ULEZ charge in 2021

[valiant]

Cotty said:

C70R said:

Looks to me like they failed to plan for the ULEZ, and the article says they are looking for locations outside of the ULEZ for next year.

I'd direct your anger towards the feckless organisers.

The Bromley Pageant of Motoring has been held at Norman Park, Bromley for over 40 years. Even if they had found a new location, the ULEZ has killed the original event.

DonkeyApple said:

One would think the issue isn't the show cars but the number of non compliant attendee cars? Most of the show cars will be exempt as they don't emit any pollution once they reach 40 years old. Conversely, I imagine a reasonable number of potential ticket purchasers may have been put off by the charge on their car.

One can only feel sorry for the organisers given that they must have all been being held prisoner in a cellar for the last few years hence why they were wholly oblivious to this ULEZ thing.

There are lots of classic cars that attend, in the one make parking areas, that are not 40 years old.

Can run a classic but can’t afford £12.50 once a year?

This is down to the organisers and I imagine most classics shown would be exempt anyway.

[Randy Winkman]

I live down that way and think it's a shame that the event isn't happening. I also don't agree with the expansion in more general terms.

But is it my imagination or have the media (eg The Mail and Telegraph) largely given up on ULEZ and moved on to other things? Or is that just my view of the world?

[valiant]

London centric media have moved on definitely.

It’s not really reported at all now except when some brainless morons blow something up.

Makes you wonder if the Tory mayoral candidate has badly misjudged things by focusing heavily on something that appears to be ‘yesterday’s news’.

[FilH]

valiant said:

Can run a classic but can’t afford £12.50 once a year?

In my case and im sure much the same for others, its not can't afford it. It is being fed up of paying made up taxes, to fund missmanaged businesses ( whilst being told its to save the lungs of children ) so won't be paying a penny to Khan.

[C70R]

FilH said:

valiant said:

Can run a classic but can’t afford £12.50 once a year?

In my case and im sure much the same for others, its not can't afford it. It is being fed up of paying made up taxes, to fund missmanaged businesses ( whilst being told its to save the lungs of children ) so won't be paying a penny to Khan.

So you'd happily "kill" this event, rather than part with £12?

Would it be fair to say you probably didn't care very much about the event in the first place?

[FilH]

C70R said:

So you'd happily "kill" this event, rather than part with £12?

Would it be fair to say you probably didn't care very much about the event in the first place?

The events been killed already due to multiple £12s, along with others.

As for bromley , you right to a point, haven't been to it for over 15yrs. But its more in general , for example, won't be doing anymore ace cafe meets, as i simply wont pay the £12 ( reasons alreay statted)


Fortunately although Im in the ulez zone, I may have got in an out of it undected several times to attand other events.

( Sadly killing lungs as I go, as i haven't paid my money ) yes that statment probably bores the hell out of you, and may or maynot be strictly true, i don't know anymore or care really.

[Billy_Rosewood]

valiant said:

London centric media have moved on definitely.

It’s not really reported at all now except when some brainless morons blow something up.

Makes you wonder if the Tory mayoral candidate has badly misjudged things by focusing heavily on something that appears to be ‘yesterday’s news’.

In Havering there are cameras being disabled daily.

If the media doesn't report on it, i guess it didn't happen.

The problem with the tory candidate is that she's st. The torys don't want to win London back as they'll have to fix it if they do.

[Terminator X]

C70R said:

FilH said:

valiant said:

Can run a classic but can’t afford £12.50 once a year?

In my case and im sure much the same for others, its not can't afford it. It is being fed up of paying made up taxes, to fund missmanaged businesses ( whilst being told its to save the lungs of children ) so won't be paying a penny to Khan.

So you'd happily "kill" this event, rather than part with £12?

Would it be fair to say you probably didn't care very much about the event in the first place?

Lol Ulez killed it as the organizers didn't want to trouble people with an additional fee ffs, easy enough to grasp.

TX.

[C70R]

Terminator X said:

C70R said:

FilH said:

valiant said:

Can run a classic but can’t afford £12.50 once a year?

