Dart Charge - be aware (1 Viewer)

[GJH]

The idea that the public sector are angels that always get things right and the private sector are evil and always get things wrong is absolute nonsense in my opinion. By the way so is the opposite suggestion.

Exactly what I've always said

 

[Gorse Hill]

Labour's headlong rush down the PFI route (which they should have controlled) is the cause of so much of the wasted spending in the NHS (to say nothing of all the money they wasted on NPfIT).

That old chestnut Graham

 

[GJH]

That old chestnut Graham

Personal experience.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[PeteH]

Should have stopped charging, as was promised. But then they wouldn't have been able run this experiment in widespread road pricing.

Same as with the Humber Bridge. It was supposed to be toll free by the millennium. They have just spent a small fortune "upgrading" to a "tag" system, so NO chance of the Tolls going any time soon. IMHO, ALL theses major infrastructures should be centrally funded from direct taxation, and maintained by the same method. It just needs TIGHT fiscal control. NOT a bunch of "Greasers" like we had running the railways in the "bad old days! OR with no accountability like the Overruns in the NHS due to rip-off merchants and speculators!.

Pete

 

[GJH]

ALL theses major infrastructures should be centrally funded from direct taxation, and maintained by the same method

The trouble is that such bridges and tunnels are regional/local facilities which typically have higher maintenance costs than the general roads and are used in the main by people from that locality/region.
General road maintenance costs can be funded from general taxation because they even themselves out across the country over time but that isn't so with the local/regional facilities.
I don't suppose the rest of the country would jump for joy if told they had to share in the maintenance costs of something like the Middlesbrough Transporter Bridge

 

[PeteH]

I don't suppose the rest of the country would jump for joy if told they had to share in the maintenance costs of something like the Middlesbrough Transporter Bridge

I fail to see why Not. After all the good citizens of Middlesbrough are (would be) funding the Q-E bridge and Tunnel?. BTW the ENGLISH taxpayer is funding SCOTTISH Bridges too!! (and 2 or more Big Welsh ones) and they have their own parliaments!.

Pete

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Deleted member 29692]

I don't really have a problem with tolls.

People who use whatever bridge or road a lot contribute more to it's upkeep than people who rarely or never use it. Seems fair to me.

I wouldn't mind seeing VED scrapped and replaced with tolls on a much wider scale, say all motorways and major A roads. Someone doing 150k miles a year on motorways would pay more than a little old lady who only ever drives to Tesco twice a week. What would be wrong with that?

 

[JockandRita]

What would be wrong with that?

Nothing Nick.........................if the price of fuel was reduced dramatically, ie, you only pay for what you use.

Cheers,

Jock.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Nothing Nick.........................if the price of fuel was reduced dramatically, ie, you only pay for what you use.

Cheers,

Jock.

Surely you only pay for the fuel you use now?

VED is inherently unfair because, assuming similar vehicles, someone who drives 200,000 miles a year pays the same as some who drives 3000. I suppose I'm suggesting basing the amount paid on mileage. Tolls on the major roads would be the simplest way of achieving that and it would also force a contribution from foreign registered vehicles.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[JockandRita]

Surely you only pay for the fuel you use now?

Yes, but the tax on the fuel is excessive, and is redirected away from road maintenance and investment in the infrastructure. Instead of charging a RFL and introducing tolls, price fuel fairly (without excessive taxation), so that we are all paying into the system fairly, with exemptions for essential and emergency users, and subsidies for goods transportation.

Regards,

Jock.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Yes, but the tax on the fuel is excessive, and is redirected away from road maintenance and investment in the infrastructure. Instead of charging a RFL and introducing tolls, price fuel fairly (without excessive taxation), so that we are all paying into the system fairly, with exemptions for essential and emergency users, and subsidies for goods transportation.

Regards,

Jock.

I agree that the tax is excessive but nothing's ever going to be done about it because it's a soft tax that's easily collected.

You seem to be suggesting scrapping the VED and also reducing or removing duty on fuel as well as subsidising essential users. How do you suggest the lost revenue would be replaced? Or if you don't want it replaced what spending cuts do you propose? We're talking about a lot of money - just over £32billion in 2014-15 - too much to just be written off or lost with no thought about how it's going to be saved.

