£7million revamp for Tesco roundabout (From Southend Standard)

Devilish82 wrote:
£7 million to save 2 minutes. Isn't that a little it extreme? If they are going to acquire £5 - 7 million to spend on roads, surely they could put it to better use by filling in pot hole, fixing pavements and making what is already in place better for people to use.

smiffy1980 wrote:
I for one think its a good idea. Something needs to happen at Strawberry fields during peak hours and for when the summer months come.

Where are all these houses going to go tho ?? Eastwoodbury lane up for sale perhaps ??

wagger wrote:
I hope Tesco will be made to pay for all of this. If not close it down ! We have far to many Tesco stores in the area, and it was recently voted the worst supermarket in the country ! They seem to build wherever they like without councils objecting.

Realworld wrote:
Update the junction SBC if you feel the need to waste £7m however PLEASE do NOT install traffic lights!!!! These have been an unmitigated disater at Cuckoo Corner and Victoria Plaza where the traffic either gets clogged up all day or avoids the area completely. Roundabouts are designed to allow the free flow of traffic and are usually installed to REPLACE lights!! Only the brain dead at SBC would think this was a good idea. No doubt SBC will "consult" residents..... and then ignore them and **** up the whole area further.....

BASILBRUSH wrote:

Realworld wrote:
Update the junction SBC if you feel the need to waste £7m however PLEASE do NOT install traffic lights!!!! These have been an unmitigated disater at Cuckoo Corner and Victoria Plaza where the traffic either gets clogged up all day or avoids the area completely. Roundabouts are designed to allow the free flow of traffic and are usually installed to REPLACE lights!! Only the brain dead at SBC would think this was a good idea. No doubt SBC will "consult" residents..... and then ignore them and **** up the whole area further.....

I'm sorry, but while I might agree with you about traffic flow at Victoria Circus.
Cuckoo Corner is fantastic now!
I use it everyday and various times of the day. It is a vast, vast improvement now compared to the old roundabout.

The junctions need improving (including The Bell), let the qualified designers get on with it.

Those talking of allocating funds to pot holes, relieving other cut backs in the Council funding.. I understand it doesnt work like that. The money would come from Central government and granted for specific infrastructure projects.

andyh wrote:
(also) Has any thought gone into just how they can plan the phasing of the lights for such a junction? Looks a very tricky problem.

jayman wrote:
by my calculations that's now 32 million that Southend council have spent or going to spend on junctions and street furniture...

I will just say that again.

thirty two million pounds...£32,000,00

0.00...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

perini wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

So cyclists don't use the roads then? Oh...sorry, I forgot - you are SO responsible you cycle on the pavements!

Sir Peter Pantsless the 3rd wrote:
Joe Wildman Clarke, you are soo wrong, are you a certin (ex)tory closed cabinet member in disguise?

Cuckoo Corner causes conjestion where previously there was no conjestion!

I drive through this at all times of the day and many times a day.
It is a complete failure, you still get tailbacks all the way to Jones Memorial during rush-hour, you now have tailbacks back to Priory Park traffic lights due to the removal of the slip road, and at times it is a complete gridlock standstill from Cuckoo Corner all the way to Tesco's, you certainly didnt get that before!

Dont even get me started of the biggest c0ck-up of them all Victoria Gateway!.

BASILBRUSH wrote:

Realworld wrote:
Update the junction SBC if you feel the need to waste £7m however PLEASE do NOT install traffic lights!!!! These have been an unmitigated disater at Cuckoo Corner and Victoria Plaza where the traffic either gets clogged up all day or avoids the area completely. Roundabouts are designed to allow the free flow of traffic and are usually installed to REPLACE lights!! Only the brain dead at SBC would think this was a good idea. No doubt SBC will "consult" residents..... and then ignore them and **** up the whole area further.....

I'm sorry, but while I might agree with you about traffic flow at Victoria Circus.
Cuckoo Corner is fantastic now!
I use it everyday and various times of the day. It is a vast, vast improvement now compared to the old roundabout.

The junctions need improving (including The Bell), let the qualified designers get on with it.

