In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit and enter a dual lane main road
with no problems and not affecting the almost non-flow of traffic on
that particular road. Not believing that I'd have to pay 5 pounds for
the privilege of my negligible zone journey to exit the zone I've not
only one fine so far (unjust but I can live with it), but the prospect
of upwards of a thousands pounds or more. This is patently unjust and
I wonder how the scheme handles these cases. Any experiences? At a
pinch perhaps one would be elligible for a residents discount although
for someone technically not a resident, on the face of it probably
not.

From a legal standpoint, is anyone aware of any test cases so far that
challenge the reasonableness of a fixed charge? Charging the same of
someone making essentially a non journey and someone spending all day
driving in the zone, adding to not only congestion of traffic but also
that of street goers lungs from polution seems contestable and
unreasonable on the basis of any tests of reasonableness.

Perhaps the charging system should only charge if a driver is within
the zone for more than a certain period of time, and if entry to the
zone was not on file when recording a zone exit before a certain time
in the morning then no fee should be charged. This would probably not
reduce revenue much and be considerably more reasonable.

n.

Nick wrote:
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit

This is not a "trap". You are driving on a public road inside the zone
during the hours of operation. Pay up and stop whingeing. If you don't
like it, get up earlier in the morning or use public transport.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Nick averred
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive.

:-)) You were all in favour of the congestion charge, right up to the
moment when you found out it wasn't just Other People who were going to
have to pay it ...!

In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit and enter a dual lane main road
with no problems and not affecting the almost non-flow of traffic on
that particular road. Not believing that I'd have to pay 5 pounds for
the privilege of my negligible zone journey to exit the zone I've not
only one fine so far (unjust but I can live with it), but the prospect
of upwards of a thousands pounds or more. This is patently unjust and
I wonder how the scheme handles these cases. Any experiences? At a
pinch perhaps one would be elligible for a residents discount although
for someone technically not a resident, on the face of it probably
not.

From a legal standpoint, is anyone aware of any test cases so far that
challenge the reasonableness of a fixed charge? Charging the same of
someone making essentially a non journey and someone spending all day
driving in the zone, adding to not only congestion of traffic but also
that of street goers lungs from polution seems contestable and
unreasonable on the basis of any tests of reasonableness.

What a pity you didn't make that objection before you realised the
charge would apply to you. Then your objection wouldn't have been open
to the criticism of special pleading.

Perhaps the charging system should only charge if a driver is within
the zone for more than a certain period of time, and if entry to the
zone was not on file when recording a zone exit before a certain time
in the morning then no fee should be charged. This would probably not
reduce revenue much and be considerably more reasonable.


I too have an idea to make the scheme more reasonable. The congestion
charge should apply to the whole of central London, *except* the route
up Kennington Road and York Road, across Waterloo Bridge, through the
Aldwych, then up Kingsway and Woburn Place and so to Euston Station.

By an extraordinary coincidence I often drive along just that route
myself. But that hasn't influenced my opinion at all.

--
PeteM

Nick wrote:

In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit and enter a dual lane main road
with no problems and not affecting the almost non-flow of traffic on
that particular road.

At what point, when it isn't deserted and you join a queue (thereby
contributing to that queue and hence the reason for the charge), should
you start paying?

At what distance should your current 100 yards become untenable as an
excuse? 200 yards? 400 yards? A mile? A free journey directly out from
any point in the zone if you start there when the charge kicks in?

Easiest answer: park your car outside of the zone overnight or, and this
is the nub, don't drive. It's the large numbers of cars on the roads
both within and without the zone that caused the charge in the first
place, just because you're skirting the edges doesn't mean you are not
part of the problem.

Sounds like a whinge if you ask me. Suck it up and pay.

"Richard J." wrote in message ...
Nick wrote:
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit

This is not a "trap". You are driving on a public road inside the zone
during the hours of operation. Pay up and stop whingeing. If you don't
like it, get up earlier in the morning or use public transport.

lol. A predicted response as the post was bound to hit a nerve in
certain camps, but thanks for the feedback and your view none the
less.