 

[JockandRita]

You seem to be suggesting scrapping the VED

Not so much scrapping Nick, but more about replacing, ie, charge us a fair rate for the fuel, and add a percentage towards road maintenance and upkeep, and that way we all contribute fairly towards the general purse. If you do 200,000 miles a year, you'll pay fairly into the system, as you would too, if you're a little old lady who only visits Tesco twice a week.

Cheers,

Jock.

P.S. Time for bed said Zebedee.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[mitzimad]

easiest way to road pricing is on fuel more you use the more you pay no cameras to maintain no bureaucracy everyone on the road pays surely its a no brainer

 

[dabhand]

When I opened an account with £10.00, I chose manual payment. A couple of days later, I added £3.00. This was to test the email activation process when I made my return crossing. It worked.
I now have £9.66 in my account, which won't be used again until 14th April.

It's only the auto top up, that extracts a tenner each time from your account.

@GJH, go for it big time Graham.

Cheers,

Jock.

Concur, after reading all the posts here I thought I'd check my account, I had a balance of £3.32, as its £1.67 a pop thought I'd try increasing up to the equivalent of 4 crossings, which I will probably use this year, so topped it up by £3.36 to a total of £6.68 enough for 4 trips.
Seems the site works well unless you don't make any trips for a year then you get the "daft" letter. Can't ever see this going to court if you don't pay though.....

Judge to plaintiff... "And how much do you say the defendant owes you?"

Plaintiff to Judge...."The Penalty Charge Notice of £35 Mlud".

Judge to plaintiff... "And what were the arrears at the time of issuance of The Penalty Charge Notice".

Plaintiff to Judge..... "Uuuhm!"

"NEXT!!"

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Not so much scrapping Nick, but more about replacing, ie, charge us a fair rate for the fuel, and add a percentage towards road maintenance and upkeep, and that way we all contribute fairly towards the general purse. If you do 200,000 miles a year, you'll pay fairly into the system, as you would too, if you're a little old lady who only visits Tesco twice a week.

Cheers,

Jock.

P.S. Time for bed said Zebedee.

How is that not the case with the duty on fuel now? The more miles you do, the more fuel you buy and the more tax you pay.

The only other fair way to achieve what you want would be to scrap VED and increase fuel duty to reflect the lost revenue.

Well done on ignoring the rest of my post by the way

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

Not so much scrapping Nick, but more about replacing, ie, charge us a fair rate for the fuel, and add a percentage towards road maintenance and upkeep, and that way we all contribute fairly towards the general purse. If you do 200,000 miles a year, you'll pay fairly into the system, as you would too, if you're a little old lady who only visits Tesco twice a week.

Cheers,

Jock.

P.S. Time for bed said Zebedee.

That could work if fuel duty were only being raised to fund road building/maintenance but the fact is that it isn't, it is a general tax with low collection overheads. If it were reduced it would have to be replaced by increases in something like income tax or VAT.
These days the majority of families have a car, meaning the tax is raised from the majority of the population. More affluent families have more than one car, meaning that it is likely that more tax is raised from those more able to pay.
If fuel duty were replaced then the largest saving would be for commercial operators. Would that saving be passed on in lower prices? I doubt it Most of us would probably end up paying as much (if not more) in the alternative way.

 

[Cavs]

easiest way to road pricing is on fuel more you use the more you pay no cameras to maintain no bureaucracy everyone on the road pays surely its a no brainer

I agree, but with a couple of caveats. Increased duty on fuel is likely to increase rebated fuel fraud and theft of fuel, but that's relatively trivial.
Much more importantly, this approach would do nothing to raise revenue from foreign hauliers. It is well know that foreign truckers can come over at Dover, do all their running about and return to the continent without purchasing any fuel here. The one advantage that VED could have, but which is not being used, is to charge foreign drivers an equivalent sum, perhaps via a vignette bought when they enter the country. Tolling major roads would also garner revenue from any user (assuming a system to collect it properly).