In my case and im sure much the same for others, its not can't afford it. It is being fed up of paying made up taxes, to fund missmanaged businesses ( whilst being told its to save the lungs of children ) so won't be paying a penny to Khan.

So you'd happily "kill" this event, rather than part with £12?

Would it be fair to say you probably didn't care very much about the event in the first place?

Lol Ulez killed it as the organizers didn't want to trouble people with an additional fee ffs, easy enough to grasp.

TX.

The event isn't "killed".

The organisers are looking for a nearby venue outside of the zone to run it at next year.

Which suggests they could have done the same for this year if they'd been sufficiently prepared/bothered.

But they weren't.

"Lol".

[jeremyc]

Let's keep the political discussions to the N,P&E forum, please.

[Cotty]

Bottom line is Bromley has lost an event because of ULEZ.
Whether it can or will relocate isn't really the point, it won;t be returning to Norman Park.

I wonder how many events in Greater London will be cancelled and/or relocated out of the zone because of ULEZ. There is supposed to be a beer festival in Bromley this year but I bet the catering trucks and the trucks bringing the kegs are not compliant.

[C70R]

Cotty said:

Bottom line is Bromley has lost an event because of ULEZ.
Whether it can or will relocate isn't really the point, it won;t be returning to Norman Park.

I wonder how many events in Greater London will be cancelled and/or relocated out of the zone because of ULEZ. There is supposed to be a beer festival in Bromley this year but I bet the catering trucks and the trucks bringing the kegs are not compliant.

You mean those "trucks" that were probably paying the LEZ anyway?

You're coming across as a bit hysterical here.

[bad company]

Cotty said:

Bottom line is Bromley has lost an event because of ULEZ.
Whether it can or will relocate isn't really the point, it won;t be returning to Norman Park.

I wonder how many events in Greater London will be cancelled and/or relocated out of the zone because of ULEZ. There is supposed to be a beer festival in Bromley this year but I bet the catering trucks and the trucks bringing the kegs are not compliant.

Yet more unintended consequences of the blatant ULEZ cash grab.

[Giantt]

jeremyc said:

Let's keep the political discussions to the N,P&E forum, please.

So it can be moderated out of existence?can't see a problem here, really are picky

[DonkeyApple]

Cotty said:

Bottom line is Bromley has lost an event because of ULEZ.
Whether it can or will relocate isn't really the point, it won;t be returning to Norman Park.

I wonder how many events in Greater London will be cancelled and/or relocated out of the zone because of ULEZ. There is supposed to be a beer festival in Bromley this year but I bet the catering trucks and the trucks bringing the kegs are not compliant.

Given many of the display cars are ULEZ compliant and that most visitors will be using ULEZ compliant vehicles and those that aren't will be reducing in number very rapidly is it not more logical to assume that the reason for cancelling wasn't solely due to the potential loss of sales from those who only have non compliant vehicles but also the current economic climate in reality?

Ergo, it'll be back in a year or two but one suspects with a change of personnel amongst the organisers where the more militant ones are replaced by more laissez faire attitudes?

[Cotty]

C70R said:

You're coming across as a bit hysterical here.

Not at all I was mearly commenting on events that are unfolding, plus a little speculation.

Edited by Cotty on Monday 8th January 13:49

[Cotty]

DonkeyApple said:

Given many of the display cars are ULEZ compliant

Actually a lot of the classic vehicles who attend the event are not compliant as they are not over the 40 year threshold.

[pingu393]

ACE Cafe is an interesting one. I wonder how they are doing?

[bad company]

DonkeyApple said:

Given many of the display cars are ULEZ compliant and that most visitors will be using ULEZ compliant vehicles and those that aren't will be reducing in number very rapidly is it not more logical to assume that the reason for cancelling wasn't solely due to the potential loss of sales from those who only have non compliant vehicles but also the current economic climate in reality?

A LOT of the display cars are not ULEZ complaint. I have a TVR purchased new in 2002, I’ve taken it to a few shows. It’ll become compliant in 2042 so not exactly ‘reducing very rapidly’.

[C70R]

Cotty said:

Not at all I was mearly commenting on events that are unfolding, plus a little hysteria.

I'm glad we got there in the end.