London Emission Zone Petition

[Brisey]

Hi all

There is now a petition on the 10 Downing Street web site petitioning the PM to make motorhomes exempt from the proposed London Emission Zone charges,

Link Removed

 

[Ralph]

A bit late. The closing date was yesterday and it only had 14 sigs.

Oops Just had another look. The closing date is one year yesterday! I didn't know they lasted that long

 

[GJH]

Oops Just had another look. The closing date is one year yesterday! I didn't know they lasted that long

If I were suspicious I would say that the fact that these petitions last a year is so that they have no chance of having any effect on decisions which have already been taken.

In general, these petitions (IMHO) are a con by the government to make people think they have a chance of changing things. As was seen with Blairs response to Link Removed (which was signed by 1,811,390 before it ended in February 2007) they only have a chance of succeeding if they come out in support of current government policy.

Perhaps I am being too cynical though. When one looks at this specific petition it appears that it is aimed at Emission Charges as a whole rather than the London LEZ as it doesn't mention London at all.

Graham

 

[RockieRV]

A year for a petition to be looked at seems a very long time indeed.
Graham, your comments are in agreement with my thoughts.

Perhaps someone should petition to get the petition time reduced

 

[Gonewiththewind]

Petition against London Emmision Tax.

Come on Guys and Gals:thumb:

Link Removed

Don

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

 

[Mavis]

emmissions

I will keep e-mailing it to Ken Livingston to tell him how it is progressing, but I left it open for a year as the law is spread out over two years.
I wanted to get as many names as possible ( and in 2 days the response is so good) as that is the only way I felt I could let them know how we feel.
If you have any advice I will listen. In the mean time I hope the Clubs and AA and RAC will help me on this we are not comercial vehicles we are classed as private light goods.
As someone pointed out Chertsey CC is in the area.
This not just through London Town it is everywhere off the London side of the M25.

 

[BGD]

This may not be a popular post, but it reflects my honest personal views.

I'm not supporting this petition.

I'm not persuaded at all as to why motorhomes are somehow a "special case" and thus should be exempted.
If we are are not going to totally destroy our (only) planet in a few generations by our continuing greed and selfishness, then we are ALL going have to start changing our behaviours, big time.

I applaud all and any attempts to clean up the air quality in big, traffic congested cities such as London.

Unless the policies adopted hurt enough (me, as well as everyone else), they just ain't going to work.

(As an aside - it really doesn't look wonderful when the petition title even spells "emissions" incorrectly.)

 

[Mavis]

Emission

Im so sorry I made a Typing error (I keep using 2 MM's) but Im more interested in getting my point across.
What I do not understand is that
1) Lorries from abroad are exempt so can polute our roads.
2)That it is the whole of the London Area not just the City.
I appreciate that we must save the planet but if I had a petrol engine I wouldnt even be talking to you as it is only Deisel that they are worried about. .
We only travel a few miles Rallying with the MCC each year.
You are entitled to your opinion and i appreciate you taking the time to put your point of view across Thanks.

 

[GJH]

What I do not understand is that
1) Lorries from abroad are exempt so can polute our roads.
<SNIP>

Is this actually the case? According to the TfL web site "Note that non-GB (including Northern ireland) vehicles will need to register with TfL to be eligible for an exemption."

They actually have a page Link Removed explaining how penalty charges for the Low Emission Zone will be enforced against vehicles registered abroad.

Graham

 

[Mavis]

emissions

:thumb: Link Removed
I got my info from the above link
They did not know how the collection would work with foreign lorries.
There is so much to read on the subject isnt there.
The petition is growing as now in 2 days it is over 109 people.
I will make sure that by Feb 2008 I will send the names in to Ken Livingston and the Goverment.

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

 

[GJH]

:thumb: Link Removed
I got my info from the above link
They did not know how the collection would work with foreign lorries.

They don't make things very clear on that site do they - they would do better to provide a series of links to the TfL site. Whatever else one might say about the scheme, at least the information on the TfL site is clear and comprehensive.

I will make sure that by Feb 2008 I will send the names in to Ken Livingston and the Goverment.

No need to send the petition to the government - they get it automatically

The petition is growing as now in 2 days it is over 109 people.