 

[gus-lopez]

I don't suppose the rest of the country would jump for joy if told they had to share in the maintenance costs of something like the Middlesbrough Transporter Bridge

Yes ,I suppose not . I wasn't too keen seeing the social security despatched to give work to Newcastle, although that I have found excellent to deal with. Unlike the DVla despatched to Swansea for the same reasons & has been a disaster from the word go.

Surely you only pay for the fuel you use now?

VED is inherently unfair because, assuming similar vehicles, someone who drives 200,000 miles a year pays the same as some who drives 3000. I suppose I'm suggesting basing the amount paid on mileage. Tolls on the major roads would be the simplest way of achieving that and it would also force a contribution from foreign registered vehicles.

To remove the 6billion VED income & increase fuel duty would mean it would have to rise by 22p /litre . That's what it amounts to when you divide the duty by the litres of fuel sold.
Foreign truckers already pay to use the roads it started 1st April2014.

Much more importantly, this approach would do nothing to raise revenue from foreign hauliers. It is well know that foreign truckers can come over at Dover, do all their running about and return to the continent without purchasing any fuel here. The one advantage that VED could have, but which is not being used, is to charge foreign drivers an equivalent sum, perhaps via a vignette bought when they enter the country. Tolling major roads would also garner revenue from any user (assuming a system to collect it properly).

As above;Foreign truckers already pay to use the roads it started 1st April2014. When I went in to the 'bungalow' office at Dover last year there were truckers in their paying & notices referring to it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-truck-firms-set-to-pay-to-use-uk-roads-for-first-time


I try not to buy fuel in the UK but unfortunately I have to.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[PeteH]

P.S. Time for bed said Zebedee.

No it wasn't, It was Florence!! Typical French Hussy!!

Pete

 

[Deleted member 29692]

To remove the 6billion VED income & increase fuel duty would mean it would have to rise by 22p /litre . That's what it amounts to when you divide the duty by the litres of fuel sold.

I would have no particular issue with that. People who do lots of miles would pay more, people who don't do many miles would pay less. People with big inefficient engines (including me!) would pay more than people with fuel efficient vehicles.

The problem is what exactly?

 

[peterc10]

No it wasn't, It was Florence!!
Pete

No I am not having that ....... that is what Florence said

Whereas it was definitely Zebedee (the guy on the spring) that said time for bed

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Cavs]

As above;Foreign truckers already pay to use the roads it started 1st April2014. When I went in to the 'bungalow' office at Dover last year there were truckers in their paying & notices referring to it.

Thanks for the information - I didn't know that (obviously ). I wonder how much it raises.

 

[gus-lopez]

I would have no particular issue with that. People who do lots of miles would pay more, people who don't do many miles would pay less. People with big inefficient engines (including me!) would pay more than people with fuel efficient vehicles.

The problem is what exactly?

No , no problem . I was merely pointing out the likely amount as most people when talking about "doing away with it " seem to think that the fuel would only have to rise by " 2 or 3p" per litre.

 

[GJH]

I've received a response from the Highways Agency to my initial complaint:

Thank you for your email of 04/01/2016 in which you raised a particular query regards Dart Charge’s web based “online” account contract closure process.

I do apologise for the frustration you experienced when, as you stated, you felt that Sanef personnel “had mislead” you regards your search for a specific online “closure” route.

You are correct when referring to paragraph 9.2 of Dart Charge’s T&Cs, that “You may terminate this Agreement on 30 days’ notice to us either in writing, by telephone or online via the Website”. However, that instruction relies, as you found, on a Dart Charge pre addressed form to be land posted to ensure “cancellation”. As does para 3.1, which states “ ……or by using the cancellation form which you can find at www.gov.uk/dart-charge or in your Welcome Pack”. This process was also confirmed by the CEO of Sanef Operations Ltd, Highways England’s service provider, when he told you that a cancellation had “to be printed, completed and signed”.

However, there is an online route advertised under the heading of "Enquiries or complaints". This will be found at: https://www.gov.uk/pay-dartford-crossing-charge with a box for you to insert, in particular, your account number.