Those talking of allocating funds to pot holes, relieving other cut backs in the Council funding.. I understand it doesnt work like that. The money would come from Central government and granted for specific infrastructure projects.

Sir Peter Pantsless the 3rd wrote:
Joe Wildman Clarke, you are soo wrong, are you a certin (ex)tory closed cabinet member in disguise?

Cuckoo Corner causes conjestion where previously there was no conjestion!

I drive through this at all times of the day and many times a day.
It is a complete failure, you still get tailbacks all the way to Jones Memorial during rush-hour, you now have tailbacks back to Priory Park traffic lights due to the removal of the slip road, and at times it is a complete gridlock standstill from Cuckoo Corner all the way to Tesco's, you certainly didnt get that before!

Dont even get me started of the biggest c0ck-up of them all Victoria Gateway!.

j-w wrote:
Better Southend are asking for ideas on improving the junctions between the Bell and Kent Elms so email them with your ideas. I can't think of any way of improving the shambles that is the Tescos roundabout apart from adding traffic lights to what is already there(with sensors and maybe on a part time basis) and allowing traffic to turn right out of the old Prince avenue so traffic from the south of the A127 can access Nestuda Way, Tescos and A127 towards Southend etc.

emcee wrote:
Firstly, I agree that £7 million is a ridiculous amount to spend on a scheme like this. Where do SBC get their quotes from and do they come in brown envelopes exchanged on a park bench? Secondly, I also think that Tesco should be made to stump up at least 20% of any costs. Thirdly, if there are bottle necks, they should all be done at the same time. I am sure most motorists would rather suffer six months of bad misery than several years of just misery. Get it all out of the way in one go. Lastly, the council MUST impose large fines for every single day the contractor overruns any agreed time for completion. Having said all that, there always seems to be extreme amounts of money available for "traffic flow" schemes but never any to substantially improve the local public transport systems. A massive (and I mean MASSIVE) investment in local public transport would be money better spent.

Noteworthy wrote:
I'd like to know where the diagram at the top has come from - is it an official SBC planning diagram, or something knocked up for the paper?

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
its only a serious bottle neck when the RBS crew escape....other times its acceptable.

Danman565 wrote:
Add another exit out of Tesco for motorists to join the road somewhere other than the roundabout, and stick in a couple of flyovers on the roundabout. Job done... But £7,000,000 to lay some tarmac and wire in some traffic lights? whoever provides these estimates must be laughing their way to their bank (in the cayman islands).

jolllyboy wrote:
This is one of the most lethal roundabouts I have come across. Badly signed, badly white lined and was only built to favour Tesco. So Tesco should pay.Stobart should contribute too as it is used also for the airport and they were born in mind too when it was first built. the amount of traffic along the 127 is greater than it can cope with. We need anoth road.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name...

he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot.

Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side.

Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name...

he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot.

Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side.

Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name...

he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot.

Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side.

Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending?

I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living.

Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times?

THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX.

ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION.

I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name...

he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot.

Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side.

Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending?

I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living.

Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times?

THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX.

ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION.

I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

pendulum wrote:
"THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX.

I'm getting rather sick of hearing this. Yes, road tax was abolished, but the fee brought in to replace it has now, in this current day and age, also become known as "road tax". Even the Government website calls it Road Tax. Language evolves.

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name...

he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot.

Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side.

Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending?

I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living.

Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times?

THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX.

ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION.

I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c

yclists case
Vehicle Excise Duty.

Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

pendulum wrote:
"THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX.

I'm getting rather sick of hearing this. Yes, road tax was abolished, but the fee brought in to replace it has now, in this current day and age, also become known as "road tax". Even the Government website calls it Road Tax. Language evolves.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air.

If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it?

I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay.

But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I’ve just taxed my car a few days ago and the DVLA form states quite clearly that if I do not pay this TAX, I am not allowed to keep or use my car on the road. So it doesn’t really matter where the funding comes from to actually pay for and maintain the roads, I pay a tax in order to USE my car on the road.
It would be a completely impossible task to administer the scheme on cyclists, horses and any other road USER that is not registered with the DVLA, but it doesn’t stop it being a sound idea in theory. We all USE the road in one way or another, so why only the motorist who has to pay a TAX in order to do so?