This thread prompted me to look at the petitions web site again. I note that they say on the FAQs page:
"Joke petitions
Initially we accepted humorous petitions, on the grounds that they did no harm and were often funny. However, particularly after the site received publicity in the media, we found that more and more time was being taken up considering borderline cases where supposedly humorous petitions risked being seen as offensive or in bad taste. Some users also contacted us to complain about silly petitions undermining the serious purpose of the site.
We decided it was impossible to justify this use of Civil Service time, or to come up with clear guidelines as to what amounts to good or bad taste. Reluctantly therefore we have decided no longer to accept petitions which are obviously intended as jokes."

and yet the ninth most popular current petition (20501 signatories) is "Make Jeremy Clarkson Prime Minister".

Sorry to pour cold water on a sincere effort but I think this is an indication of how serious (Not) the government really is about these e-petitions. :Sad:

In reality what will happen is that companies which run non-exempt vehicles will either replace them or pass the cost on to their customers so, within a reasonably short time, commercial operators will be unaffected. The only people who will be affected are people with privately owned vehicles which are not exempt. By sending a FoI request to TfL a few weeks ago I established that one of the pieces of data which they obtain from DVLA is the Body Type. TfL is, therefore, easily able to exempt motor caravans and any other privately registered vehicles which are obviously not used commercially. The fact that they have consistently refused to do so, despite the evidence quoted in the petition being placed before them by all sorts of leisure bodies, indicates that they are simply not prepared to listen.

Graham

 

[Mavis]

emissions

Thank you for your reply and Im not being funny I just want to make a point.
So what are you are telling me, that I sit back and do nothing in life and let the powers that be walk all over me and if this does spread Scrap my vehicle and sit in doors because I will not have a Motorhome to part exchange.
You dont know me.
Anyway whats wong with Mr Clarkson being Prime Minister. He would be a great one.
I hope you take this in the lighthearted way I mean it.

 

[GJH]

Thank you for your reply and Im not being funny I just want to make a point.
So what are you are telling me, that I sit back and do nothing in life and let the powers that be walk all over me and if this does spread Scrap my vehicle and sit in doors because I will not have a Motorhome to part exchange.
You dont know me.

Not at all - but I am annoyed with the way the government tries to con people into thinking that the e-petition system has any chance of making them change their policies.

As I mentioned, I obtained information from TfL which shows that they could exempt motor caravans if they wished to. That was actually after reading elsewhere that TfL had stated that the reason for not doing so was that their system couldn't differentiate between types of vehicles. I've passed the information on to the Caravan Club and someone else who is involved in the ongoing consultation so that they can use it to highlight the fact that TfL's excuse is invalid.

Anyway whats wong with Mr Clarkson being Prime Minister. He would be a great one.
I hope you take this in the lighthearted way I mean it.

On the grounds that he couldn't be any worse than Blairown/Cameron I'm inclined to agree

Graham

 

[Mavis]

emissions

Thanks and I will get back to the Kent MCC members and tell them all the info you have given me.
:thumb:

 

[Mavis]

emmissions

I have had on another site Interesting answer

Re:Emission Charges - 2007/10/18 20:29 This problem doesn't just apply in the UK. I am aware that the Féderation International de Clubs de Motorhomes (France, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Luxembourg, Italy and the UK [both MCC and HCI] membership) has petitioned Paolo Costa, the Chairman of the transport committee in Brussels to try to get something done.

When questioned by letter, the official response from Fiat was that particulate filters cannot be retro fitted to older vehicles. Similar responses are expected from the manufacturers of engines for other base vehicles.

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

 

[wilko09]

Quoted by BGD:
Unless the policies adopted hurt enough (me, as well as everyone else), they just ain't going to work.

Does £100 to leave the area and another £100 to enter again (if you live in it) and a fine of up to £1000 for failure to pay within 14 days hurt enough?

This has nothing to do with reducing pollution, it is just another way of squeezing money out of us to pay for this governments financial incompetence of the last 10 years, another stealth tax masquerading as a green issue being made more palatable\justified because it seems to tap into peoples guilt complex!

Good on you Mavis, you are dead right, what do you do, just let those in power keep walking all over us without so much as a squeak? I am not naive enough to think that this petition will change anything but I will still be signing it!


