Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ulez-fee-the-new-london-pollution-charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9 172

I'm unskilled at political prophesising so I won't try to predict
what will happen.

I've said many times that motorists are the sleeping tigers of
London politics and that if they ever wake up and recognise
what is going on, their unified reaction could sweep away
several dishonest, hypocritical politicians. As I've posted before,
if this Mayor or any of his predecessors had genuinely been
concerned about air pollution in London, they would have
stopped making our roads unfit for road vehicles.

In my neighbourhood, Whipps Cross Roundabout, which has
always done a splendid job of processing three large, constant
streams of traffic, is now being replaced by a complex system with . . . .
yes, oh so predictably . . . . numerous traffic lights. The increase in
traffic queues and air pollution will be horrendous.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 11:42:57 +0000, Robin9
wrote:


I'm unskilled at political prophesising so I won't try to predict
what will happen.

I've said many times that motorists are the sleeping tigers of
London politics and that if they ever wake up and recognise
what is going on, their unified reaction could sweep away
several dishonest, hypocritical politicians. As I've posted before,
if this Mayor or any of his predecessors had genuinely been
concerned about air pollution in London, they would have
stopped making our roads unfit for road vehicles.

In my neighbourhood, Whipps Cross Roundabout, which has
always done a splendid job of processing three large, constant
streams of traffic, is now being replaced by a complex system with . . .
.
yes, oh so predictably . . . . numerous traffic lights. The increase in
traffic queues and air pollution will be horrendous.

Yes, I think Sadiq may be taking aim at a rather large, belligerent
target. It seems that far more motorists and vans will be affected by
this new charge than had been suggested. This looming charge (really,
more of a new tax) will be a pretty good way of getting Shaun Bailey
elected in 2020.

Sadiq only has to look at Paris today to get a feeling for what
happens when you alienate a lot of the population. Brits aren't as
violent, but they could still make like difficult for him.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Recliner remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.
--
Roland Perry

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Recliner remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax. He'll
certainly be voted out if he doesn't back down in some way (either delay
it, have more exceptions, or focus only on much older vericles).

Even though I almost never drive inside the North and South Circulars these
days, I realise that the dealer that services my car is just inside it.
That would mean 2-3 days @ £12.50 a day would be incurred any time it needs
work, including the annual service.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Recliner remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

Of course, if I hadn't bought that Euro-4, someone else would have done,
so it's not changed the overall pollution potential at all!

He'll certainly be voted out if he doesn't back down in some way
(either delay it, have more exceptions, or focus only on much older
vericles).

Backdating to Euro-5 is the obvious parachute.

Even though I almost never drive inside the North and South Circulars these
days, I realise that the dealer that services my car is just inside it.
That would mean 2-3 days @ £12.50 a day would be incurred any time it needs
work, including the annual service.

Back in the day they were talking about a "congestion charge" for
Cambridge; a bit like the London one, but on a much smaller scale.

One of the reasons I opposed it was that as someone living [then] just
[maybe a few 100yds] outside the cordon, it would have been a stealth
tax on me ever going into the City.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to
pay.
--
Roland Perry

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:15:08 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early which - if they're replaced - will released a whole
lot more pollution into the atmosphere. That and a huge rise in the number of
cloned and foreign plates being used inside the zone which coupled with the
total lack of traffic police these days will just lead to people taking the
****.

All this because of his dogmatic attachment to his no rise in fares policy
and the screwup that is crossrail.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to
pay.

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an in/out
line you can avoid. Even if you start your journey in the zone and never leave
it you'll still apparently be caught by ANPR (presumably yet to be installed)
and charged/fined.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at 09:56:31 on Mon, 10 Dec
2018, remarked:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:15:08 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early

I really don't think anyone is going to scrap a 2013 car because of this
tax.

which - if they're replaced - will released a whole
lot more pollution into the atmosphere. That and a huge rise in the number of
cloned and foreign plates being used inside the zone which coupled with the
total lack of traffic police these days will just lead to people taking the
****.