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

hothead wrote:
7 million to move some mud and lay tarmac - ridiculous! Russ13 I think you meen thousands rather than hundreds of thousands who use the route every day.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I’ve just taxed my car a few days ago and the DVLA form states quite clearly that if I do not pay this TAX, I am not allowed to keep or use my car on the road. So it doesn’t really matter where the funding comes from to actually pay for and maintain the roads, I pay a tax in order to USE my car on the road.
It would be a completely impossible task to administer the scheme on cyclists, horses and any other road USER that is not registered with the DVLA, but it doesn’t stop it being a sound idea in theory. We all USE the road in one way or another, so why only the motorist who has to pay a TAX in order to do so?

Again. Because it is NOT a tax to USE ROADS. It is a tax to use a car that pollutes on roads.

You could buy a zero emission vehicle and pay ZERO VED.

If it was a tax to use roads ALL vehicles would have to pay - regardless of their emissions - when in reality millions of vehicles are completely exempt from VED because they don't pollute.

It's a very simple fact. Why can't your poor little brain cell grasp it?

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I’ve just taxed my car a few days ago and the DVLA form states quite clearly that if I do not pay this TAX, I am not allowed to keep or use my car on the road. So it doesn’t really matter where the funding comes from to actually pay for and maintain the roads, I pay a tax in order to USE my car on the road.
It would be a completely impossible task to administer the scheme on cyclists, horses and any other road USER that is not registered with the DVLA, but it doesn’t stop it being a sound idea in theory. We all USE the road in one way or another, so why only the motorist who has to pay a TAX in order to do so?

Again. Because it is NOT a tax to USE ROADS. It is a tax to use a car that pollutes on roads.

You could buy a zero emission vehicle and pay ZERO VED.

If it was a tax to use roads ALL vehicles would have to pay - regardless of their emissions - when in reality millions of vehicles are completely exempt from VED because they don't pollute.

It's a very simple fact. Why can't your poor little brain cell grasp it?

ORACUS wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I’ve just taxed my car a few days ago and the DVLA form states quite clearly that if I do not pay this TAX, I am not allowed to keep or use my car on the road. So it doesn’t really matter where the funding comes from to actually pay for and maintain the roads, I pay a tax in order to USE my car on the road.
It would be a completely impossible task to administer the scheme on cyclists, horses and any other road USER that is not registered with the DVLA, but it doesn’t stop it being a sound idea in theory. We all USE the road in one way or another, so why only the motorist who has to pay a TAX in order to do so?

Again. Because it is NOT a tax to USE ROADS. It is a tax to use a car that pollutes on roads.

You could buy a zero emission vehicle and pay ZERO VED.

If it was a tax to use roads ALL vehicles would have to pay - regardless of their emissions - when in reality millions of vehicles are completely exempt from VED because they don't pollute.

It's a very simple fact. Why can't your poor little brain cell grasp it?

Vehicle excise duty is a tax to use a vehicle that pollutes at the point of use.
It has nothing to do with polluting or producing little or no CO2.
If all vehicles were taxed based on the carbon footprint of the fuel they use cyclist would be paying more than everyone else.
Its time to get these planet killing cyclists of the road.

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it.

And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter!

Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere.

So how exactly did I answer my own question?

And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay.

So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it.

And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter!

Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere.

So how exactly did I answer my own question?

And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay.

So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it "

But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it.

And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter!

Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere.

So how exactly did I answer my own question?

And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay.

So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it "

But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it

But before you say it's therefore a car tax...

I can use my car on private land without it.

Russ13 wrote:

Devilish82 wrote:
£7 million to save 2 minutes. Isn't that a little it extreme? If they are going to acquire £5 - 7 million to spend on roads, surely they could put it to better use by filling in pot hole, fixing pavements and making what is already in place better for people to use.

Are you really that short-sighted.......

.. 2 minutes multiplied by the hundreds of thousands who use the routed everyday over the course of months/years.

