That’s lovely. Shame if they own a non compliant Land Rover with a price guide of £18,000 - still line up the mini folks
Mate, you’re the one misrepresenting already flawed data made on presumption's. I googled what you said and it took me straight to the RAC report where it instantly said “could” lead to 700K non compliant vehicles not 100% will be 700K as you tried to represent it and within the first paragraph tells you it has worked that number out based on the assumption that no cars registered before the Euro 6 standard or the Euro 4 standard became law for new registrations were non compliant. You think you’re the industry expert. You know that the manufacturing commitments came in a year before the registration deadlines and you know that they were making compliant cars long before that deadline. The Mini being the perfect example they were building them in petrol meeting Euro 4 compliance 4 years before Euro 4 became law.Where is the source of this data?
They should have bought a Volvo, BMW etc etc equivalent in the first place. All the self proclaimed JLR executive has demonstrated is that JLR didn’t future proof their cars while their competitors were. Not sure how ULEZ can be blamed for JLR’s competitors keeping up with the pace while JLR didn’t.This is a terrible example.
Someone who owns an 18k car can afford the ULEZ charge. If they really can't, or they just don't want to pay it, then there are plenty of 18k cars that do meet it (including land rovers).
They really aren't the demographic that's affected by ULEZ.
This is a terrible example.
Someone who owns an 18k car can afford the ULEZ charge. If they really can't, or they just don't want to pay it, then there are plenty of 18k cars that do meet it (including land rovers).
They really aren't the demographic that's affected by ULEZ.
It was an extreme case to enable me to boast about my new car.
And it backfired in your face instantly. First page of google and I found out that any equivalent car made by anyone else almost certainly had been compliant. No wonder you brought German.It was an extreme case to illustrate the absurdity of Tony’s argument. My rather lovely brand new Mercedes of course would qualify so why would I care. I can wave at the plebs now standing at the bus stop as they can’t afford the fee.
And it backfired in your face instantly. First page of google and I found out that any equivalent car made by anyone else almost certainly had been compliant. No wonder you brought German.
Actually you should be able to answer this. How did JLR so spectacularly fail to future proof their cars? Was it because their executives spent all their time on football forums instead of doing their jobs?
But there not are they based on myself as a case in point?It didn’t Tony because my basic point is the only people inconvenienced are the poorest - in looks like your inner Tory is returning
But there not are they based on myself as a case in point?
Depends on what the central funding is doesn't it.The people who have to pay the fine or be unconvinced are people with older vehicles.
Now who are these people likely to side with at an election?
Are they likely to think - “oh yes I’ll inconvenience myself and save the planet” or will they look to a political party that would back them and remove this tax that inconveniences them?
Well the last London Mayoral election was only in May and the person who inconvenienced them with this “tax” won by a landslide so I guess the answer is yes. Most people accept the necessity of ULEZ to get the gains in air quality and health benefits that brings. A few noisy frothers, aside the policy is A) popular and B) successful in what it aims to achieve.The people who have to pay the fine or be unconvinced are people with older vehicles.
Now who are these people likely to side with at an election?
Are they likely to think - “oh yes I’ll inconvenience myself and save the planet” or will they look to a political party that would back them and remove this tax that inconveniences them?
Well the last London Mayoral election was only in May and the person who inconvenienced them with this “tax” won by a landslide so I guess the answer is yes. Most people accept the necessity of ULEZ to get the gains in air quality and health benefits that brings. A few noisy frothers, aside the policy is A) popular and B) successful in what it aims to achieve.
I just don’t think banning new ICE vehicles from 2030, when the rest of the EU which Starmer loves is aiming for 2035. I am totally unconvinced that the generating and distribution capacity will be there, nor the public charging system. The roads will need massive investment to take the increase in average weight. I certainly wont be going anywhere near multi storey car parks.
As others have commented, reducing the weight of ICE vehicle’s would help. Reverse we some of the safety requirements, put an end to all the autonomous driving kit.