All this because of his dogmatic attachment to his no rise in fares policy
and the screwup that is crossrail.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to
pay.

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an in/out
line you can avoid.

And I was describing the Cambridge congestion charge, not London's

Even if you start your journey in the zone and never leave it you'll
still apparently be caught by ANPR (presumably yet to be installed) and
charged/fined.

I was mainly addressing Recliner's comment that his car dealership was
just inside the [London] cordon. Which suggests he's starting just
outside.

While there does have to be some line drawn on the map, it's
disproportionate that someone whose errands takes them as little as
perhaps a mile inside on an irregular basis should be charged as much as
someone driving for hours inside.

Accidental experiments, in Cambridge again, appear to show that people
will go to considerable lengths to avoid paying quite small fees for
parking (or petrol at 1p/litre cheaper).

Getting back to other modes of transport for a moment, what if one of
the radial railways suffers a glitch, and people at a station just
inside the cordon where the trains have ground to a halt, start phoning
home (maybe one station beyond the cordon) for a lift, then this stealth
tax on the rescue mission is going to grate severely.
--
Roland Perry

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:11:04 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 09:56:31 on Mon, 10 Dec
2018, remarked:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:15:08 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early

I really don't think anyone is going to scrap a 2013 car because of this
tax.

which - if they're replaced - will released a whole
lot more pollution into the atmosphere. That and a huge rise in the number of
cloned and foreign plates being used inside the zone which coupled with the
total lack of traffic police these days will just lead to people taking the
****.

All this because of his dogmatic attachment to his no rise in fares policy
and the screwup that is crossrail.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to
pay.

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an in/out
line you can avoid.

And I was describing the Cambridge congestion charge, not London's

Even if you start your journey in the zone and never leave it you'll
still apparently be caught by ANPR (presumably yet to be installed) and
charged/fined.

I was mainly addressing Recliner's comment that his car dealership was
just inside the [London] cordon. Which suggests he's starting just
outside.

The garage is perhaps a quarter of a mile inside the zone. I live a
few miles away, outside the zone. You don't get Jaguar main dealers in
every borough.


While there does have to be some line drawn on the map, it's
disproportionate that someone whose errands takes them as little as
perhaps a mile inside on an irregular basis should be charged as much as
someone driving for hours inside.

Accidental experiments, in Cambridge again, appear to show that people
will go to considerable lengths to avoid paying quite small fees for
parking (or petrol at 1p/litre cheaper).

Getting back to other modes of transport for a moment, what if one of
the radial railways suffers a glitch, and people at a station just
inside the cordon where the trains have ground to a halt, start phoning
home (maybe one station beyond the cordon) for a lift, then this stealth
tax on the rescue mission is going to grate severely.

Yes, there will be many such examples.

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:11:04 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:56:31 on Mon, 10 Dec
2018, remarked:
All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early

I really don't think anyone is going to scrap a 2013 car because of this
tax.

Not 2013 cars, but 10 year old cars maybe. Regardless they'd probably end up
selling them and this has a trickle down effect where somewhere along the line
a car gets scrapped that otherwise wouldn't have been.

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an
in/out
line you can avoid.

And I was describing the Cambridge congestion charge, not London's

I know, just saying.

Even if you start your journey in the zone and never leave it you'll
still apparently be caught by ANPR (presumably yet to be installed) and
charged/fined.

I was mainly addressing Recliner's comment that his car dealership was
just inside the [London] cordon. Which suggests he's starting just
outside.

Well as he likes to remind us, money is no object for him so coughing up
12.50 for the occasional service shouldn't be too onorous.

While there does have to be some line drawn on the map, it's
disproportionate that someone whose errands takes them as little as
perhaps a mile inside on an irregular basis should be charged as much as
someone driving for hours inside.

Agreed, but then the ultimate goal is to clear traffic off the roads and so
the more unfair it is the closer that goal will be met.