I should say that IMHO the charge concept is fine and I agree in
principle. Anything that helps to improve efficiency of PT, car
journeys in/through town when necessary and perhaps improve air
quality and noise can only be a good thing, but the black and white
view of "your tyre crossed the line and so you have to pay 5 quid or
get a fine" is faulty.

No matter how vehemently one may be a fan of the CC, the reality is
that being expected to pay over a thousand pounds a year for the right
to travel a few yards down a deserted side road is by any standards
unreasonable, most particularly when the same cost buys the right to
travel for over 10 hours a day and create all manner of havoc if a CC
user so desired. The charge is after all a congestion charge, and
where a 30 second zone journey is the start of a route driving away
from town on roads well below capacity and where one doesn't even get
the chance to add to any congestion for the 5 quid a day (and this is
most likely not because the CC has been effective on the said route),
it can hardly be considered good value for money.

It's a case of where a potentially good project has a flawed
implementation, and whilst grasping the general concept of what's
required, fails to then go further to consider and address its
limitations and problems. I'm sure that with perhaps some additional
expert advice, Ken's minions at TfL can come up with improvements if
they put their collective minds to it, but I'm not holding my breath
on that one.

With regards to public transport, and as with anything, personally I
believe in using the best tool for the job. Obstinately blind to any
downside there are certainly those with the mindset that because they
paid their car tax they're going to use the car to replace even a 2
minute walk to the postbox, and there are equally those who will
always use PT. If there's spare time to be absorbed then fine, but I
prefer to make use of the transport option that makes the most sense
overall and that in general gets me from A to B in the least time in
order for me to be as productive as possible outside of travel time.
Typically PT is good for travelling into town but for travelling on
the periphery, and even before the CC was introduced, with the absense
of any good acceptable alternative the car is typically the most
efficient and sensible choice.

n.

"Richard J." wrote in message ...
Nick wrote:
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit

This is not a "trap". You are driving on a public road inside the zone
during the hours of operation. Pay up and stop whingeing. If you don't
like it, get up earlier in the morning or use public transport.

Or walk. 100 yards isn't far. Or cycle (an under-rated mode if
people use it properly).

PhilD

--

(PhilD)typed


"Richard J." wrote in message
...
Nick wrote:
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit

This is not a "trap". You are driving on a public road inside the zone
during the hours of operation. Pay up and stop whingeing. If you don't
like it, get up earlier in the morning or use public transport.

Or walk. 100 yards isn't far. Or cycle (an under-rated mode if
people use it properly).

For about half your £1000, you can buy a Brompton folding bike that you
can leave in your boot or under a desk etc. Then you can park your car
outside the CC Zone and whizz to your girlfriend.

You will also find other uses for it...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

chris harrison wrote in message ...
Nick wrote:

In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
At what point, when it isn't deserted and you join a queue (thereby
contributing to that queue and hence the reason for the charge), should
you start paying?

Yep, I'd raise the same questions too if pushing the point you're
trying to make. A charge isn't the problem perse, but more that I
don't get my 5 pounds worth. 25 pence would be more reasonable. SE1.
Deverill street joins bartholomew street and you leave the zone. In
case it wasn't clear, it's not 100 yards into the zone (maybe 100 is
even an over estimate), but 100 yards on a side street that's not used
as a rabbit run or anything else and that leaves the zone and filters
into a free flowing dual lane road that leads out of town. Fairly soon
leave the main road to use some side streets that avoid New Cross
bottlenecks and within just a few minutes one is rapidly approaching
deptford and soon into Blackheath. It's opposite to the way of most
other cars. There is no congestion nor ever likely to be except in
exceptional cases. Give me PT that can do it so quickly as the car and
I'd take it but unless we take to the skies it's not an option. That
said our garden is more than big enough to take a helicopter without
taking out the trees and squirrels in the process and so if anyone
knows of a cheap helitaxi then maybe that's the solution.

At what distance should your current 100 yards become untenable as an
excuse? 200 yards? 400 yards? A mile? A free journey directly out from
any point in the zone if you start there when the charge kicks in?

Easiest answer: park your car outside of the zone overnight or, and this
is the nub, don't drive. It's the large numbers of cars on the roads
both within and without the zone that caused the charge in the first
place, just because you're skirting the edges doesn't mean you are not
part of the problem.