Having said that, this will be a useless piece of work until they do something with the Bell and/or Kent Elms as they will become the new bottlenecks.

southendmike wrote:
Is there not the potential for a slip road to be constructed for Southend-bound traffic from the eastern end of the Tesco Car Park onto Prince Avenue? This should at least relieve some of the bottlenecks currently suffered by drivers exiting from Tesco/RBS. Just a thought!

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it

But before you say it's therefore a car tax...

I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it But before you say it's therefore a car tax... I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist) He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:
Don't tell the greeies but I have a Hilux 3 litre D-4D manual, got chunky tyres fitted, winch, land anchor, Roof Console with CB radio, air compressor, snorkel, four way camera (insurance reducer it films whenever the key is in front, rear left and right) there is also cabcam films the inside should it get nicked they will be on camera, it has live stream to a computer over the 3G soon to be 4G network. most of the mods I have done.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:
Don't tell the greeies but I have a Hilux 3 litre D-4D manual, got chunky tyres fitted, winch, land anchor, Roof Console with CB radio, air compressor, snorkel, four way camera (insurance reducer it films whenever the key is in front, rear left and right) there is also cabcam films the inside should it get nicked they will be on camera, it has live stream to a computer over the 3G soon to be 4G network. most of the mods I have done.

That was going so well until you mentioned the CB radio breaker breaker one nine.

Noteworthy wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it But before you say it's therefore a car tax... I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist) He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

I will add - quite ironically - IT IS NOT A POLLUTION TAX!

The government bands vehicles in different classes based on their emmissions to try and convince motorists to buy more economical cars. This is the only thing linking it to the environment.

The vehicle excise duty is a vehicle tax, that allows you to use a vehicle on the road. you don't pay it because your vehicle pollutes, you are rewarded with a discount because it doesn't.

Otherwise, all cars, on road or not, would have to pay it. After all, pollution at home or on the roads - it all ends up in the same place, it all does the same damage...

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it

But before you say it's therefore a car tax...

I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist)

He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it But before you say it's therefore a car tax... I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist) He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

I will add - quite ironically - IT IS NOT A POLLUTION TAX! The government bands vehicles in different classes based on their emmissions to try and convince motorists to buy more economical cars. This is the only thing linking it to the environment. The vehicle excise duty is a vehicle tax, that allows you to use a vehicle on the road. you don't pay it because your vehicle pollutes, you are rewarded with a discount because it doesn't. Otherwise, all cars, on road or not, would have to pay it. After all, pollution at home or on the roads - it all ends up in the same place, it all does the same damage...

If your vehicle pollutes you have to pay VED. If your vehicle does not pollute you don't have to pay VED. It's a pollution tax. Go on, tell us alcohol duty is a pub tax, or tobacco duty is a hospital tax.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it But before you say it's therefore a car tax... I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist) He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

I will add - quite ironically - IT IS NOT A POLLUTION TAX!

The government bands vehicles in different classes based on their emmissions to try and convince motorists to buy more economical cars. This is the only thing linking it to the environment.

The vehicle excise duty is a vehicle tax, that allows you to use a vehicle on the road. you don't pay it because your vehicle pollutes, you are rewarded with a discount because it doesn't.

Otherwise, all cars, on road or not, would have to pay it. After all, pollution at home or on the roads - it all ends up in the same place, it all does the same damage...

If your vehicle pollutes you have to pay VED. If your vehicle does not pollute you don't have to pay VED.

It's a pollution tax.

Go on, tell us alcohol duty is a pub tax, or tobacco duty is a hospital tax.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it But before you say it's therefore a car tax... I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist) He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

I will add - quite ironically - IT IS NOT A POLLUTION TAX!

The government bands vehicles in different classes based on their emmissions to try and convince motorists to buy more economical cars. This is the only thing linking it to the environment.

The vehicle excise duty is a vehicle tax, that allows you to use a vehicle on the road. you don't pay it because your vehicle pollutes, you are rewarded with a discount because it doesn't.