Accidental experiments, in Cambridge again, appear to show that people
will go to considerable lengths to avoid paying quite small fees for
parking (or petrol at 1p/litre cheaper).

Certainly.

Getting back to other modes of transport for a moment, what if one of
the radial railways suffers a glitch, and people at a station just
inside the cordon where the trains have ground to a halt, start phoning
home (maybe one station beyond the cordon) for a lift, then this stealth
tax on the rescue mission is going to grate severely.

Don't forget the stealth tax on the East London Line. The whole line is
zone 2 or 6 apart from shoreditch high street. Cynically put in zone 1 so
they can charge the maximum oyster fare and prevent west and north londoners
using the overground as a way to avoid paying for zone 1 on the tube to get to
the City or Canary wharf. Yes you could go to straford but that would be a hell
of a roundabout route.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at 14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Recliner remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

Neither would have any measurable impact on the volume of 'traffic', and
are simply a stealth tax on distress purchases.
--
Roland Perry

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to extract
fines from those who don't. Usually the only time I go over that bridge is
when I'm heading to Dover to go to France and once on the continent paying
that sodding charge is the last thing on my mind. It was a damn site easier
just to hand over a couple of quid and forget all about it.

Neither would have any measurable impact on the volume of 'traffic', and
are simply a stealth tax on distress purchases.

From when I've been through, removing the barriers has made little difference
to the southbound and almost no difference to the northbound which still backs
back to the A20 on a w/e.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:15:08 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec
2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to
buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more
vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than
the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early which - if they're replaced - will released a
whole
lot more pollution into the atmosphere. That and a huge rise in the number
of
cloned and foreign plates being used inside the zone which coupled with
the
total lack of traffic police these days will just lead to people taking
the
****.

All this because of his dogmatic attachment to his no rise in fares policy
and the screwup that is crossrail.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to
pay.

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an
in/out
line you can avoid.

CCZ doesn't have an in/out line that can be avoided

They (is it still Crapitia?) have (in theory) roving vehicles recording reg
numbers of cars that start and finish their journey wholly within the zone
and of cars parked up in bays that don't qualify for exemption (I think
that's all on street bays except residents bays, BICBW).

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:56:31 on Mon, 10 Dec
2018, remarked:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:15:08 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec
2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...don-pollution-
charge-may-be-mayor-sadiq-khans-poll-tax-moment-kf8h2z5hm?shareToken=50
fd0db33f7e78ede69332bfd5bf9172

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to
buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to
scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more
vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than
the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early

I really don't think anyone is going to scrap a 2013 car because of this
tax.

which - if they're replaced - will released a whole
lot more pollution into the atmosphere. That and a huge rise in the number
of
cloned and foreign plates being used inside the zone which coupled with
the
total lack of traffic police these days will just lead to people taking
the
****.

All this because of his dogmatic attachment to his no rise in fares policy
and the screwup that is crossrail.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to
pay.

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an
in/out
line you can avoid.

And I was describing the Cambridge congestion charge, not London's

Even if you start your journey in the zone and never leave it you'll still
apparently be caught by ANPR (presumably yet to be installed) and
charged/fined.

I was mainly addressing Recliner's comment that his car dealership was
just inside the [London] cordon. Which suggests he's starting just
outside.

While there does have to be some line drawn on the map, it's
disproportionate that someone whose errands takes them as little as
perhaps a mile inside on an irregular basis should be charged as much as
someone driving for hours inside.

Accidental experiments, in Cambridge again, appear to show that people
will go to considerable lengths to avoid paying quite small fees for
parking (or petrol at 1p/litre cheaper).

I drove out of my way for petrol that I thought was going to be 1ppl cheaper

and when I got there it was 6ppl Kerr-Ching.

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real bottleneck.

One can only hope that now sense has finally prevailed on the Severn crossing
and the charge is to be removed, the same can be done at Dartford.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:11:58 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
Accidental experiments, in Cambridge again, appear to show that people
will go to considerable lengths to avoid paying quite small fees for
parking (or petrol at 1p/litre cheaper).

