Safe Speed Forums

Actually, they already have. Anything post a certain date of manufacture (IIRC, R or S reg) has to undergo an ESVA that requires a model report that includes the emissions data. This is all so that they can tax the h*ll out of you

Of course, my 2.8 Pajero is older than that, and so my VED has gone up to £180. In contrast, the VED on my 2001 Citroen Dispatch (pre-emissions banding) is also £180 even though it returns nearly twice the Pajero mpg with a careful right foot.

IMO, VED is one big con. I know several people who would love to keep several vehicles so that they could use the most appropriate for the trip in hand. Unfortunately, they're stuffed by insurance and VED, which means they can only afford to keep one - and thus they burn a lot more fuel than they strictly need to. IOW, VED and the insurance cartel are in many ways responsible for the emission of more CO2 than is necessary. If both were transferred to fuel duty (as per Paul's suggestion) that problem would be avoided.

_________________
Will

I totally agree, I have a large V8 which I use during the summer months, I also have a small engined car which I have SORNED 18 mths or so ago because of VED tax rises......thereby saving the VED, the Insurance and the MOT costs. I'm forced to use a "compamy Logo'd" vehicle for work so MY car stays in the garage every day....both of them, week in, week out. I have to look for excuses to run my V8 to keep it in working order!

Now, come summer I take my V8 and travel Europe covering around 2.5 to 3k miles ..... this winter, it has covered 30 miles........and it wouldn't have done this winter mileage if my small car was available for use on the supermarket run.... and during the summer this could have been knocked off too!

These cars are only insured for me........I can obviously only drive one at any time, yet I am penalised for their ownership by VED and inflated INSURANCE premiums in the UK.


Isn't it time that these "pratts" got real?.......

If you would allow us Gordon.......We would chose the right vehicle for the job!........ Your "taxation regime" and the "Insurance Industry" here in the UK is preventing us....from sensible "choice"!

GORDON: Are you are really green.............or do you really just want the money?.....

As I said earlier, Brown is returning to his socialist roots with this "envy tax" on people with "big" cars. It's nothing to do with the environment, just spite. The simplist way to go (as we all know) is to tax fuel which reflects usage. Brown's crypto-communism taxes possession - this being, of course, theft.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Interesting article. I'd heard this thing about a Hummer being "greener" than a "Pious" but never really believed it!

That said, even now, I still wonder about those figures. Now I could be wrong here, but how many Hummers are actually likely to be around in 300,000 miles???? I mean, they're not really to tool of choice for reps and taxi drivers are they?

OK, I'm no big fan of the "Pious" and I completely accept that the batteries are a big environmental problem - both in production and disposal at the end of their lives, but I do think it's coming in for a bit more stick than is justified. After all, one has to start somewhere and you can be sure as hell that Toyota will have gained a huge amount of experience in hybrid driveline technology from it. I'd be amazed if they weren't already working on something that addressed the Pious' main shortcomings!

He's getting greener by the minute

http://sjhoward.co.uk/archive/2007/03/2 ... m-his-nose

_________________
Wake me up when the revolution starts
STOP the Toll Tax http://www.traveltax.org.uk