Martin

 

[Mavis]

Here is what the SMMT and the Caravan Club said in their consultation papers to Ken:

SMMT

The SMMT say the motorhomes should not be included in the LEZ:
Seeks reconsideration of inclusion of motor caravans in LEZ because the numbers of motorhomes in London in very small: The overall number of motorhomes in use in the UK is 136,000 out of total parc of some 30 million vehicles
They also make the point that you have made regarding the costs:
Motorhomes are leisure vehicles, not commercial ones: their inclusion in the proposed LEZ has major implications for their owners, private individuals, not businesses. The economic implications for owners who live within London boroughs cannot be compared to a business that has the option to replace, renew, move or upgrade.
Motorhomes travel very low mileages: the average mileage travelled by motorhomes is about 6,000 miles per annum, close to fifty percent of all other vehicles, and considerably less than commercial vehicles.
The SMMT cannot understand why anyone would want to travel through London in a motorhomes unless absolutely necessary( confirms what you said yesterday about a sudden hospital trip):
Motorhomes are used sparingly in urban environments: anecdotal evidence suggests that the motorhomes are not extensively used in urban environments.

This will effect the tourism industry:
the zone may have a significant deterrent effect on potential visitors to London . So much so that rather than tackling onerous form filling, tourists from overseas and elsewhere in the UK will simply seek alternative destinations for their tourism spend.
The LEZ could deter tourism: many users of motorhomes do come to visit the capital, often basing themselves on sites within the Greater London boundary, but then using public transport to reach the centre. The charge would be a deterrent to tourism by motorhomes. Motorhomes are more popular on mainland Europe than they are here. It is very likely these will be used to visit the Olympics and the charge would be a deterrent to tourism at a peak time for London and the UK .






Caravan Club



It is wrong and inaccurate to include motorhomes in the LEZ. Ken has said that cars are exempt and motorhomes are in effect a private car. They are not a commercial vehicle which is what Ken is classifying them as. Here is what the Caravan Club had to say:
The proposed amendment to the LEZ Scheme Order is fundamentally flawed in its placing of motor caravans in a vehicle category other than M1. Paragraphs 2(d), 2(e), 2(f) and 2(g) state that motor caravans can form part of vehicle categories N1, N2 and N3. This is incorrect. The UN ECE document 'Classification and Definition of Power-Driven Vehicles and Trailers' provides a definition of a motor caravan as a special purpose M1 category vehicle constructed to include accommodation space with specified equipment. This equipment should be rigidly fixed to the living compartment; however, the table may be designed to be easily removable.
While it is likely that the base vehicle on which most motor caravans are constructed would fall into one of the ‘N’ categories, once conversion to a motor caravan has taken place, the vehicle moves to category M1, irrespective of its size, weight, engine capacity etc, which means that in classification terms it becomes a ‘motor car’. It has been stated in the LEZ proposal that it is not intended to include cars in the LEZ at this stage.
The LEZ is not clear on how it decides whether a vehicle is compliant or not. We have to take their word for it and there is no way to independently check if they are doing this correctly. Here is what the CC said.
[The Caravan Club are] Not convinced that owners and potential owners of specific models of motor caravan will have easy access to the relevant information needed to judge whether their vehicle is compliant with the LEZ requirements or not. As an example, the current VCA CarFuelData website lists only one diesel engine option (2.3l) for the pre-2007 Fiat Ducato (the most common motor caravan base vehicle choice), when in fact two further engine choices were commonly specified (2.0l and 2.8l).
The LEZ is said to target heavy vehicles only however, the CC found:
The proposal is stated as aiming to target ‘heavier diesel engine motor caravans ambulances and hearses’. By our estimate, the defined weight threshold at which vehicles would potentially become compliant (2500kg) would include over 98% of all motor caravan models currently available in the UK . In effect, all motor caravans are therefore potentially within scope, and not merely the ‘heavier’ ones.
The CC also made comments about effecting the tourism industry:
Caravanners make a positive contribution to local communities, with Club member families currently spending on average at least £40 per day on local purchases, amounting to over £270 million per annum.
The difficulties facing vehicle users in understanding/complying with this proposal are magnified when the leisure use (ie motor caravan) sector is considered, as opposed to the commercial vehicle sector. An infrequent leisure visitor is very unlikely to be willing to make such efforts for what might be their only leisure trip into the zone during their ownership of the vehicle. They are likely, therefore, to avoid travelling to London entirely, even if their vehicle might actually be compliant with the zone requirements. By doing so, they will not, therefore, support the many tourist destinations within the LEZ, nor the large number of businesses which support tourist trips.
Nine of out the top ten most visited attractions in the UK during 2006 would fall within the LEZ. To visit such attractions without the risk of incurring an LEZ charge, motor caravan-based visitors would have to base themselves outside the LEZ, thus deterring them from accessing locations such as The Club’s sites at Crystal Palace, Abbey Wood and possibly Alderstead Heath, all of which have effective public transport links into Greater and Central London. Such issues will become increasing significant in 2012. The experience on the World Cup in Germany during 2006 was that vast numbers of national and international visitors choose to make their trips by motor caravan, and there is every reason to think that the Olympics, with its even greater multi-venue characteristic will generate similar visitor patterns.