Sounds like a whinge if you ask me. Suck it up and pay.

hehe, sounds like a whinge about cars causing the problem in the first
place

I've been used to taking PT from SE3 into my office in CW and
previously an office opposite Cannon Street station. Generally PT was
OK. Of course trains were typically late or cancelled (although the
DLR was good) but with years of conditioning to have low expectations
of the rail service one could always say that the service met them.
The only car I'd ever take was someone elses if I hopped into one of
the private hire Mercs parked in Walbrook to get a comfy ride home if
it was late and I was shattered. Driving into town on a morning would
be madness.

The don't drive argument really wears a bit thin after a while, and
where should one stop? Would you advocate taking it to its logical
conclusion and banning cars inside the M25, returning side streets
where there's no public transport to parks, gardens and shelters for
the homeless. Opening up cycle lanes so that people can get on their
bikes and get a more healthy lifestyle and more of a sense of shared
community rather than being isolated in their mostly metal pods of a
morning? Damn, this actually starts to sound like a great idea. That
and concreting over the Thames and we could really be onto something
here. Of course the CC employees at TfL would be out of a job, but oh
well and never mind, any anyway maybe they could take up studying the
cycle lanes.

Unfortunately of course in the real world the don't drive argument
isn't practical, at least not yet and probably not for some
considerable time to come. Easy for people to say who don't need to
get from A to B not only within a reasonable timeframe but in good
shape and awake, but on the route in question getting up earlier,
which would be needed not just to avoid the charge but to take public
transport as it's comparatively sucky, and taking PT would be more
traumatic than the car, even with the cloud of having to pay the CC.

Ho hum, 5 quid a day isn't a killer but in this case I'd rather give
it to a cause where it might do some good.

PeteM wrote in message ...
Nick averred
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive.

:-)) You were all in favour of the congestion charge, right up to the
moment when you found out it wasn't just Other People who were going to
have to pay it ...!

Hehe, not really as I've paid it before on the one or two occasions
where I had to drive into the Zone. The Zone is fine and probably does
some good. No one likes to have to pay up but there are alternatives
for getting into town.

What a pity you didn't make that objection before you realised the
charge would apply to you. Then your objection wouldn't have been open
to the criticism of special pleading.

Agree with you totally on that, it's a pity indeed, but as the
circumstance didn't apply this wasn't an option. Oh well.

I too have an idea to make the scheme more reasonable. The congestion
charge should apply to the whole of central London, *except* the route
up Kennington Road and York Road, across Waterloo Bridge, through the
Aldwych, then up Kingsway and Woburn Place and so to Euston Station.

By an extraordinary coincidence I often drive along just that route
myself. But that hasn't influenced my opinion at all.

Not really that extraordinary and I think we guessed that by the
second line but thanks for the clarification

There probably are routes out of town that one could say are congested
but I didn't think that the charge was to try and combat those. Really
I'd have expected that the charge should be getting those that drive
into town, and to catch people that entered overnight to record those
that are travelling on major arteries through town. This would be
reasonable whether or not there was congestion, but being charged to
actually drive out of town on clear routes seems unreasonable and is
perhaps the biggest flaw in the system.

Another modification to the scheme might be to only charge if there
was congestion, and this is something that is technically entirely
feasible to do although of course less of a deterrent because people
would chance their luck on there being none, but if there was no
congestion the payment could be carried over until next time.

n.

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:17:31 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Nick wrote:
In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that
was until I was caught in this trap. On an evening and outside zone
hours I would like to drive to my g/f's flat that's inside the zone by
about 100 yards drive. In the morning I would leave the private car
park, enter the zone to drive 30 seconds or even less on a deserted
side street to reach the zone exit

This is not a "trap". You are driving on a public road inside the zone
during the hours of operation.

Precisely. Your use of the car within the zone means you become liable
to pay the charge.

You cannot allow small exceptions to the rules because it is the thin
end of a very big wedge which would eventually undermine the basis of
the scheme.
--
Paul C
Admits to Working for London Underground!