London SE1 community website

Ken's tax on older or second hand cars

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2
Current: 2 of 2
Wednesday 15 November 2006 3.53pm
But if you lived inside the CCZ, then your tube fares would be lower, too, so I reckon it would still be cheaper to go by tube.

But Davies has already said he lives outside the CCZ.
Anonymous User
Wednesday 15 November 2006 3.57pm
I believe that TLMJJ's is still right even given a saving of, say, 1700 by living inside the C charge zone, once all other costs are cconsidered.

Also - an annual bus pass is nearer 600 so even cheaper!
Wednesday 15 November 2006 5.09pm
BUT - if you need a car for occasional use weekends, holidays etc this charge is aimed at family motorists. My car sits immobile monday to friday week in week out. I drive to my parents at the weekend, take them out, I take my sons out at weekends also for those uses I need a larger car. ON TOP of the season ticket costs for loacl travel using my Oyster spy card.

As a matter of interest the least environmentally friendly car is Toyota Pious - the whole life impact is 6 times greater than the Ford Focus. damage building, disposal of batteries, weight of car - high fuel consumption etc etc.

I feel Ken's policy would have more credibility if it was an Environment Tax not a Congestion Tax and if the proceeds were spent on reducing bus n tube fares rather than on self promotion ads - Mayor of London Working for You
Wednesday 15 November 2006 5.43pm
BUT - if you are using your car at the weekend then the rise in the C charge won't affect you anyway...
Wednesday 15 November 2006 9.10pm
If, as Dee Dee says, it only applies to car registered after March 2006, what's the problem? And of course it's cheaper to travel by public transport than even in an old banger.
Wednesday 15 November 2006 9.29pm
Good leaders make unpopular but necessary decisions and stick by them. The sound of squealing on here shows Ken's probably got it about right. My third vote for him is assured.
Thursday 16 November 2006 9.50am
Couldn't agree more GjF. There's a lot of Ken-bashing on this forum - which is fair enough, because that's democracy - but less understanding of what he is trying to do. Some times it reads like the Daily Mail on here. I dread to think what London's streets would be like without the congestion charge and Ken's efforts to improve the transport system. Nobody's perfect (I still hate the bendy buses, and I'm not sure he's right about tall buildings), but the Tories would not even have attempted to fix a problem that their car-obsessed, anti-public-transport policies created in the first place.
Friday 17 November 2006 8.36pm
Only posted twice on this forum, and on both occasions I'm voting with kmitchell. Ken is flawed, but he has a vision for a sustainable, thriving and functioning city which I can buy into. If Davies really knows no-one who voted for him, he maybe ought to get out and meet a few more Londoners - because a lot of us did, and probably will again.
Sunday 19 November 2006 6.11pm
Looks like the Bigvan Company ( will be charging all you lot an extra 25 per move.
a tax on moving house, and having furniture delivered,
whatever next?
Tuesday 21 November 2006 11.46am
Birdie - annual bus pass last year was 340, year before 340, year before that 380.

perhaps Davies has a large amount of tools and equipment that he has to have with him for his job. I'm sure that if i was a plumber/electrician or some such similar tradesman i'd find it rather difficult taking all i need to do my job with me on public transport.
Pages:  Previous1 2
Current: 2 of 2

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions