tolerate white delivery vans because they love Amazon.

Which are grey?

I suspect the wider public would happily see motorhomes even more restricted.

I'd like to see the greater public restricted,reduced holidays and 7day working as the norm.

However the outcry would have been massive, as large sections of the transport industry would have shut down, shops with no food, no local deliveries, and hundreds of thousands of cars unable to be moved

And that is exactly how it should be ,and is,in most European countries. That ensures that if the populace want it they will agree ,if not they can rise up and remove the politicians.

A good motorhome friendly park and ride would be good though. Maybe double down and make it an aire?

One I use in Somerset actually closes and locks the gates on Sundays as parking in town is free

Most car trips are local.

Therein lies the problem. We were always taught anything under 8 miles ,walk/bus/bikes including school.

14 years ago?

I've been registered with the scum,tfl ,for 12 years

They'd have made far more by enforcing bus lanes.

True but to those who can offset against tax or have plenty of money they are private roads

LEZ restrictions have nothing to do with carbon emissions or carbon footprint. They are about NOX and particulates that directly affect peoples health.

It is called 'natural selection'.

 

[busby]

Looking at a couple of Overlanders driving into BOMBAY I just wonder why the rest of the world is bothering trying to cut emmisions...The air quality in Bombay looks like London in the early 50s..BUSBY

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

Looking at a couple of Overlanders driving into BOMBAY I just wonder why the rest of the world is bothering trying to cut emmisions...The air quality in Bombay looks like London in the early 50s..BUSBY

The air quality in places like Mumbai and Dheli is reducing life expectancy by 10 years.

 

[cyberyacht]

Anything built after 2014/Euro 6 is currently exempt

Mine's 2016 and Euro 5

 

[Pausim]

It is called 'natural selection'.

Are you suggesting that ‘natural selection’ covers ignoring poisonous gases produced by vehicles? On that basis we should also have ignored the polluted water supplies that killed thousands of Londoners through typhoid. There is nothing natural about excessive NOx in city air.

 

[Guigsy]

Mine's 2016 and Euro 5

Yeah. With cars, there was a hard cutoff date. But with commercial vehicles, there was some wiggle room to allow conversions by intermediaries take place. I think they had to be Euro6 by 2017? But it's a bit fuzzy for the few years before.

 

[jongood]

Looking at a couple of Overlanders driving into BOMBAY I just wonder why the rest of the world is bothering trying to cut emmisions...The air quality in Bombay looks like London in the early 50s..BUSBY

Lots of India and Asia are the same but it doesn’t matter because thats where we've outsourced a lot of our manufacturing emissions to and we all know that air doesn’t move

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

Lots of India and Asia are the same but it doesn’t matter because thats where we've outsourced a lot of our manufacturing emissions to and we all know that air doesn’t move

Air pollution isn't that mobile. Most of it stays pretty local.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Which is a totally different issue to air quality.

 

[Brains]

Mine's 2016 and Euro 5

Must be one of the last Euro 5's registered.
As most vehicles registered after 1st September 2014 were Euro 6's

Unlike Euro 1 to 4 which had fixed dates where the last one had to be registered before the 1st of January of a particular year, Euro 6 started on the 1st of September, and it looks like engines that were already built by that date were still permitted to be fitted into new vehicles.
I'm surprised by a 2016 Euro 5 though, it must have been sitting at the Dealers for quite a while!

( I wonder if it was the manufacturers caught in the Diesel Emissions scandal trying to do as fast a fix as they possibly could, and were fitting Euro 6 to any chassis that could take it and only giving Euro 5 engines from the old stockpile to those who had not yet altered their chassis. I'm sure someone in the trade can tell us the real story)

 

[cyberyacht]

It's an A Class so I'm not sure how many chassis Carthago buy in for stock at a time. The Marquis Majestic that it replaced (Peugeot chassis) was the same year and also Euro 5.

 

[PaulyP]

There is a lot more to this.

The entire global Diesel emissions Scandal was first proven at the Blackwall Tunnel Approach as the traffic rolls past slowly. Every vehicle is recorded on ANPR and they were able to cross reference the supposed diesel emissions with the actual diesel emissions and that is where they realised they did not match.

One of the proposed solutions was to simply ban all of the most heavily polluting vehicles immediately.
However the outcry would have been massive, as large sections of the transport industry would have shut down, shops with no food, no local deliveries, and hundreds of thousands of cars unable to be moved and would have to be shipped out of the area and sold.

That would be the sort of bad planning that brings down governments.

Hence they went with the progressive roll out, which achieves a similar solution, but takes a decade (and raises a bit of money on the side)

I’m guessing that making money was the first consideration when they realised how lucrative it could be

 

[VXman]

I thought I read in the C&MHC rag the number of motorhomes on the UK roads is more like 220,000 ?? But I stand to be corrected.

Also I can't believe there are 340,000 extra 40 year old vehicles on our roads every year.
That would mean 3.4 million vehicles between 40 and 50 years old.
That number sounds way too high!
Where are they all ?

In people's garages locked away and tucked up until there is a car rally/show somewhere on a nice sunny day in the summer. They won't be used on a daily basis - hence the exemption from tax and other restrictions.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}