I drove out of my way for petrol that I thought was going to be 1ppl cheaper

Assuming you put in 10 gallons of fuel (which is more than most people) that
would have saved you a mere 45p. Its highly likely you would have used more
than than in fuel going more than a few miles out of your way in traffic. So
whats the point?

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will simply
have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into the
correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the junction joining
only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service areas on
the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

One can only hope that now sense has finally prevailed on the Severn
crossing
and the charge is to be removed, the same can be done at Dartford.

the politics are different

plus the small matter of having to fund the third crossing

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 16:10:59 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will simply
have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

There'd be a bit more queuing , but I doubt it would make a huge amount of
difference. The regular users would still sail through the non toll sections.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into the
correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the junction joining
only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

Northbound is a cluster**** anyway. Putting a few toll booths back won't
make much difference.

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service areas on
the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

Thats certainly an idea.

One can only hope that now sense has finally prevailed on the Severn
crossing
and the charge is to be removed, the same can be done at Dartford.

the politics are different

Not really. Both are simply a case of "bridge needs to be paid for" turning
into "we've got a nice little earner here".

plus the small matter of having to fund the third crossing

Widening and straightening the west bore of the Blackwall tunnel and replacing
some of the traffics lights on the A12 with under/overpasses would probably
cost a fraction of the price and significantly improve the northbound flow
across the river.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail
fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into the
correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the junction
joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service areas
on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a mobile
phone or those who want to pay in cash?

One can only hope that now sense has finally prevailed on the Severn
crossing
and the charge is to be removed, the same can be done at Dartford.

the politics are different

plus the small matter of having to fund the third crossing

tim





--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at
17:12:41 on Fri, 14 Dec 2018, Robin remarked:

[Dartford crossing charge]

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service
areas on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone

Do they give the phone number on the roadside signage?
--
Roland Perry

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 14/12/2018 16:43, wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 16:10:59 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

There'd be a bit more queuing , but I doubt it would make a huge amount of
difference. The regular users would still sail through the non toll sections.

You'd need barriers on the non-paying lanes to stop people who need to
pay trying to get through the "free" lanes. Then you will get people
reversing into the oncoming queue to get to a pay booth.




--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:33:09
on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and
only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free trips
at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail
fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will simply
have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into the
correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the junction
joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service areas
on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a mobile
phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they didn't
have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even there - I forget)

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

wrote in message
...



plus the small matter of having to fund the third crossing

Widening and straightening the west bore of the Blackwall tunnel and
replacing
some of the traffics lights on the A12 with under/overpasses would
probably
cost a fraction of the price and significantly improve the northbound flow
across the river.

but nowhere near as much as a new 2+2 tunnel

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at 17:49:25 on Fri, 14
Dec 2018, John Williamson remarked:
There'd be a bit more queuing , but I doubt it would make a huge
amount of
difference. The regular users would still sail through the non toll sections.

You'd need barriers on the non-paying lanes to stop people who need to
pay trying to get through the "free" lanes. Then you will get people
reversing into the oncoming queue to get to a pay booth.

Nonsense! You ANPR everyone - like they do now - and people who stop to
pay get ticked off the list just like people who have accounts, or pay
later online. Leaving just the people who haven't paid to be sent
penalty notices.
--
Roland Perry

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 14/12/2018 17:55, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and
only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming
everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time
rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the
traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues
anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into
the correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the
junction joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service
areas on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a
mobile phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they
didn't have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even there
- I forget)


How do you take it down while driving?