Otherwise, all cars, on road or not, would have to pay it. After all, pollution at home or on the roads - it all ends up in the same place, it all does the same damage...

If your vehicle pollutes you have to pay VED. If your vehicle does not pollute you don't have to pay VED.

It's a pollution tax.

Go on, tell us alcohol duty is a pub tax, or tobacco duty is a hospital tax.

Well that’s not quite the whole truth is it.

You don’t have to pay vehicle tax on following types of vehicle.

Vehicles used by a disabled person –That’s any vehicle including those in the top band for the rest of us. POLLUTANT.!

Disabled passenger vehicles
Vehicles (apart from ambulances) used by organisations providing transport for the disabled. – Usually mini bus type vehicle, often quite old as they are provided by charities. POLLUTANT!

Historic vehicles
You don’t have to pay vehicle tax on vehicles made before 1 January 1973 – That’s any vehicle used before 1st Jan 1973. How many of those would you say were clean? Probably the dirtiest group of all. POLLUTANT!

Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry
This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road.- Doesn’t matter what type of engine or how dirty it is. POLLUTANT!

So if it were a pollution tax, there’s a lot of money to be made here. But it’s not is it. It is a tax that I have to pay in order to be able to use and keep my car (that doesn’t fall in to one of the above categories) on a road. It is that simple. As a motorist I don’t like paying it but I have to, in order to use my car on the road.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:

whateverhappened wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Another £7million of our taxes set to be wasted on motorists.

Are you not a professional driver, or was that irony

Look at his name... he is one of the lycra "we own the road" lot. Saw one cycling in the middle of the Southend bound lane of Victoria Avenue this morning, it was not best pleased as cars were passing him either side. Cyclist should pay a tax as they use the road as well as cars, prehaps £50 per year, all money go's to a fund to pay for cycle safety schemes.

Are you really so dim that you think a username defines someone, or are you just pretending? I have stated many times on this forum I am a driver by profession. That is how I earn a living. Are you also so dim as to raise the tax issue again? Have I not explained this to you enough times? THERE. IS. NO. SUCH. THING. AS. ROAD. TAX. ROADS. ARE. PAID. FOR. THROUGH. GENERAL. TAXATION. I even wrote that slowly so your lonely little brain cell had time to read it.

Yeah, but on my DVLA documentation they ask me to pay TAX so I can use my car on the ROAD. Mmm, tax road!

ROAD TAX as it is more commonly - generally - usually - ordinarily - normally called is also know as... Vehicle Tax... Car Tax or in shoebury_pedantic__c yclists case Vehicle Excise Duty. Whatever we want to call it is a tax to drive on the road, which MUST be applied to cyclists as they use the road and pavements as well, so prehaps they should pay more to cover the cost of cyclepaths as well...

No, it is a tax to pollute, it is not a tax to use roads. If it was a tax to use roads then pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, the many thousands of zero/low emission vehicles, milk floats, police cars, ambulances, would have to pay it too. They don't. Educate your brain cell here: http://ipayroadtax.c om/no-such-thing-as- road-tax/who-pays-ro ad-tax/ Drivers do NOT 'pay for roads', SOCIETY as a whole pays for roads.

I'm sorry but it cannot be a tax to pollute. My car s currently declared SORN, off the road, sitting on my driveway. Yet I can still go out, turn the key and pump fumes and pollution into the air. If it's a tax to pollute, why am I not paying it? I'm sorry but I've had enough. VED is a VEHICLE ROAD USE TAX - certain vehicles are exempt because they are greener, and the government, trying to ensure people by more environmentally friendly cars, have banded them as such that the more pollution you produce, the more you pay. But the fact remains, no disc, no road use. Yes, it's called Vehicle Excise Duty officially, but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?

You ave answered your own question. Without VED you cannot go out and pollute public areas, but you can pollute on your own property. "but don't you think people can call it whatever the hell they want?" Not when they follow up that misnomer with thinking it infers a right to use roads over and above those who do not qualify to pay VED, and not when they think it means they 'pay for the roads'. They don't.

