Parking cost may increase to £750

Something has got to be done before the Great British public are seen as just sheep.co.uk. Next election, vote for who-ever is for banning political correctness, then we will be able to make the comments we REALLY want to make about these nonsence, borderline, thieving motoring fleecing schemes!!

There seems to be a lot of talk on this site and others about the injustice of inflated parking permits, taxation, petrol prices etc., but it seems to me that a huge amount of vehicle congestion, and subsequent environmental and other problems in London and other cities and towns could be avoided if people stopped the ridiculous status-seeking practice of running second and even third vehicles. We could increase the tax on second cars by a few hundred percent, which might have an impact on people who are generally too thick to figure out for themselves their second car is unjustifiable, but perhaps education is the key?

Has anybody asked the Mayor of Richmond about his official car? I wonder if he practises what he preaches and is driven around in a small economical car?

Looking at the above comments I have to question if some people have missed the point of the changes to the permit system. Richmond is an area which has lots of people coming and going. This is the councils atempt to do one of two things.
1. they are trying to encourage people to drive green cars = less polution.
2. they are getting people to think do they realy need two cars = less cars = less congestion = less polution.
No one has the right to park infront of their own house. What would you do if councils put double yellow lines on every street in every town and city?

What Car states carbon offset for the year for my car (Audi S4) is £47 and a Prius £15. If any green tax is to be taken surely it should be done in line with the carbon offset and not through stelth taxes.

I drive a gas guzzler, it's fuel consumption can be as low as 7 MPG when I get stuck in a que. I do low mileage and living in a city center, comuting to the outskirts, I drive in the opposite direction to every one else when going to and from work. Should I be taxed more than a person driving a Prius getting 50 MPG? To do 1 mile (@7MPG) I pay roughly 33p to the government while the Prius pays 4.5p. Gas guzzlers already pay their dues for every mile covered. Get some of the second cars off the road and provide a cheap public transport. With less congestion on the roads my car might get 20+ MPG.

If you wonder why I dont use public transport, we dont all live in a city like London and have a reliable transport system where you only have to wait 5 minutes for a tube or bus. Besides, public transport is that expensive, it's cheaper to go by a car that does 7 MPG.

The govenment needs to face facts, cars are here to stay until the petrol runs out. Provide us with cheap reliable transport and maybe people in congested areas will use it.

I am sick and tired of hearing 4 x 4 drivers described as 'school run' drivers and gas guzzlers! We live in the country and own our own wood business. We NEED a 4 x 4 vehicle to drive on the roads and to carry our product! So do all the farmers who live out here. Our pick up is NOT a flashy crew cab style. It only has 2 seats. I actually fail to see the advantage of a 4 seated pick up, as it means the load capacity in the back is reduced.

We don't use our vehicle for school runs or anything similar. I really resent not only this totally unfair tax, but also being tarred with the same brush as the 'Chelsea set'.

If this tax really IS aimed at the 'rich' - then tax 4 wheel drive owners by post code. As it is, it is the farmers, builders, joiners and people who live in the country and rely on a 4 wheel drive to conduct their businesses who are being hit.

is'nt it time we played the powers that be at their own game, leave our cars (what ever they may be) at home, then use public transport to commute to work. lets see how good this public transport system really is, lets see how many of us make it to work, if at all. How much would this money grabbing goverment lose in one day of the beloved tax they so greedily take from you and me. I totally agree we need to do something about co2, but taxxing us off the roads is not going to keep this country prosperous if we cant get to work. Does this goverment not understand we drive our cars to get to work its about time these politicians led by example and showed us how green they are.

Am being simplistic or is it not right that the purpose of a road is to enable us to get from one place to another.If that is the case what is the point of allowing any cars to park on the road and therefore deprive other road users of the space to move around? If the average taxpayer was asked whether they were happy to spend a certain amount of money to provide an individual with a free parking space, I think we can forsee the answer. Therefore isn't it right to charge for all road parking and that money be returned directly into paying for the upkeep and renewal of these roads and not into the coffers of the local government to offset rates. Maybe there should no free road parking anywhere, how about that ,instead of a mileage tax?

at a point in the future some leagal bofin is going to take this to the court of human rights. as we all own our roads by paying for them in our taxes. and we are tax to use them, they are not up a standard that makes them safe. and now they are trying to charge us to use a road that belongs to us is payed for by us.