These are comments from the manuafacturers and traders association and Caravan Club. Two big and powerful speakers. But Ken has chosen to ignore them.

 

[Mavis]

im trying to get as much info together so here is some more

The relevant part is para 4.2 “classes specified. Eg, M1, M2 etc etc , And this is what is says in European Law:



5. "Special purpose vehicle" means a vehicle intended to perform a function which requires

special body arrangements and/or equipment. This category shall include wheel-chair

accessible vehicles.

5.1. "Motor Caravan" means a special purpose M category vehicle constructed to include living

accommodation which contains at least the following equipment:

– seats and table,

– sleeping accommodation which may be converted from the seats,

– cooking facilities, and

– storage facilities.

This equipment shall be rigidly fixed to the living compartment; however, the table may be

designed to be easily removable.

So this clearly states that a motor caravan is an M class vehicle. Now, there are different types of M class. See this:
1. Category M: Motor vehicles with at least four wheels designed and constructed for the carriage of passengers.

Category M1: Vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of passengers and comprising no more than eight seats in addition to the driver's seat.

Category M2: Vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of passengers,

comprising more than eight seats in addition to the driver's seat, and

having a maximum mass not exceeding 5 tonnes.

Category M3: Vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of passengers,

comprising more than eight seats in addition to the driver's seat, and having a maximum mass exceeding 5 tonnes.

So by my reckoning, a motor caravan falls under M1 class. Ie, exempt from the LEZ.
If this is correct, that means that Kens LEZ contradicts and conflicts itself. On the one hand, cars, ie M1 vehicles are exempt but motor caravan are not. He can’t have it both ways.
Now I am not sure when this new European Law comes into force, or indeed, if it is already is force. If this is true, we should be exempt!!

 

[Mavis]

emissions

This is and anouncement from Volvo I Have emailed Fiat for their comments
:thumb:
Automakers are making all sorts of modifications to existing models to beat the 120 g/km of CO2 limit for free entry into London when the Congestion Charge rules change (e.g., Audi A3, 16 models from Peugeot, and 23 from Citroën). For trucks and other large vehicles, the key date is February 2008, when new rules for the London Low Emission Zone (LEZ) kick in. In preparation, Volvo Trucks is broadcasting loud and clear that some of their trucks will be exempt from the incredibly pricey £200 entry fee.

The LEZ rules will be introduced in phases, and Volvo's PR materials say that, "The good news is that all Volvo engines supplied to the UK market since 1993, including all the 12-litre Euro 1 and Euro 2 D12A to D12C power units fitted to the first FH and FM trucks, all the D16's fitted to the first generation FH16's and also the D6A fitted to the FL6, meet or exceed the Euro 3 emission levels required for entering the capital." Trucks will still need to be inspected annually to prove they are indeed still "low emission" vehicles.

[Source: Volvo]

 

[Mavis]

emissions

Make sure you vote for Boris :thumb:
Dear Ms Nye,

Thank you very much for bringing this particular issue to our attention. All your comments and suggestions are greaty appreciated.

Boris Johnson's campaign is at present holding 'working groups' throughout London to develop solutions for London.

We have had a lot of correspondence about the predicted emission charges and we should be putting more information on our website about this issue soon.

I will in the meantime make sure your comments will get forwarded to the relevant people for future discussion groups as stated below.