I cannot use the roads without it - ergo, I can use the roads with it. And yes, I can pollute my own property. Wow, amazing, you've just solved the question of global warming! If you only pollute where you are at an exact moment in time it doesn't matter! Seriously? Pollution is not about what you pump out at your property, it's what you pump out INTO THE ATMOSPHERE - no matter where you are. At home, in a traffic jam, my car will be pumping out the same fumes into the atmosphere. So how exactly did I answer my own question? And there you go, people can call it what they want so long as they don't mistake it for meaning other road users should pay. So as long as I don't say 'cyclists should pay it' I can call it road tax all day long.

"I cannot use the roads without it " But you CAN use the roads without it: you could cycle, or walk, or use an electric vehicle.

Ok I'll conceed that - I cannot use my car on the roads without it But before you say it's therefore a car tax... I can use my car on private land without it.

As I said previously, the tax permits you to use a car that pollutes on public roads. You are free to use a car to pollute on your own, or others, private property to your heart's content.

Whatever you want to call it if you do not pay you can not legally drive on the road, so whilst is not not offically called Road Tax it is what most people call it, its a name use by the public (apart from shoebury-cyclist) He moans about poluting cars but has said he drives for a living... Smacks of "Do as I say, Not as I do"

I will add - quite ironically - IT IS NOT A POLLUTION TAX!

The government bands vehicles in different classes based on their emmissions to try and convince motorists to buy more economical cars. This is the only thing linking it to the environment.

The vehicle excise duty is a vehicle tax, that allows you to use a vehicle on the road. you don't pay it because your vehicle pollutes, you are rewarded with a discount because it doesn't.

Otherwise, all cars, on road or not, would have to pay it. After all, pollution at home or on the roads - it all ends up in the same place, it all does the same damage...

If your vehicle pollutes you have to pay VED. If your vehicle does not pollute you don't have to pay VED.

It's a pollution tax.

Go on, tell us alcohol duty is a pub tax, or tobacco duty is a hospital tax.

Well that’s not quite the whole truth is it.

You don’t have to pay vehicle tax on following types of vehicle.

Vehicles used by a disabled person –That’s any vehicle including those in the top band for the rest of us. POLLUTANT.!

Disabled passenger vehicles
Vehicles (apart from ambulances) used by organisations providing transport for the disabled. – Usually mini bus type vehicle, often quite old as they are provided by charities. POLLUTANT!

Historic vehicles
You don’t have to pay vehicle tax on vehicles made before 1 January 1973 – That’s any vehicle used before 1st Jan 1973. How many of those would you say were clean? Probably the dirtiest group of all. POLLUTANT!

Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry
This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road.- Doesn’t matter what type of engine or how dirty it is. POLLUTANT!

So if it were a pollution tax, there’s a lot of money to be made here. But it’s not is it. It is a tax that I have to pay in order to be able to use and keep my car (that doesn’t fall in to one of the above categories) on a road. It is that simple. As a motorist I don’t like paying it but I have to, in order to use my car on the road.

No. You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road. If you have an electric car, you don't have to pay it. If you walk, you don't have to pay it. If you cycle you don't have to pay it.

stopmoaning1 wrote:
By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:
By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road"

So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax.

Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:
By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road"

So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax.

Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc.

That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places.

Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles.

Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax.


'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles.

So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places.

It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:
Don't tell the greeies but I have a Hilux 3 litre D-4D manual, got chunky tyres fitted, winch, land anchor, Roof Console with CB radio, air compressor, snorkel, four way camera (insurance reducer it films whenever the key is in front, rear left and right) there is also cabcam films the inside should it get nicked they will be on camera, it has live stream to a computer over the 3G soon to be 4G network. most of the mods I have done.

That was going so well until you mentioned the CB radio breaker breaker one nine.

Broadwaywatch wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:
Don't tell the greeies but I have a Hilux 3 litre D-4D manual, got chunky tyres fitted, winch, land anchor, Roof Console with CB radio, air compressor, snorkel, four way camera (insurance reducer it films whenever the key is in front, rear left and right) there is also cabcam films the inside should it get nicked they will be on camera, it has live stream to a computer over the 3G soon to be 4G network. most of the mods I have done.