The parking permit gives the holder the right to park in a designated space, it does not guarantee a parking space.
Can you think of any other thing that you would gladly pay for with no guarantee of receiving that which you have paid for? If I pay to park in a car-park I expect a parking space don't I?
If this council gets away with this money raising exercise I predict that their next venture will be on houses with parking spaces. Charge extra rates for possible parking spaces around peoples homes, this could be a huge money spinner!
It is all very well the councils and government bleating on about environmental taxes but I would like to know where this money is being spent. We have had little or no feedback as to how much money has been raised and where it is going. Before agreeing to any more "environmental taxes" we should all ask where will the money go.
By the way, did you know that methane is by far and away a much worse green-house gas than Co2? Every animal on the planet emits methane as part of its digestive process. Worse still, vegetarians give off more than carnivores!!
So, the self righteous vegetarians pop down to their favourite spot for a bit of elevenses bleating about the car drivers emit more green-house gasses than the guy who has a car parked outside his house all week and travels to work by train. Should we propose a tax on vegetarians?
And another thing, there is no such thing as green energy. How was your electricity generated? What process was used in building the generator? How was the cable that feeds the cable to your house/train manufactured?
I agree with an earlier poster in that we should start using carrots instead of the stick.
Personally I would use the train more often if it was not so expensive, less overcrowded and more frequent.
Every time the government hikes up fuel prices it increases costs for the transport companies who in turn put up fares. Net benefit, none except that the government coffers are once again swollen by several million more in revenues. I thought the idea was to get us out of our cars (park them) and onto trains and buses.
How about more park and ride services. Every railway line leading into London should have a new station built. Not in a town centre but near areas which can be turned into car parks as they do in France.
Until we see some serious investment of the monies gathered from motorists into alternative energy sources and public transport, I like so many others will be cynical as to the motives of the people in charge.

Hey all of you dont be so imature and blame 4x4 users and steriotype them all the time. I own a freelander, so what? Its engine size is nearly the same as a pergot 306! But then you go to a slightly more expensive mercadies and the engine size and fuel consumption goes sky high. So just because you own a 4x4 doesnt mean you dont care about the planet. I bet half of you drive an automatic car HA and you blame 4x4 go sue some factory in china or tell the americans to loose some weight.

For the record but not much to do with Richmond parking, the Prius is a Toyota product, not Honda and certainly my 2003 model does not quite get under the 100g/km criterion---I think the documentation claims 104g/km.

Very good point 'Friendly Dutch'; legally, no one has the automatic right to park on the highway. Historically it is for the passage of 'passengers', whether they be on foot, horseback, pedal cycle or more recently on or in mechanically propelled vehicles. Unfortunately, the later have virtually 'taken over the world' and think they own the highway/road. Vast numbers of vehicles are already allowed to park illegally (by reducing the width of the carriageway to less than the width of two vehicles) and thus cause an obstruction. The time really has come for drivers of vehicles to get in line and start abiding by the rules - all drivers (including the well-off) and all of the rules.

Very interesting debate! Why would anyone assume they can park their private car on the public road and not pay for it? Why should I pay for my own garage and/or driveway while others can clog up the roads with their cars? More cars parked on the road means more road space and more costs to the council (i.e. the local public). Vehicle licence allows you to use the road it doesn't grant you the right to park for free anywhere at all.

I propose that everyone should pay for the costs of maintaining their parking space, just as I do with my private drive and garage! Yes, there are idiosyncrasies in the Richmond parking and the Vehicle licensing charges but neither pay for the full costs of parking and driving on our roads.

Just to add, the Vehicle Excise Duty is also already based on CO2 emissions so all drivers (who tax their car) pay this.

So if youre a car driver you pay for CO2 emissions through VED. If youre a company car driver, you pay it again through tax and now if you live in Richmond, you pay again through a permit.

