who pays the congestion charge?
Discussion
This comment cropped up:
As a related side note: Due to the Vienna Convention, diplomats, embassy staff and their drivers cannot be forced to pay the congestion charge in London - so they just ignore it. At this point the total amount they've skipped out on is something like ninety MILLION dollars, ten percent of which is the US Embassy alone.
posted in reply to this observation:
Does anyone else have a problem with the cost of travel within a metropolitan area being set so high by bureaucrats? (they) must really care about the common man, when they're hell bent on making commuting or commerce a privilege reserved for the rich.
As a related side note: Due to the Vienna Convention, diplomats, embassy staff and their drivers cannot be forced to pay the congestion charge in London - so they just ignore it. At this point the total amount they've skipped out on is something like ninety MILLION dollars, ten percent of which is the US Embassy alone.
posted in reply to this observation:
Does anyone else have a problem with the cost of travel within a metropolitan area being set so high by bureaucrats? (they) must really care about the common man, when they're hell bent on making commuting or commerce a privilege reserved for the rich.
The first quote makes a reasonable point.
The second quote is illogical nonsense, I'm guessing from someone who's never lived and worked in London. Even pre-CC, very few commuters did so by car because very few people would have anywhere affordable to park once they got to work. So I doubt the CC has made very much difference at all to the majority of London commuters.
The second quote is illogical nonsense, I'm guessing from someone who's never lived and worked in London. Even pre-CC, very few commuters did so by car because very few people would have anywhere affordable to park once they got to work. So I doubt the CC has made very much difference at all to the majority of London commuters.
Edited by Gruber (to remove his own nonsense!) on Sunday 2nd September 09:04
Edited by Gruber on Sunday 2nd September 09:05
I've lived all my life (47 years) in the south London suburbs. The vast majority of people from the London suburbs rarely, if ever drove into/through central London even before the congestion charge. Getting the train/tube/bus was always the natural way of travelling for most. And most never drove to stations either, they walked.
heretheygo said:
At this point the total amount they've skipped out on is something like ninety MILLION dollars, ten percent of which is the US Embassy alone.
It's normal for embassies to operate "tax free" in other countries. The so-called congestion charge is just a "driving in London" tax. Ken Livingstone made mimself unpopular with the Americans by calling their ambassador in London "a chiselling little crook" over this issue. It's almost certainly part of the reason the Americans have located their new embassy OUTSIDE the congestion charging zone. Pints said:
I refuse to commute through the congestion zone by car, so it's job done for them if the aim is to reduce congestion.
It didn't though, the level of traffic is the same now as it was before the CC zone was introduced, also all the fees levied don't cover the cost of running the thing either, just when you add in the fines then it barely breaks even. So they have created a huge bureaucratic job creation scheme which has little or no positive effect on traffic flow, all that it has achieved is allowing Ken Livingston his opportunity to travel the world proclaiming his genius.Ive always lived in East London/Essex. When I was a kid, a drive through London was reserved for Sunny Sunday evenings. We never drove through there in the week, except for the odd friday night to visit friends.
As an aside, I recently drove into London myself for the first time. I had to transport my girlfriends 90 year old nan to Camden. They slapped a PCN on my vehicle despite parking with a disabled badge clearly on display and in an assigned disabled area. When I applealed against it, on the grounds that one of their wardens confirmed I could in fact park in that space and I was carrying a fragile old lady who now felt terrible for getting me a ticket, they basically replied 'F OFF, you were parked in a 'traders bay'. It was not marked as one. I paid the PCN just so they would leave me alone and so nan would stop being upset.
Makes me sick. They had absolutely no compassion or guilt at all. I will never be taking my business or spending money in Camden again.
As an aside, I recently drove into London myself for the first time. I had to transport my girlfriends 90 year old nan to Camden. They slapped a PCN on my vehicle despite parking with a disabled badge clearly on display and in an assigned disabled area. When I applealed against it, on the grounds that one of their wardens confirmed I could in fact park in that space and I was carrying a fragile old lady who now felt terrible for getting me a ticket, they basically replied 'F OFF, you were parked in a 'traders bay'. It was not marked as one. I paid the PCN just so they would leave me alone and so nan would stop being upset.