I would like to thank you for the time you have taken to send in your comments on this issue. They have been noted and will be taken into consideration as the scheme matures.

Further information about Dart Charge can be found at www.gov.uk/highways/dartford. Alternatively, Highways England can be contacted directly at dartcharge@highwaysengland.co.uk.

It's obviously a fudge because, if not, why didn't the CEO of Sanef Operations and his staff simply point it out (and make a simple change to the web site to add in a link and instructions) rather than responding as they did? It gives every appearance that they did not understand the system either.

The reply contained no comments on my follow-up complaint about data protection so I've asked when I can expect that.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[gus-lopez]

Yes, does seem a bit cobbled up.
The recent parliamentary discussion on the Dartford crossing "after toll booth removal" shambles ( brought about by a petition over 100k etc ) also referred to the Dart charge problems with Sanef & in the Ministers response he agreed that the whole lot wasn't at present fit for purpose & was hauling in Sanef to give them a kicking & get them to explain exactly what they were proposing to do about it all.

 

[GWAYGWAY]

I don't really have a problem with tolls.

People who use whatever bridge or road a lot contribute more to it's upkeep than people who rarely or never use it. Seems fair to me.

I wouldn't mind seeing VED scrapped and replaced with tolls on a much wider scale, say all motorways and major A roads. Someone doing 150k miles a year on motorways would pay more than a little old lady who only ever drives to Tesco twice a week. What would be wrong with that?

I think you are a bit simplistic with your conclusion about how much it would cost to do a trip if they did that. The fees would be considerably higher than you pay for VED and it would encourage the government to grab every penny they can at the highest cost possible. Motorhoming as a hobby would die on the spot if you HAD to pay by the mileage per trip by toll. Bit like going to France everywhere on Peage one trip can be 150 euro and then back. It would be the same here. Have you been on the M6 toll road, I did once and It shocked me how much I had to pay for the trip as I had a trailer on it was twice nearly. I would not be going on again.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

I think you are a bit simplistic with your conclusion about how much it would cost to do a trip if they did that. The fees would be considerably higher than you pay for VED and it would encourage the government to grab every penny they can at the highest cost possible.

I don't think I am. If you're so sure present some figures....

Motorhoming as a hobby would die on the spot if you HAD to pay by the mileage per trip by toll.

Would it? For you maybe. It would make no difference whatsoever to me.

Bit like going to France everywhere on Peage one trip can be 150 euro and then back. It would be the same here.

I do use the toll roads as a preference when in France, I think they're great so not quite sure what your point is there?

Have you been on the M6 toll road,

Yes often. If the radio traffic reports suggest the slightest hint of hold ups on the old M6 I use the toll road. Best stretch of motorway in the UK IMO.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GWAYGWAY]

How is that not the case with the duty on fuel now? The more miles you do, the more fuel you buy and the more tax you pay.

The only other fair way to achieve what you want would be to scrap VED and increase fuel duty to reflect the lost revenue.

Well done on ignoring the rest of my post by the way

At the moment I think the UK is the only country that charges VED and Tax on fuel together making it the highest costing country. I WILL guarantee that if tolls went on We would pay that ON TOP of the other two. This is treasure Island it is dearer here than nearly everywhere else in the World for most things compared to the incomes, Switzerland and Norway are more expensive but their incomes are also a lot more.

 

[GWAYGWAY]

I don't think I am. If you're so sure present some figures....



Would it? For you maybe. It would make no difference whatsoever to me.



I do use the toll roads as a preference when in France, I think they're great so not quite sure what your point is there?



Yes often. If the radio traffic reports suggest the slightest hint of hold ups on the old M6 I use the toll road. Best stretch of motorway in the UK IMO.

Methinks you must have a lot more income than me. I struggle to pay all the things I do or get.

 

[gus-lopez]

[QUOTE="NickNic, post: 1712388, member: 29692"


Yes often. If the radio traffic reports suggest the slightest hint of hold ups on the old M6 I use the toll road. Best stretch of motorway in the UK IMO.[/QUOTE]

No ,it would be if it had no speed limit or other restrictions as it is a private road.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}