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 17:55, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number
of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and
only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming
everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail
fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order
to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the
traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues
anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into the
correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the junction
joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service areas
on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a mobile
phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they didn't
have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even there - I
forget)


How do you take it down while driving?

you don't - your passenger does - if you have one of course

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 14/12/2018 17:55, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and
only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming
everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time
rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the
traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues
anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into
the correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the
junction joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service
areas on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a
mobile phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they
didn't have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even there
- I forget)


I would be very surprised if anyone who was ignorant of the toll in
advance but asked politely for the number at any of the services on the
M25/M2/M20 - or at the ferry/Eurotunnel terminal - would fail to get it,
if only from a passing member of the public.

And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/sydney-mo...ges/index.html


https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/sydney-mo...ges/index.html


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 14/12/2018 21:05, Robin wrote:
On 14/12/2018 17:55, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small
number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month),
and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming
everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time
rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in
order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the
traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through
or heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues
anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the
real bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into
the correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the
junction joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service
areas on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a
mobile phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they
didn't have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even
there - I forget)


I would be very surprised if anyone who was ignorant of the toll in
advance but asked politely for the number at any of the services on the
M25/M2/M20 - or at the ferry/Eurotunnel terminal - would fail to get it,
if only from a passing member of the public.

And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/sydney-mo...ges/index.html


https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/sydney-mo...ges/index.html



Denver has something similar IIRC.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

cashless tolling, Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In article ,
Robin wrote:
And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars. ...

Cashless tolling is increasingly popular. The 407 motorway near
Toronto has always been cashless. If you travel frequently you can
rent a transponder, otherwise they photograph your license tag and
send you a bill. If you travel semi-frequently as I do, you can
register on their web site and they'll e-mail you the bill, slightly
cheaper than a paper bill. If you're in an HGV you must have a
transponder, presumably with a large fine issued otherwise.

Some of the toll barriers on the New York Thruway, some bridges in New
York City, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike have been turned into
gantries, more or less the same deal, and the Thruway is planning to
go totally cashless in a year or so, saying that the vast majority of
users already use transponders. The roads are all well signed with
LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL and the like so you have little excuse to be
surprised.

It does help that most of the toll agencies in the northeastern US
belong to the E-ZPass consortium so if you have a transponder from any
of them, it works on all of them. The 407's transponders are
technically compatible but for some reason they don't belong. (It's
not because they're in Canada, since the Niagara River bridges are
all E-ZPass.)

--
Regards,
John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at
21:05:26 on Fri, 14 Dec 2018, Robin remarked:

the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

The postal service is only for pre-pay, and needs 10days notice. I'd
characterise it more as applying for a season ticket by post (even if
it's only a one-trip season being paid for).

I wonder if it's mainly for institutional vehicles, where arrangements
for reimbursing drivers small amounts of money are either non-existent
or very clumsy, and they don't want to have a system for drivers to
report each trip as it happens, and the finance department pay the
charge from central funds rapidly enough.
--
Roland Perry

Absolutely! I could not agree more.

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 17:55, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No
remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number
of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and
only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming
everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time rail
fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in order
to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the
traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through or
heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues
anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the real
bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into the
correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the junction
joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service areas
on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a mobile
phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they didn't
have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even there - I
forget)


I would be very surprised if anyone who was ignorant of the toll in
advance but asked politely for the number at any of the services on the
M25/M2/M20 - or at the ferry/Eurotunnel terminal - would fail to get it,
if only from a passing member of the public.

And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's electronic
or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

Presumably rental companies have a way to provide this

It's not like I'm going to roll up in my UK registered car, is it?

Unlike in Portugal, where I have a map that shows some motorways as having
traditional "pay at kiosk" tolls and others as toll-free

Unfortunately, the latter have now been changed to e-tolls. And where does
a foreigner get the e-toll card, you might ask? At the border as they enter
the country on one of these roads.

If you enter the country some other way and happen across one of these
e-till roads later, you are ****ed

It's nonsense like this that is just asking for the EU to impose common
standards, but they can't be bothered

tim

cashless tolling, Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"John Levine" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Robin wrote:
And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars. ...