Many thanks again and kind regards,
Georgiana
Housing

Stephen Greenhalgh
Sean Bailey - Conservative Candidate for Hammersmith
Angela Harvey
Mike Freer
Simon Randall - Chairman of Broomleigh Homes
Mira Bar-Hillel _ Evening Standard.
James Cartlidge - Sharetobuy
Alan de Botton
Tony Pidgley - Berkeley Homes
Peter Redfern - Taylor Wimpey

Planning and Regeneration

John Moss
Terry Farrell
Peter Golds
Sir Stuart Lipton
Sir Peter Hall
Nick Paget-Brown (K&C)

Peter Thompson (Leader, Hounslow – Heathrow impact, balancing development in west as well as east etc)

Michael Heseltine

Peter Stoker - Commercial Director Bellway PLC

Rail

Steve Norris
Kulveer Ranger
Stephen Hammond

Matthew Offord, Barnet

Colin Smith, Bromley

Daniel Moylan
James Morris
Joe Weiss - London Corporation

Value for Money

Ian Corby
Kit Malthouse
Eddie Lister

Olympics

Kate Hoey
Philip Hammond
Brian Coleman
Iain Wilton
David Shaw
Geoff Parsons
Lord MacLaurin

Alan Mendoza

Crime

Ray Lewis
Ian Clement
Greg Smith
Richard Barnes
James Brokenshire MP
Victoria Borwick
John Stevens/Nick Herbert are trying to come up with a police name to help.

Health

1. Professor Nick Bosanquet, Professor of Health Policy at Imperial
College London
2. Dr. Tim Crayford, DPH & Medical Director, Corydon PCT.
President, Association of Directors of Public Health (UK).
3. Sir Jonathan Michael, former Chief Executive, Guy and St. Thomas
Trust
4. Henry Pitman - Formerly Chief Executive, Tribal Group
5. Rachel Joyce (PPC Harrow, public health expert used to work for
A PCT)

6. Andy Jones (GP and on candidates list, a leading health expert
In UK)
7. Margot James
8. Lurline Champagnie! (who is happy with the above)

9. Lynne Hillan (Barnet), Vice-Chair on the Health & Adult Services Forum and Portfolio Holder in Barnet

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

 

[Mavis]

emissions

Sorry to take up so much space but I keep giving all the replies I have as I get them
I passed on the question of Class MI to the Minister of Transport Office (reply below)
My Local MP has written also to the Treasury Minister and asked for her comments I will let you know what these are as soon as I hear.
I have copied my petition and all the people signing it 243 so far and sent that to Ken Livingstone and that is the all I seem to be able to do.
I will just let the petition run and keep sending it in to him all through next year
If you havent signed please do The Link is Link Removed

FROM The Minister OF Transport Office
LOW EMISSION ZONE
Thank you for your emails of 29 October 2007 regarding the European classification of motorcaravans and their operation in the Low Emission Zone (LEZ).
You are correct in your understanding of the European classification given to your vehicle. Transport for London (TfL) is aware that motorcaravans are legally defined as passenger carrying vehicles and so fall into the M1 category. However, because the emissions from these vehicles may be substantially higher than those from passenger cars, TfL has included the vehicles in this class within the scope of the LEZ and are defined as such in Annex 2 of the Scheme Order. As explained previously, such vehicles have similar emissions characteristics to the Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) and Light Goods Vehicles (LGVs) from which they are derived, and as such TfL considers that they should be applied to the same emissions requirements

Operators of lorries, buses, coaches and all other vehicles over 3.5 tonnes which do not meet the LEZ standards will need to pay a daily charge of £200. There will be a £100 charge for non-compliant minibuses, large vans and all other vehicles 3.5 tonnes and under, affected from 2010, for each charging day they are driving in the zone. I fully appreciate your situation but the level of charge has been set in order to encourage operators to clean up their vehicles rather than pay the daily charge.

I would like to re-iterate that there are still options available to you to comply with the scheme (and thus avoid the daily charge) including: fitting particulate abatement equipment to the vehicle or certifying that an eligible engine meets the required standard. TfL has a set up a dedicated enquiries service to help vehicle owners understand what the LEZ means for them and what they may have to do to comply with the scheme. The call centre can be contacted on 0845 607 0009. Alternatively, further information about the LEZ can be found on TfL’s website at: www.tfl.gov.uk/lezlondon.

