ULEZ

Well I hope the taxis are cheaper there than they are here. It costs over $150 for a one way trip to the city for us. Even Uber is $100 plus.

Hetty I live 4 miles from the station and the taxi journey one way costs £15.00. I know, I did it 2 years ago and it will not have gone down since.

I estimate replacing my car by taxis would cost upwards of £100 a week, plus unduly restricting how I currently lead my life.

Oreo

MaizieD

It's a bl**dy sad world when you can't trust a taxi driver...

Like the one who murdered several women? Or the one who pretended not to know the way to the local hospital for a friend of my Mum recently going for her cancer treatment, and charged her an absolute fortune when they eventually did get there? Or maybe the surly one who grunts at you and leaves you to put your own case in.

Well, London police officers, and maybe elsewhere, haven't covered themselves in any glory recently. Sexual abuse, rapes, murders, downloading various images etc🙁

But, it wouldn't make me distrust all police officers.😗

The taxis I have used lately have been appalling in terms of driving too fast never mind anything else.
I think watching this debate is like watching Brexit all over again. It really wont be the result you want.

You don't even have to step outside your door to be at some risk - from somebody. That risk is incredibly tiny, though. You could stay at home and be bored to death, too.

Don't confuse perceived risk with actual, will you? The most dangerous thing people do, daily, is to get into their car and drive - statistically - yet they feel 'safe'.

Apparently, the infamous 'white van man' can offset ULEZ charges against tax:

www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/the-ulez-white-van-man-loophole-self-employed-motorists-who-drive-high-polluting-vehicles-inside-the-newly-expanded-zone-can-offset-charges-against-their-tax-bill/ar-AA1fU3Jf?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=4b667c7c067e406d98731b5b4d10290e&ei=19

I think for some of us the risk of people bent on control of others actions is a risk we dont want to play.

Hetty58 no idea about self-employed claiming ULEZ.

As a limited company the congestion charge along with any road tolls have to be accounted for just like any other vehicle expenditure.

Galaxy

I think for some of us the risk of people bent on control of others actions is a risk we dont want to play.

Would you like to explain what you mean by this?

Who are the people 'bent on control' in this context?

Well for example 'take a taxi' driving a car is an obsession' (paraphrasing a bit there), it's an approach that's just not going to work and shows a misunderstanding of peoples lives and incomes.

There are shift workers where one shift will straddle two consecutive days, one such woman raised this point on QT a while back, her partner, not a high earner, employed on such a basis would be liable to pay the charge twice! There seems to be such a lack of understanding and glib responses to those who just won't be able to afford the necessities of day to day life.

TerriBull

There are shift workers where one shift will straddle two consecutive days, one such woman raised this point on QT a while back, her partner, not a high earner, employed on such a basis would be liable to pay the charge twice! There seems to be such a lack of understanding and glib responses to those who just won't be able to afford the necessities of day to day life.

It is easy to pontificate on how others lead their lives.

It is not easy to walk in their shoes.

This charge will hit the lower earners who need their vehicles to get to and from work, shift workers, home careers etc.

Saying get a taxi is crass.

I find some of the self congratulatory comments on here unpleasant. People make their own choices about how they want to live their lives according to the resources available to them wherever they live. Some people for example don’t wish to drive and prefer to use public transport or bikes, others are unable to use bikes due to their health limitations, or indeed even walk far for the same reason. Some areas are not served well by public transport and people need to drive, and some people don’t want to use taxis for a variety of reasons.
Whether we like it or not ULEZ hits the poor, those who work nearby and need to drive to work, it hits self employed workmen with their white vans, and it hits parents taking their children to school if the school is too far away to walk. We know from various studies done by universities that ULEZ will not improve air quality very much. We also know that ULEZ and other similar schemes are fully signed up to by both main political parties and therefore wherever you put your cross on your ballot sheet won’t change anything. The only exception to this is possibly the London mayor election.
As for the 82 year old man, I’m sorry I mentioned him, because judging by the total lack of empathy shown by many posters, I find it difficult to believe that some of those same posters are frequently on Gransnet crying out about ‘the poor.’ How ironic!

My young neighbour has got Ulez sorted- yesterday he removed the number plates but he cannot do that too often or the police will be knocking on his door.

Good post maddyone ULEZ seems to have put some posters empathy gene into hibernation

We are right on the edge of South West Herts and within a few minutes we can be in the ULEZ zone. Our main car is a nearly 7yr old diesel mercedes and it just scrapes through being complaint! OH's classic car, which he rarely uses, is not compliant. However next year it will be 40yrs old so will be tax free, MOT free and also ULEZ compliant, unless the rules change again.

I had no idea that classic cars didn't need an MOT! So as long as it's over 40 years old you can drive a car in a dangerous condition on our roads, free of tax or ULEZ compliance? Not for one second suggesting your OH's car is dangerous LittlebrookLyn, but others might well be. There is zero logic to this status.

Classic cars don’t need a mot but it’s always sensible to have one done, which we do. Our car is safe and regularly serviced. Assume most others take a pride and proper care of theirs too.

With you Rosie51. Motorists are such an easy target. Read yesterday that businesses will be able to claim back the LEZ charge via business expenses so it's the private individual who will be hit the most. Wonder why there is no mention of a complete ban on gas boilers. I know they will cease to be installed in new properties but replacements will still be allowed. Don't boilers emit pollution?

Sar53

My youngest daughter lives on the very edge of the London Borough of Bromley. Their two vehicles are compliant but my eldest daughter has a 2014 plate Peugeot 5008, 7 seater, which isn't compliant and it will cost her to visit her sister. She needs a 7 seater as she has 3 growing girls and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the car.
I do accept that big cities need to reduce C02 emissions but the very edges of most London boroughs are countryside with a lot less pollution.

I can understand why your daughter doesn’t want to change her car, but surely a 7 seater is not necessary for a family with three children. I am one of three and had three children of my own. In both instances we were able to manage in five seater car’s even when we/they were growing rapidly.

Very well put Maddyone

Surely it’s a problem that is going to ‘blow itself out’ with time. Not many people keep really old cars as they become unreliable.

A money making exercise, for sure.

There will still be pollution in the air. How will it be stopped because money is changing hands.

Get real people.

Having had to get hold of a GP at 2am for a wheezing asthmatic child. I have sympathy with ULEZ. However it needs to be managed better, particularly where those on lower incomes and small businesses are concerned

It's not going to make much money, so they saying its just money making is wrong. Any money it does make will be used for public transport its not money making for the sake of it.

Nobody needs a car in London. It’s self indulgent. Pay up or do the right thing and get onto public transport.