Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

Just a quick one: if you have a parking permit, be aware when renewing that Southwark's parking account system is incorrectly identifying some ULEZ-compliant vehicles as non-compliant - the fees now differ between the two. I have a ULEZ compliant car and the online system would only give me the option to pay £300 for an annual permit for a non-compliant car, instead of £225. All sorted by doing the renewal by phone.

I'm sure the hike in fees has been well discussed elsewhere. To my mind it goes against the principle that "[Southwark needs] to charge for parking permits to cover the operational costs of the zone", which was as described in the consultation of the zone I live in. The first I knew of the increase was when I went to renew.

GM

Generally local authorities will use the same databases, shared by or purchased from DVLA, possibly with additional fields.  The DVLA one, containing tens of millions of vehicles isn't fool proof, ie there will be the odd error.  ULEZ is based on emissions, and there are some older petrol cars that in theory will be caught as they are not modern enough, but were designed to meet future standards.

What is special/different about your vehicle gm99 - out of interest.  Is it Euro 3 petrol (ULEZ non-compliant) mascarading at a Euro 4 (compliant).

 

 

 

9 hours ago, gm99 said:

I'm sure the hike in fees has been well discussed elsewhere. To my mind it goes against the principle that "[Southwark needs] to charge for parking permits to cover the operational costs of the zone", which was as described in the consultation of the zone I live in.

Unfortunately there is a small, but well organised and vociferous minority who want councils to use resident parking fees as a deterrent to car ownership.   One such group argue that the current cost of a parking permit is below what they consider to be the  market rate.  For Southwark they suggest the fee be raised to  £1333.

https://www.swlondoner.co.uk/news/26052023-central-london-councils-missing-out-on-millions-in-parking-revenue

Southwark council's stated policy is to "force a reduction in vehicles", by which they mean our family cars, not through traffic.  So expect more rises and expansion of CPZs in the future,

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12027415/Labour-council-wages-war-drivers-increasing-cost-permits-368.html

 

8 hours ago, malumbu said:

What is special/different about your vehicle gm99 - out of interest.  Is it Euro 3 petrol (ULEZ non-compliant) mascarading at a Euro 4 (compliant) 

Nothing - it's a Euro 6 diesel and has no issues with the actual ULEZ (ie we're not being charged in error by TFL). A neighbour with a brand new petrol car has had the same overcharging problem and is now trying to get a refund (he was unaware of the error until I alerted him to it). 

Edited by gm99

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of Smoke Control law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all per se, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...