Makes me sick. They had absolutely no compassion or guilt at all. I will never be taking my business or spending money in Camden again.
Ozzie Osmond said:
heretheygo said:
At this point the total amount they've skipped out on is something like ninety MILLION dollars, ten percent of which is the US Embassy alone.
It's normal for embassies to operate "tax free" in other countries. The so-called congestion charge is just a "driving in London" tax. Ken Livingstone made mimself unpopular with the Americans by calling their ambassador in London "a chiselling little crook" over this issue. It's almost certainly part of the reason the Americans have located their new embassy OUTSIDE the congestion charging zone. 
Foreign Embassies in the US have precisely the same behaviour - the mayor of new york goes bonkers at them over parking charges every now and again.
C
Strawman said:
also all the fees levied don't cover the cost of running the thing either, just when you add in the fines then it barely breaks even.
Congestion charging bought in £136.8m last year for TFL, after the costs of running it were subtracted. Assuming the £90m in total allegedly skipped by diplomats is since it was bought in (nearly 10 years ago) it's not that significant really.As said, assuming you're a "common man" commuting into London the CC pales into insignificance next to the cost of parking for a day.
sjg said:
Congestion charging bought in £136.8m last year for TFL, after the costs of running it were subtracted. Assuming the £90m in total allegedly skipped by diplomats is since it was bought in (nearly 10 years ago) it's not that significant really.
Don't you mean before the costs were subtracted?Those figures are wildly out of line with these
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/1...
Where did yours they come from ?
Living in London but don't need to drive through CC zone, ditching car now anyway for pedal power as the cost of parking, insurance and the inevitable fines (in 10 years of driving previously not living in London I'd had one fine, after a year in London I'd had 4) just makes it impossible for me. 
Ozzie Osmond said:
It's normal for embassies to operate "tax free" in other countries. The so-called congestion charge is just a "driving in London" tax. Ken Livingstone made mimself unpopular with the Americans by calling their ambassador in London "a chiselling little crook" over this issue. It's almost certainly part of the reason the Americans have located their new embassy OUTSIDE the congestion charging zone.
When diplomats travel on toll roads in the US and elsewhere do they have to pay or can they ignore those charges as well?Strawman said:
It didn't though, the level of traffic is the same now as it was before the CC zone was introduced, also all the fees levied don't cover the cost of running the thing either, just when you add in the fines then it barely breaks even. So they have created a huge bureaucratic job creation scheme which has little or no positive effect on traffic flow, all that it has achieved is allowing Ken Livingston his opportunity to travel the world proclaiming his genius.
Very good point. Oh well, I do my bit of staying away from London now for his efforts.theboyfold said:
When diplomats travel on toll roads in the US and elsewhere do they have to pay or can they ignore those charges as well?
AFAIK they pay the same way as everyone else. The London congestion charge is a vague tax for vague purposes unlike a toll-road charge to pay for the construction and maintenance of that road. However, if a diplomat drives through an unrestricted lane there's nothing anyone can do to levy a fine - same as all other law-breaking by diplomats. However, it's generally considered rather impolite in diplomatic circles to ignore other peoples laws. Strawman said:
Pints said:
I refuse to commute through the congestion zone by car, so it's job done for them if the aim is to reduce congestion.
It didn't though, the level of traffic is the same now as it was before the CC zone was introduced, also all the fees levied don't cover the cost of running the thing either, just when you add in the fines then it barely breaks even. So they have created a huge bureaucratic job creation scheme which has little or no positive effect on traffic flow, all that it has achieved is allowing Ken Livingston his opportunity to travel the world proclaiming his genius.Had a job to do in the West End last week. As I also had to do a job in deepest Essex, Croydon and Eastbourne train or even tube did not work well.
Bit the bullet. Was very surprised to get parking where I needed to be on street at £3.80 an hour or thereabouts.
Still the previous time I forgot to pay the CC - heard nothing.
Bit the bullet. Was very surprised to get parking where I needed to be on street at £3.80 an hour or thereabouts.
Still the previous time I forgot to pay the CC - heard nothing.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff