I don't know how serious this threat is, but it is all too conceivable that some politico or other is pursuing it. The environmental impact of new-car manufacture seems somewhat understated below. As all of my cars are over ten years old, I'd be grateful to anyone who signs up. (Originally found at www.mbclub.co.uk.)
"Plans to ban cars older than 10 years from our roads
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Banning/restricting cars over 10yrs old. This is on the .gov website too.
"Several EU proposals across the years are dangerous to the classic car movement. One that has been under consideration is to ban the use of cars older than 10 years. Similarly, Edinburgh City Council is considering the banning of cars over 15 years old from the town centre. These, and similar, proposals directly threaten the classic car movement, and encourage the manufacture of new cars, with the attendant environmental issues of sourcing raw materials, manufacturing, distributing and scrapping the spiralling supply of new vehicles."
You'll be banned from using the roads and only allowed to take the vehicle out having obtained PRIOR consent from your local council.. i.e you'd have to plan your route in advance and inform the council for approval who may then decline the whole thing or certain aspects like perhaps if you wish to pass through a city centre etc... "
petitions.pm.gov.uk/Classic-Cars/
|
I think that the French did something like this albeit not as draconian as banning. I think that they basically offered to buy via a subsidy all cars over 10 years old.
Slightly concerning this as I can see it being brought in. I have a 7yo 530d that I am planning on keeping for at least another 3-5 years
However, as this country seems incapable of organising anything slightly complicated without the cost being astronomical, I can't see it coming to fruition.
|
|
|
|
i wonder how many cars are actually over ten years old on the roads today?...must be in the millions!
|
|
my car is old enough to smoke, fortunately it doesnt , not bad with 130k on the clock
|
Surely it's more environmentally friendly to keep an existing car running with slightly increased emissions than to incur the environmental pollution of making a new one. Steel, aluminium, glass and plastic all consume huge amounts of energy in their manufacture.
Moves to ban cars over 10 years old sounds like car makers using environmental concerns to generate unnecessary production.
At 7 years old / 91,000 miles my car is close to being threatened but still manages 0ppm HC and 0.00% CO at MOT time.
|
The car manufacturers have been lobbying hard for many years to introduce this policy (both in Europe and the US). Cars potentially last longer than ever and so to maintain sales you need to get older cars off the road either by making minor repairs uneconomic or using some other form of legislation (i.e. environmental or testing - like the Shaken in Japan).
As far as I am concerned, if a car meets the relevant emissions legislation then it can be used, age does not come into it.
|
And how many lorries/fire engines/and busses will be forced off roads?
Fire engines in particular.
I expect it will not happen.. but given the muppets in Government who cannot organise.. etc...
madf
|
|
|
As far as I am concerned if a car meets the relevant emissions legislation then it can be used age does not come into it.
Absolutely!
Many cars are being taken off the roads at 10 years anyway, simply because of being uneconomic to repair. As ever the market is the deciding factor. This is yet another plain stupid proposal by our dear beloved government. How are people on lower incomes going to afford a car; sub-prime finance? Disgusting thought.
|
|
|
|
|
In various cities within South America older cars are banned from the roads on certain days.
e.g. a car over 15 years old with a licence plate ending in 01 or 02 may not be in the city on a monday, 03/04 Tuesday etc. etc. No restrictions on holidays or at weekends.
What it does is discourage use of such vehicles as standard transport. Fines/penalties are quite stiff.
M.
p.s. this insipid pale yellow around the reply box is nasty.
|
"p.s. this insipid pale yellow around the reply box is nasty."
's funny, on mine it's pink!
|
|
There is a French law that allows elderly classics only to be driven in their own department(county) and neighboring ones.
|
|
|
|
I can imagine one good reason (from the governments point of view) to ban cars older than 10 years is to ensure that all cars used as daily transport are capable of supporting the tracking/charging device that will be used for road charging schemes.
Older cars with simpler electronics could well struggle to be adapted for the new monitoring and charging systems that will surely happen one day.
Of course, if you don't have and don't intend to own a car older than 10 years, you might think this wouldn't affect you. Wrong, we will all be hit, because a car at 9+ years old will be totally worthless. Even cars at 6-7 years old will be worth little, having a real knock-on effect on prices right the way up the chain, especially on premium marques where prices traditionally remain quite high, even towards 10 years old.
I would be surprised to see this really happen though, all the same.
|
|
I agree Oilburner. what's more, how long before the Act's initial 10 year becomes ammended to 9, 8, 7, 6, 5 years?
|
|
You just can't trust them at all. I'm still waiting for the end of the "experimental" 70 mph limit on motorways !
|
|
If it does happen, here's one lawbreaker. It's amazing that something like this can even be considered. This country is sleepwalking into an elected totalitarian state, if that isn't a contradiction in terms.
|
|
|
|
|
I can imagine one good reason (from the governments point of view) to ban cars older than 10 years is to ensure that all cars used as daily transport are capable of supporting the tracking/charging device that will be used for road charging schemes.
I think you have just hit the nail on the head.............
|
|
|
I can imagine one good reason (from the governments point of view) to ban cars older than 10 years is to ensure that all cars used as daily transport are capable of supporting the tracking/charging device that will be used for road charging schemes.
As far as I'm aware, any tracking device would have to be a standalone device, of a "rolling standard", and would merely require a power input - it could be fitted to anything, so even (for instance) a vintage car with electrics could have a device fitted. Any device would have to be tamper-proof, as well as being detectable by its' absence.
|
|
|
|
I think this is terrible :(. Terrible for the environment, and terrible for people who don't replace their cars every few years.
The most shocking thing will be when 9 year old cars suddenly become almost worthless, and 10+ year old cars are worthless. My car is almost 8 years old, and not worth much, but I have no plans to replace it yet, and can't really afford to replace it.
|
|
...and the golden rule is - he who has the gold makes the rules.
|
|
Where does this sort of nonsense end? If this was applied to aircraft then the Navy, Army and Air Force would be virtually grounded. What about trains, ships, and every other form of transport? Then we can move on to house wiring, boilers, fridges, freezers and so on ad infinitum.
|
Where does this sort of nonsense end? >>
I think it will only end when we finally rise up against our politicians and governments; but will it ever happen?????
|
Obviously an oppressive and unjust idea, of benefit as Aprilia points out to no one but the automobile manufacturing industry.
But in a country that bans fox hunting for no good reason and implements anti-smoking legislation in the way described in another thread, to name just a thing or two, might we not expect it to happen?
Oh yes, and all this parking and bus lane camera malarkey.
Worst thing Gordon Brown has done to me so far was to halt the rolling 25-year date for 'classic' licence-free status with old jalopies. Of course I didn't have a company pension.
A Trinidadian friend came up the other day with the charming idea of ASBOs for po-faced killjoys and spoilsports. High time I think, good God ten years behind it.
|
I can't believe I'm reading this......
Until the public transport infrastructure in this country is hugely improved any proposal by any government along these lines to force people out of their cars who only have enough money to purchase a car that's at least 10-yrs old will be met with huge resistance.
But I'm sure rather than banning the older cars the goverment will just come up with an 'Older Car Tax' to make some more money..............
Chris
|
There are so many reasons why this idea is plain stupid, and obviously a put-up job by the car industry, but here goes:
1) The now well known environmental factors - original footprint, recycling and remanufacturing costs, etc.
2) The thoughtless and calous condemnation of a whole section of the low paid population to a life of perpetual benefit dependancy. Cars are so entrenched into working life now that it is extremely difficult to get a job without one.
3) Ignorance of a thriving classic car and spares industry. Aside from the economic benefit, there is a preserved pool of skills and expertise.
4) If a 10 year old car is effectively going to be confiscated by the government, what value does a 9-year old car have? Who is going to bother maintaining it, for safety or environmental reasons?
Finally, it might even be a short-sighted desire by the manufacturers themselves. Why pay £20,000 or more for a luxury car, when they are all going to be worthless in ten years time?
|
But in the long term will it benefit the car industry? I think it will come back to bite them on the backside.
Why?
Because would any of you bother to spend tens of thousands on a new car that will be worth nothing in exactly ten years? So what will be the point of spending say 50k when you could spend 5k? Even if you don't keep the car for 10 years, the level of depreciation will be that much greater than what we even have now, so I personally think that we will not bother to spend anything like as much on a car as we might consider doing at the moment.
Another thing, it will put many small garages and breakers etc out of business (probably what the government wants anyway) and will lead to MORE polluting and dangerous cars being on the road, beacuse who will bother to maintain cars when they will be worthless very quickly?
Personally I think we should all - as a mass protest - drive illegally, unregistered, uninsured, untaxed etc if this should happen. Not that I, or I am sure most of you would want to of course, but just what will it take to get these lunatics that are running this asylum of a nation to listen?
I look forward to reading your feedback!
|
I don't see it making all that much difference. The majority of ten-year old cars are close to worthless today anyway - they're always one major repair away from extinction.
Personally, I think that is very, very wrong - given the amount of energy and raw materials which go into making and shipping a new car, I'd rather see them used for a longer period of time, especially as many older cars tend to do relatively few miles.
But much government policy doesn't actually have that much to do with the environment. I'm commuting to work 100 miles from home because its too expensive to move (due to stamp duty).
|
I would like to know what would happen the classic car industry.The 1000's of people who work in servicing,or supplying parts for classic cars.Also what will happen to our motoring heritage.
There is huge difference between a "old banger",& a properly maintained old car.Every car goes through it's MOT every year.If it fails,then it's either put right.Or it's off the road anyway.So over time older uncared for cars will go,through natural wastage.
Proper classic & vintage vehicles,aren't exactly a common sight on the roads any way.I can't see them making a blind bit of difference,to pollution levels.
I think the real agenda.Is that they want to bring in this pay as you go.Black box thing,& in a lot of old cars, it wouldn't work.So that's why they want to restrict/ban old vehicles.
|
|
I'm off to look at the EC website for more on these proposals. It's so ludicrous it smells of urban myth! But then a lot of crazy ideas are discussed in the couloirs of power, most of them, thank goodness, never seeing the light of day.
|
|
|
Is there a petition for banning Gordon Brown? How I detest that man. Did he ever pass his driving test?
|
Is there a petition for banning Gordon Brown? How I detest that man. Did he ever pass his driving test?
Ban him? Shoot him morelike!
|
|
|
Is there a petition for banning Gordon Brown? How I detest that man. Did he ever pass his driving test?
Blind in one eye. Doesn't drive, and having once walked about with a bandaged eye I must say I don't blame him.
|
The reason is obvious.
HM Government do not care about the environment. They only pretend to.
The real reasons are:
1) Modern cars with all these electronics are heavier and consume masses of electricity, so they use about 25% more fuel than an equivalent older car. The driver therefore has to buy 25% more fuel, which means 25% more fuel tax to the Exchequer.
2) Then there is the small(!) matter of the VAT on the new cars [ or at least on the extras? ], plus more car sales means the factories are making more money. This means the UK based ones are paying more corporation tax to the Exchequer.
3) Ditto the scrapyards - more cars to scrap = more profit = more corporation tax.
4) Similarly, because most of the electronics are not work-on-able at home, more work has to be carried out at the main dealers = more profit = more corporation tax.
And so on.....
|
My wife's daily car is a 1970 VW Beetle. I also own another 1970 Beetle, although it's awaiting restoration....
I'm sure that even if the Govt introduced exceptions for classic cars, it would probably end up being 'amended to suit' by Brown and his pals. Just look at the farce surrounding RFL, first of all it was a rolling 25 year old exemption, when Blair and his cronies came to power that was knocked on the head, and a cutoff date established.
It's a flawed idea right from the start...
|
Whilst I am as shocked by this silly idea as anyone else, in a perverse kind of a way the "bottom-feeders" among us who buy old cars cheap and run them into the ground may well benefit in some ways through this -- we'll be able to buy a much newer car for the same money.
The Korean manufacturers must be laughing into their cornflakes at this one. If cars are sent to the scrapper after ten years, the resulting vicious depreciation will mean that people will just buy cars as cheap as possible and have done with -- they'll be literally disposable items.
The average lifespan of a car will not be 10 years -- because of the low value of cars at 6 years old, one failed component and they go in the bin, just as is happening to the 10-year-old cars now. So the average life will be closer to 7 to 8 years. Combine that with the Kia/Hyundai 5-7 year warranties and you have a car that's guaranteed for life pretty much.
If this is a product of the car manufacturers, they've shot themselves in the foot big-style. Less years = less money spent on each car = lower profits. Isn't it the case that a lot of car makers actually make a loss on the smaller models, because the cost of manufacture doesn't cover the market price adequately enough?
|
|
|
|
|