The whole basis of the new "permit" is biased. If you actually look at the emission bands, a car sitting in the starting part of band G produces 225 CO2 g/km or 127% of a car sitting in the starting point of Band B (101 CO2 g/km.) However the difference in the new permit fee is 500%. There isnt a car yet that doesnt produce emissions so if there is to be a charge (which personally I think the "consultation period" is just a rubber stamping exercise) then it should be applied uniformly.

Secondly, not that I am one but company car drivers already pay tax on their cars emissions each year. If they live in Richmond they will be paying twice.

I do agree with Doug Law (above). Freedoms are being taken away from us - based on our income. Those that can afford a 4x4 or like will still drive them when the cost of owning, driving and parking them rises.

In fact, it will likely increase the numbers of 4x4s on the road; as those with lower incomes drive less and drive smaller cars, the arrogant 4x4 drivers/owners will have more space to lumber around - they are already taking over the pavements.

Perversely, it will take draconian measures to ensure real freedom and equality of choice, such as legislating against the use of 4x4s in urban areas. Shock, horror, I hear the 4x4 fraternity shout. But I wonder what they would say if masses of people started driving lorries in London?

Then you would hear them say "ridiculous, unacceptable.... why does anyone need to drive around in a 20 ton truck?" Simple; they would have as much right to drive around in a truck as the 4x4 driver has to drive a 4x4.

Who needs a four wheel drive to do the school run or go to the shops or get from home to the office? 4x4s are actually commercial vehicles with added mod cons. They are inherently unsafe for their occupants and for other road users (although they are improving slowly).

Lets get such vehicles banned from towns and lets have legislation that addresses the green issues but impacts on everyone equally.

Next they will be taxing us extra on the "empty" rooms in our house - as clearly, you don't *need* spare rooms and pollution is caused by the energy used to heat these empty rooms.

So, if you are a couple and you have a 2 bed flat, expect to pay an extra charge above someone other couple with a lodger.

So, before we go round hapilly accepting ever increasing methods of more money being taken of us , or saying 'thats OK it doesnt affect me" remember that the next new tax increase could affect you.

R

I know, lets go back to horse drawn carts and stay at home. Get real! China refuses to accept the issues, America refuses to do anything about it what the hell is money making- grabbing Blair/Brown going to do, what impresion are we going to make on the world if the two biggist nations will not even prepared to do anything. Peeing and wind come to mind

Hi.
It never ceases to amaze me how most get the band, shouting about this increase and that increase in fuel duties and tax increase's for that reason or this reason.
STOP!
About time we all got together and forced the manufacturer's to start mass producing electric vehicles and engines that run on "Hydrogen". A clean fuel.
Yes! they are less powerful, but given time, that solution answer could be found.
Meantime its about time we slowed down.
I'm surprised at the revenue collected for speeding, is there a road out there where I can exceed, without coming up against a jam or roadworks!
Remeber, Rome was'nt built in a day, it took two and a half days.
Even less for Snow and Ice too melt.

well the motorists pay yet again. i am sick to the back teeth of taxes and more taxes .its got nothing to do with the environment just another excuse to rob us. surely a car parked up is a no emission vehicle?? just a farce isnt it? i am getting soooo annoyed by being ripped off all the time.you look at all the new proposals and its all about revenue.

I was under the impression that we lived in a country that allowed us to use free will and allowed us to make choices about our lifestyle. However that seems to be increasingly a right which is only available to the wealthy.

This is only one of many 'taxes' aimed at the motorist under the banner of green policies. It is an ill conceived and thinly veiled attempt to wring more money out of motorists. We already have a green tax on the motorist which is as fair as you can get, ie fuel duty, whether we like it or not it is the only tax which relates directly to the amount of CO2 you are actually likely produce. A cherished Jag XKR doing 6000 miles a year will pump out 2.6 tonnes a year. A well used Nissan Micra doing 15,000 miles will pump out 3.4 tonnes. Why then should the Jag pay more road tax, more parking tax - it's already paid for in fuel duty!!