The LEZ was subject to two rounds of public and stakeholder consultation during 2006-07. The LEZ remains the most effective option for achieving reductions of the most harmful road transport generated emissions in London between 2008 and 2015. Further information on the public consultation and the need to implement the LEZ can be found on TfL’s website at: www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/furtherinfo.


Policy Officer

London Low Emission Zone


-------------
I love my motorhome

 

[Mavis]

emissions

Update to my Petition

From the Minister of State
Rt Hon Rosie Winterton MP


Julian Brazier TD MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A OAA

Dear Julian
Thank you for your letter of 29 October enclosing correspondence from your constituent Mrs Mavis Nye about the classification of motorhomes and the London low emissions zone (LLEZ)
I have noted Mrs Nye's concerns but, following the creation of the Greater London Authority. Transport for London (TFL) (under the Mayors jurisdiction) is now responsible for the day to day management of the transport services in London (with exception of the National Railway at present.)

Parliament gave the Mayor of London the powers to introduce road charging schemes in Greater London in the Greater London Authority (GLA) act 1999 which created the Greater London Authority.
The aim of the scheme is to improve air quality for those living, working or studying in London, as well as to help London and the UK move closer to achieving national and EU air quality targets.
The Government remains committed to improving air quality and the Department for Transport supports the aims of the LLEZ
Mrs Nye is correct in suggesting that in principle, motorhomes are classified as Category M1 vehicles under European Vehicle approval regulations Unfortunately some motorhome converters use the base vehicles type approval details (usually the base vehicle is a truck chassis, which is category N 1) to gain registration and thus the vehicle is recorded within DVLA as N1 category and not M1.
The records held at DVLA will determine the category of emission charges.
If Mrs Nye's registration certificate (document V5C) shows the vehicle as a Motorhome but an N1 type approval category she should return it to DVLA with a covering letter for amendment.
I hope this explains the position
Rosie Winterton

These are some extracts from the original letter.

My next petition will be to stop cutting the rain forest down as we will run out of oxygen soon

 

[Road Runner]

Off topic

But hate the capitol now.

Full of foreigners (not the touristy ones either)

Would only go there if I was forced.

 

[GJH]

Would only go there if I was forced.

The only time we go is at the end of January each year. The English Civil War Society stages an annual march to commemorate the execution of Charles I. Trouble is because he was beheaded in London the march has to be there.

Good news for us is that our van is compliant with the EZ standards.

Graham

 

[Mavis]

Emission

why cant we do it like Germany

From 1 January 2008 a total of 33 German cities will require all motorists to purchase a "Pollution Badge" in the form of a windscreen sticker in order to enter city centre ‘Umwelt Zones’ (green zones).

The participating cities are: Augsburg, Berlin, Braunschweig, Köln (Cologne), Darmstadt, Dresden, Düsseldorf, Essen, Frankfurt am Main, Hannover, Heidelberg, Islfeld, Karlsruhe, Kassel, Leipzig, Leonburg, Ludwigsburg, Madgeburg, Mannheim, Mühlacker, München (Munich), Neu-Ulm, Nürnberg (Nuremberg), Pforzheim, Pleidelsheim, Regensburg, Reutlingen, Ruhr Area, Schwäbish-Gmund, Stuttgart, Tübingen and Ulm.

You must present your vehicle registration document at Pollution Badge (Umwelt Plakette) sales outlets, including vehicle repair centres, car dealers, MOT (Tüv) stations and vehicle licensing offices, and you will be issued with a badge, coloured (Red/Yellow/Green) according to your vehicle’s Euro emission rating.

The cost of the badge is understood to be between €5 and €10 and, once issued, covers you throughout Germany for the life of your vehicle. Failure to display a badge could incur a fine of €40. Enforcement will be managed by the police, local authorities and traffic wardens.

The system seems fairer than the LEZ as it effects all motor vehicles and the badge lasts for the life of the vehicle and covers all the participating cities.

However, legal struggles are still ongoing, especially regarding older motorhomes: The problem is that almost 50% of all German motorhomes are too old to get a Pollution Badge at all, at least without retrofitting a particle filter. And the makers of refit particle filters are not too much interested here, as there would be many different filter models required, each only for a very low total number of vehicles.