Cashless tolling is increasingly popular. The 407 motorway near
Toronto has always been cashless. If you travel frequently you can
rent a transponder, otherwise they photograph your license tag and
send you a bill. If you travel semi-frequently as I do, you can
register on their web site and they'll e-mail you the bill, slightly
cheaper than a paper bill. If you're in an HGV you must have a
transponder, presumably with a large fine issued otherwise.

Some of the toll barriers on the New York Thruway, some bridges in New
York City, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike have been turned into
gantries, more or less the same deal, and the Thruway is planning to
go totally cashless in a year or so, saying that the vast majority of
users already use transponders. The roads are all well signed with
LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL and the like so you have little excuse to be
surprised.

It does help that most of the toll agencies in the northeastern US
belong to the E-ZPass consortium so if you have a transponder from any
of them, it works on all of them. The 407's transponders are
technically compatible but for some reason they don't belong. (It's
not because they're in Canada, since the Niagara River bridges are
all E-ZPass.)

and how do users of rental cars pay these tolls?

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 21:05:26
on Fri, 14 Dec 2018, Robin remarked:

the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's electronic
or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

The postal service is only for pre-pay, and needs 10days notice. I'd
characterise it more as applying for a season ticket by post (even if it's
only a one-trip season being paid for).

I wonder if it's mainly for institutional vehicles, where arrangements for
reimbursing drivers small amounts of money are either non-existent or very
clumsy, and they don't want to have a system for drivers to report each
trip as it happens, and the finance department pay the charge from central
funds rapidly enough.

surely if the institutional vehicle belongs to the institution, they can set
up an online account that does all this

tim

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

In message , at 10:50:11 on Sat, 15 Dec
2018, tim... remarked:

the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

The postal service is only for pre-pay, and needs 10days notice. I'd
characterise it more as applying for a season ticket by post (even if
it's only a one-trip season being paid for).

I wonder if it's mainly for institutional vehicles, where
arrangements for reimbursing drivers small amounts of money are
either non-existent or very clumsy, and they don't want to have a
system for drivers to report each trip as it happens, and the finance
department pay the charge from central funds rapidly enough.

surely if the institutional vehicle belongs to the institution, they
can set up an online account that does all this

Many institutions are leery of online accounts, many of which appear to
them to be akin to blank cheques. I'd be surprised if a school (even one
in Essex or Kent) was happy to set up an online account for even the
Head's car, should he have some official business the other side of the
river. How would that account not end up also paying for his leisure
trips, for example? The postal payment, however, could be ringfenced for
just one trip.
--
Roland Perry

cashless tolling, Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 15/12/2018 10:48, tim... wrote:


"John Levine" wrote in message
...
In article ,
RobinÂ* wrote:
And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars. ...

Cashless tolling is increasingly popular.Â* The 407 motorway near
Toronto has always been cashless.Â* If you travel frequently you can
rent a transponder, otherwise they photograph your license tag and
send you a bill.Â* If you travel semi-frequently as I do, you can
register on their web site and they'll e-mail you the bill, slightly
cheaper than a paper bill.Â* If you're in an HGV you must have a
transponder, presumably with a large fine issued otherwise.

Some of the toll barriers on the New York Thruway, some bridges in New
York City, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike have been turned into
gantries, more or less the same deal, and the Thruway is planning to
go totally cashless in a year or so, saying that the vast majority of
users already use transponders.Â* The roads are all well signed with
LAST EXIT BEFORE TOLL and the like so you have little excuse to be
surprised.

It does help that most of the toll agencies in the northeastern US
belong to the E-ZPass consortium so if you have a transponder from any
of them, it works on all of them.Â* The 407's transponders are
technically compatible but for some reason they don't belong.Â* (It's
not because they're in Canada, since the Niagara River bridges are
all E-ZPass.)

and how do users of rental cars pay these tolls?


IMLE in Sydney a few years ago very easily, by following the very clear
instructions on the website. And car hire companies warn customers
about the tolls.