Will the owner of a Range Rover Sport worry about paying an extra couple of hundred quid in parking, i doubt it. But someone on a moderate wage who has made their choice to own an older, cheaper large engined car, will be the one hit, ie those at or below the average wage.

How apt that Robin Hood should be back on the telly when the british public is getting fleeced by the tax man on the pretence of saving the planet.

As I understand it, from the police, a valid vehicle tax disc allows one to park on a public road anywhere unless there is a restriction or a liability of the parked vehicle being a danger to other road users. It seems that some councils have made their own civil torts to suit their coffers, and Richmond is no exception.

I would suggest this is purely a money making venture, dream't up by someone in the Liberal Party who is fearful for their seat and trying to please the ultra left in their constituancy. Unfortunately, the die is cast, and other councils will now jump on the bandwagon, since they will equally see it as another way of extracting money from the ever burdened ratepayer.

One only has to see how councils have expanded their staff umpteen times in the past 10 years to realise that they need ever more dosh to pay the wages and gold plated pensions.

I live in Richmond and would be subject to these charges.
Our last permits cost £85. The proposal is based on a new permit charge of £100, so that is already a 17.6% hike without the extra "green" tariffs!!

Unless you own a tiny normally aspirated diesel (Corsa, Fiesta, C2, Panda), a Toyota Prius or a 0.7 Smart then you will fall into at least Band C which attracts a "10% discount", which is actually a 6% increase on last years charges.

Our main car is a 1.9l diesel Touran which does an average 43mpg around town and about 55mpg on a long run. This falls into Band D alongside other "gas guzzlers" such as the Fiesta 1.6, Nissan Micra 1.4, Peugeot 307 1.4. This band attracts a "10% increase" which is actually a 30% increase on last years charges (gasp).

If that weren't breathtaking enough our second car is a 1994 BMW 3 series 1.8 that attracts a "30% increase" - read 53% increase - on top of which, because it is a second car, would attract an extra 50%.

So, this year our two very average cars cost £170 in parking permits. If this proposal passes next year we will be paying £305!!!

What is more I commute on the train and our kids walk to school. The combined mileage of both cars is about 12,000.

A parked car has zero emissions. Tax moving cars not stationary ones!

Let's face it this is just another excuse to make more money out of the governments (and local councils) current cash cow, the motorist. They know we have no viable alternatives to driving so spend their time thinking up more elaborate ways of fleecing us.

This latest report on climate change is another example. The climate is changing so let's increase taxes on motorists instead of going after the real polluters in heavy industry. It wouldn't surprise me to see a report suggesting that in order to tackle the increase in violent crime the government are going to increase taxes for motorists. After all, I'm sure violent criminals drive cars so if we can tax them off the road then they mightn't be able to travel to commit a crime.

Will we ever see the day that someone in government applies some innovative thinking to a problem instead of just reaching for the easy solution of increased taxation.

With all the parties jumping all over the green issues and with this government proposing new green taxes, why do we always have to be beaten by the stick instead of being lead by the carrot. It really is getting to be punative living in this country.
Why biodiesel is not considered more seriously suggests to me to be another money rackerttering exercise.
It's just the motorist & 'the working man' that keeps this country going!

The principle seems to be on car ownership and how many, rather than use.
The assumptions being made are seriously flawed, and will undoubtly lead to even more problems for the merry band of councillor's who thought it up.

Mostly at the ballot box.

This is good. People in London do not need cars, or not large cars anyway.
It is when this is targeted at people outside of cities with little or no public transport that it will become criminal - give it a year ot two and it will be countrywide :)

Perhaps you should have read the proposed changes before writing this article. Firstly, the higher charges are aimed at vehicles with high CO2 emissions and households with more than one vehicle, 4x4s are not mentioned. Secondly, the the highest proposed cost of a permit is £450, not £750 as you imply. £750 would be the cost to a household with 2 cars in the highest price band.

High charges / taxes for more polluting vehicles may be a good idea, but in my opinion it would make more sense to impose them on car use, (i.e. through fuel taxes or congestion charging), not on parking.