But the EU is 2035 And most of the car manufacturers are European.Theresa May initially brought in the 2030 deadline. I recall when Johnson extended it to 2035 the automotive industry weren’t happy as they’d accelerated their investment plans on the understanding that ICE would be phased out by 2030 and it presented a risk that uptake would be slower than they’d forecast for. Returning to 2030 is likely working with business to keep their investment plans on track, increasing supply of vehicles due to ramp-up of production and likely resulting in a reduced price point.
Theresa May initially brought in the 2030 deadline. I recall when Johnson extended it to 2035 the automotive industry weren’t happy as they’d accelerated their investment plans on the understanding that ICE would be phased out by 2030 and it presented a risk that uptake would be slower than they’d forecast for. Returning to 2030 is likely working with business to keep their investment plans on track, increasing supply of vehicles due to ramp-up of production and likely resulting in a reduced price point.
Does it ”run out in a couple of years”?Has anybody else seen Keir starmers interview with Nicky Campbell, where a caller asks him about 25% tax free allowance on your pension, and he says they are not going to renew it when it runs out in a couple of years, as they need the money for there manifesto pledges , all hell.breaks loose and labour say he misunderstood the question and thought the question was about mortgages...yeah righty oh
Sent from my CPH2025 using Tapatalk
Has anybody else seen Keir starmers interview with Nicky Campbell, where a caller asks him about 25% tax free allowance on your pension, and he says they are not going to renew it when it runs out in a couple of years, as they need the money for there manifesto pledges , all hell.breaks loose and labour say he misunderstood the question and thought the question was about mortgages...yeah righty oh
Sent from my CPH2025 using Tapatalk
Does it ”run out in a couple of years”?
Does it ”run out in a couple of years”?
So doesn't that suggest it's not going up and remaining the same?I bloody hope not , from what I can see it was supposed to go up to 57 , but neither does mortgage relief run out in two years , Google the interview , and he seems quite adamant that they will stop the 25% tax free when it runs out
He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.I bloody hope not , from what I can see it was supposed to go up to 57 , but neither does mortgage relief run out in two years , Google the interview , and he seems quite adamant that they will stop the 25% tax free when it runs out
If first time buyers are all heading for £300k+ houses, we really are fucked...He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.
Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government
Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022www.theguardian.com
You are a miserable so and so aren’t you. Or are you suggesting that nobody benefitted from that tax break?If first time buyers are all heading for £300k+ houses, we really are fucked...
They managed to make me dislike Labour a bit less by hearing that, so fair play to them for that.How are they so bad at this?
Not a great look for Starmer to confuse his own policies.He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.
Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government
Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022www.theguardian.com
Yes because it sounds exactly the same when someone says are you going to stop their 25% tax free when they take there pension ...I can see how it sounds exactly the same ..He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.
Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government
Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022www.theguardian.com
Depends if the owner's jacked it again like the last time, it's a signal after all in an already overcooked market isn't it or wasn't it when it came in tbf?You are a miserable so and so aren’t you. Or are you suggesting that nobody benefitted from that tax break?
You said first time buyers would suffer from it, I'd suggest that at £300k+, first time buyers who can afford that are doing rather well for themselves and most are certainly not buying at that level.You are a miserable so and so aren’t you. Or are you suggesting that nobody benefitted from that tax break?
|
FFS, the stamp duty break is for first time buyers. I didn’t invent it, nor did I invent Starmers fuck up. According to you it won’t be missed at all - so it will be no great loss.You said first time buyers would suffer from it, I'd suggest that at £300k+, first time buyers who can afford that are doing rather well for themselves and most are certainly not buying at that level.
I mean, I can't help it if you just spout reactionary bollocks can I?
Shame not all first timers buy a house in Coventry.Average house price for a home bought with a mortgage in Coventry is £228,000 btw. First time buyers? £196k...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?