PS

I forgot to mention that the Dart Charge can also be paid in any of the
many shops which are part of the Payzone network. So those not able or
willing to pay online, by phone or by post in advance can make a small
detour to one of the many either side of the crossing, or near the
Dover ferry terminal, or...

And if they don't know that then can ask for help.

And if they can't do that then I begin to doubt if they are safe to drive.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 15/12/2018 10:45, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 17:55, tim... wrote:


"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/2018 16:10, tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:13:53 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:57:35 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
14:33:09 on
Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Billy No Mates Billy No

remarked:

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small
number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month),
and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that
people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but
rare
visitors weren't impeded.

The authorities seem wedded to the idea of nickel-and-diming
everyone
whenever they can. It'd also be great to get half a dozen free
trips at
the Dartford Crossing a year, or maybe half a dozen peak-time
rail fares
at the off-peak rate.

The new dart charge was designed to make it a PITA to pay in
order to
extract
fines from those who don't.

ITYF that's Cock-up, not Conspiracy

I'm not sure it is in this case. A significant proportion of the
traffic
will be ad hoc trips of cars trucks and vans just passing through
or heading to
the ports who they know will probably forget (regular users will
simply have an
account). There was no reason not to retain a few pay by cash or
contactless
kiosks and its not as it its made a huge difference to the queues
anyway
especially on the northbound through the tunnel which is is the
real bottleneck.

I think you underestimate the chaos which "a few kiosks" would cause.

Northbound there's enough zig-zagging of traffic trying to get into
the correct lane of a tunnel already, plus the problem of the
junction joining only a few 100 yards before the tunnel

I agree that something along the lines of pay stations at service
areas on the M2/20/25 would be a useful feature.

You can pay by phone so would this be for those who don't have a
mobile phone or those who want to pay in cash?

It'll be for those who don't know the number to phone because they
didn't have time to take it down as they drove past (if it's even
there - I forget)


I would be very surprised if anyone who was ignorant of the toll in
advance but asked politely for the number at any of the services on
the M25/M2/M20 - or at the ferry/Eurotunnel terminal - would fail to
get it, if only from a passing member of the public.

And the phone and postal services for the Dart Charge seem quaint and
indulgent compared with the toll roads in eg Sydney where it's
electronic or else - including for visitors in hire cars.

Presumably rental companies have a way to provide this

Well I suppose they'll provide the website if you don't know it already.
It's the one I gave you a link for where it states "you can set up an
electronic pass before you leave home or up to three days after you
travel on a toll road".

It's not like I'm going to roll up in my UK registered car, is it?

How do I know? I've seen UK registered cars in use in Aus.

Unlike in Portugal, where I have a map that shows some motorways as
having traditional "pay at kiosk" tolls and others as toll-free

Unfortunately, the latter have now been changed to e-tolls.Â* And where
does a foreigner get the e-toll card, you might ask?Â* At the border as
they enter the country on one of these roads.

If you enter the country some other way and happen across one of these
e-till roads later, you are ****ed

It's nonsense like this that is just asking for the EU to impose common
standards, but they can't be bothered





--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

On 15/12/2018 10:34, Robin9 wrote:
;168262 Wrote:

Widening and straightening the west bore of the Blackwall tunnel and
replacing
some of the traffics lights on the A12 with under/overpasses would
probably
cost a fraction of the price and significantly improve the northbound
flow
across the river.

Absolutely! I could not agree more.




And what would you do during the works? The Blackwall tunnel approaches
can be a nightmare anytime of the day and night at the moment, having
that permanently for months or years is really not a brilliant idea.

cashless tolling, Sadiq's looming poll tax moment
 

"tim..." wrote:

and how do users of rental cars pay these tolls?

Toll company bills rental car company, rental car company charges card used for
rental. At least in my experience. The layers of administrative surcharges make
that an expensive option. Unfortunately, I think the transponder rules prohibit
moving from car to car.