That was going so well until you mentioned the CB radio breaker breaker one nine.

You write very much Max Impact did

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Broadwaywatch wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Joe Wildman-Clark wrote:
Don't tell the greeies but I have a Hilux 3 litre D-4D manual, got chunky tyres fitted, winch, land anchor, Roof Console with CB radio, air compressor, snorkel, four way camera (insurance reducer it films whenever the key is in front, rear left and right) there is also cabcam films the inside should it get nicked they will be on camera, it has live stream to a computer over the 3G soon to be 4G network. most of the mods I have done.

That was going so well until you mentioned the CB radio breaker breaker one nine.

You write very much Max Impact did

??

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

OK, please indulge us all and answer the following question with a simple A or B. No if’s, but’s what about’s and maybe’s, just a simple A or B

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

OK, please indulge us all and answer the following question with a simple A or B. No if’s, but’s what about’s and maybe’s, just a simple A or B

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Neither. We don't pay tax to use roads in the UK.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

OK, please indulge us all and answer the following question with a simple A or B. No if’s, but’s what about’s and maybe’s, just a simple A or B

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Neither. We don't pay tax to use roads in the UK.

No no no, READ THE QUESTION.

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

OK, please indulge us all and answer the following question with a simple A or B. No if’s, but’s what about’s and maybe’s, just a simple A or B

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Neither. We don't pay tax to use roads in the UK.

No no no, READ THE QUESTION.

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

OK, please indulge us all and answer the following question with a simple A or B. No if’s, but’s what about’s and maybe’s, just a simple A or B

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Neither. We don't pay tax to use roads in the UK.

No no no, READ THE QUESTION.

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

I did read the question. You asked:

"Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD."


And I answered that question with the correct answer which is:

Neither, because NO-ONE in the UK is TAXED to USE roads.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Noteworthy wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote: By the way, I didn’t add electric car because you already said that and that’s not in dispute

Shoebury Cyclist said "You have to pay it in order to be able to use a car that pollutes on the road" So it's a tax to use a car on the road then, hence, a vehicle tax. Pollution occurs at home or on the road so that's irrelavent, and the whole 'alcohol/pub tax thingy you tried to argue with has rather backfired too.

It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc. That is why you can use an electric vehicle in public places without having to pay the tax. Because electric cars/vehicle do not POLLUTE those public places. Regarding vehicles belonging to disabled people: they don't have to pay the tax because they have limited choices to get around, and many have no choice as to their form of transport. So the tax is waived for their vehicles. Regarding agricultural vehicles, they can only be tax exempt if they are driven in public places for less than 1.5km when moving to different parts of the farm during agricultural use. If they are to be driven further than that - and therefore pollute more public space than permitted when moving from one part of a farm to another - then they have to pay the tax. 'Historic vehicles' don't have to pay the duty because their numbers are dwindling and very few are used as a daily driver. Also they tend to be maintained to a higher standard than newer vehicles. So as you can see, it is plainly NOT a tax to use roads. If it was then electric vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, milk floats, ultra-low emission vehicles would have to pay it. They DON'T have to pay it because they DON'T POLLUTE in public places. It is a pollution tax. It is NOT a tax to use roads.

By the way, you have misunderstood some of the definitions regarding exemptions. My disabled neighbour has a motorbility vehicle for which he would pay towards the top end of the Tax if he were not exempt Vehicles used just for agriculture, horticulture and forestry This includes tractors, agricultural engines and light agricultural vehicles used off-road. It ***‘ALSO’*** includes ‘limited use’ vehicles used for short journeys (not more than 1.5 kilometres) on the public road between land that’s occupied by the same person.

"It's very relevant. The tax is only applicable if you are going to pollute in public places. If your car is kept off road and only used on private property you don't have to pay the tax, but you can still use the car, run its engine etc."

So I still cause pollution when I run my engine at home, or drive on private land. If I'm contributing to pollution, by your reasoning, shouldn't I be paying tax rather than having the car SORN?

Also, electric cars - not really the most pollution friendly vehicles in the world after all - it's just they don't directly spew out gasses.