So, if it goes as planned then the Umwelt Zone scheme would effectively ground a large number of German motorhomes. To avoid a legal defeat, German authorities currently think about making exceptions: Maybe that owners of affected vehicles who live in an Umwelt Zone will be allowed to travel in and out of their zones. Another discussed model is to make an exception for motorhomes in general.

Meanwhile also the motorhome manufacturers have realized that not - as they had obviously hoped earlier - all owners of such old motorhomes will run and buy shiny new ones. So they now also have started campaigning for exceptions.

The fact that local councils, the federal states, and the federal gouvernment all have their say in this, does not exactly make things easier, so it could even happen that the introduction of Umwelt Zones will be delayed once again.

so please go to my petition and sign it Link Removed

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

 

[Enodreven]

Hi, Mavis

Can you explain what the bottom paragraph means, as does it suggest that if your MH is registered M1 then it will be exempt from the LEZ

Update to my Petition

From the Minister of State
Rt Hon Rosie Winterton MP


Julian Brazier TD MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A OAA

Dear Julian
Thank you for your letter of 29 October enclosing correspondence from your constituent Mrs Mavis Nye about the classification of motorhomes and the London low emissions zone (LLEZ)
I have noted Mrs Nye's concerns but, following the creation of the Greater London Authority. Transport for London (TFL) (under the Mayors jurisdiction) is now responsible for the day to day management of the transport services in London (with exception of the National Railway at present.)

Parliament gave the Mayor of London the powers to introduce road charging schemes in Greater London in the Greater London Authority (GLA) act 1999 which created the Greater London Authority.
The aim of the scheme is to improve air quality for those living, working or studying in London, as well as to help London and the UK move closer to achieving national and EU air quality targets.
The Government remains committed to improving air quality and the Department for Transport supports the aims of the LLEZ
Mrs Nye is correct in suggesting that in principle, motorhomes are classified as Category M1 vehicles under European Vehicle approval regulations Unfortunately some motorhome converters use the base vehicles type approval details (usually the base vehicle is a truck chassis, which is category N 1) to gain registration and thus the vehicle is recorded within DVLA as N1 category and not M1.
The records held at DVLA will determine the category of emission charges.
If Mrs Nye's registration certificate (document V5C) shows the vehicle as a Motorhome but an N1 type approval category she should return it to DVLA with a covering letter for amendment.
I hope this explains the position
Rosie Winterton

These are some extracts from the original letter.

My next petition will be to stop cutting the rain forest down as we will run out of oxygen soon

 

[GJH]

Hi, Mavis

Can you explain what the bottom paragraph means, as does it suggest that if your MH is registered M1 then it will be exempt from the LEZ

In general vehicles in Class M1 are exempt from LEZ charges. However, Motor caravans (not sure about any other M1 classed vehicles) have, for the purposes of the LEZ order, been specifically included in other classes. See pp 22/23 Link Removed.

Graham

 

[Enodreven]

Hi, Mavis

Did the reply from Fiat quantify what they ment by older vehicles ??

Brian

I have had on another site Interesting answer

When questioned by letter, the official response from Fiat was that particulate filters cannot be retro fitted to older vehicles. Similar responses are expected from the manufacturers of engines for other base vehicles.

 

[olley]

Hi Brian been doing a bit of reading up on this subject, I would imagine the reason Fiat say it can't be done is that ideally it needs to be designed in from the onset, otherwise its much more difficult and can even cause catastrophic engine failure, so its easier to say no than maybe.

The filter goes in the exhaust line and needs periodic regeneration to stop it becoming blocked, if it becomes blocked there is a good chance of the back pressure causing your exhaust valves to hit the top of your pistons, not recommended.oh:

Regeneration is carried out by your ecu pumping neat fuel into it or having heating elements in it, at over 600c the particulate burns away leaving it clean, again some form of control is needed.

The whole exercise seems a bit iffy to me, and I am not surprised figures of £3000 have been quoted. But it would seem that any vehicle can be converted, if you are willing to pay the price. I wonder if any of the converters give guarantees against the filter failing and damaging the engine?

If you want read wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_particulate_filter

Olley

 

[Enodreven]

Hi, Olley

Thanks for the info, it starts to make sense of the £3000+ figures, hopefully they may come down nearer 2012

Brian

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