Again, it's a vehicle tax (I'm so tempted at this point to email the government for a proper clarification it's unreal), not a tax on pollution. The fact it's cheaper if your car pollutes less is a reward, that is all.

No. You have to pay MORE if your vehicle pollutes MORE,

It's a pollution tax.

OK, please indulge us all and answer the following question with a simple A or B. No if’s, but’s what about’s and maybe’s, just a simple A or B

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

Neither. We don't pay tax to use roads in the UK.

No no no, READ THE QUESTION.

My partner and I have two cars. I have a Fiat 500 for example, the lowest tax banding above an electric car. My partner has say a 1970 Rover 3500, a monster of a gas guzzler and a filthy pollution machine that kills trees as it drives past them
.
Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD.
A/ The Fiat 500
B/ The Rover 3500”

I did read the question. You asked:

"Which one do we have to pay TAX on in order to USE it on the ROAD."


And I answered that question with the correct answer which is:

Neither, because NO-ONE in the UK is TAXED to USE roads.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Your question was:

Which one do we have to pay TAX **on** in order to **USE** **it** on the ROAD?

The only way to answer that question is:

Neither, because NO-ONE in the UK is taxed to USE roads.

You need to comprehend your own question before criticising the answer.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Again, we are not taxed to use cars on roads. We are taxed to pollute.

stopmoaning1 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Again, we are not taxed to use cars on roads. We are taxed to pollute.

Nicely dodged again.

If you are not prepared to concede a point you simply duck the question.

The point of course is the answer is A. We pay tax on the smiley little environmentally friendly Fiat while the killer Rover is TAX EXEMPT.

But of course you continually avoided that because actual FACTS do not fit in with your ideas.

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Oh you are funny. You have to tax the CAR. FACT. You can’t use it on a road unless it’s taxed.FACT. Even you agree with that. My question was which CAR needs to be taxed.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
I see. You completely lost the argument on VED, so now you spout the usual cyclist hatred of the uneducated, peppered with insults.

Here are some facts for you to consider:

Pedestrians killed by cyclists 2001-2009: 18
Pedestrians killed by motor vehicle 2001-2009: 3,495
Pedestrians seriously injured by cyclists 2001-2009: 434
Pedestrians seriously injured by motor vehicle 2001-2009: 46,245

Roads, cycle lanes, and pavements are paid for through council tax, income tax and every other tax that goes into the central government pot, all of which are also paid by cyclists. Plus 88% of cyclists also drive, so they pay all the same taxes as everyone else. There is only ONE hypothecated tax in the UK: the television licence. Every other tax goes into the central pot and is distributed as the exchequer sees fit.
Cyclists have been paying for decades yet the proportionate investment has not been made in cycle infrastructure.
If anything the government should be giving cyclists rebates.

Likewise drivers should be fined for:
using phones while driving,
speeding,
parking illegally and dangerously,
not indicating,
dangerous overtaking,
dangerous undertaking,
drink driving,
drug driving,
driving uninsured,
driving without MOTs,
texting while driving,
eating while driving,
tailgating,
jumping red lights,
driving on pavements (how do you think all those cars parked on pavements got there?)
driving the wrong way up one-way streets,
parking in cycle lanes,
driving in cycle lanes,
stopping in ASLs for cyclists,
stopping in box junctions,
etc.

Oh, and 90% of cyclists also hold drivers licences and drive, know the Highway Code, and are usually a hell of lot more knowledgable on it than drivers who do not cycle.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Oh you are funny. You have to tax the CAR. FACT. You can’t use it on a road unless it’s taxed.FACT. Even you agree with that. My question was which CAR needs to be taxed.

Buy a Nissan Leaf, zero tax, but you can use it on the road. Buy a bicycle, zero VED but you can use it on the road. Buy a VW Polo Blue Motion, zero VED but you can use it on the road. Buy a Fiat 500 Twin Air, zero VED but you can use it on the road. Or a Fiat Panda twin air, zero VED but you can use it on the road.

Like I said, we are not taxed to use roads in the UK.