London Eye
 

In article ,
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement
system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them?

A motorcycle can carry as much luggage as a small car, and 2 people, in
1/4 the road space.

Thus 4 motorcycles, carrying a minimum of 4 people, can fit in the same
space as 1 car.

I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just that I doubt that Ken was thinking
what you're thinking when he decided to exempt motorcycles from the
congestion charge.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

London Eye
 

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement
system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them?

A motorcycle can carry as much luggage as a small car, and 2 people, in
1/4 the road space.

Thus 4 motorcycles, carrying a minimum of 4 people, can fit in the same
space as 1 car.

I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just that I doubt that Ken was thinking
what you're thinking when he decided to exempt motorcycles from the
congestion charge.


Really? He seems to like buses (more people in less space) surely
motorcycles are exempt for the same reason?

London Eye
 

"Geezer" wrote in message
eenews.net...

"JB" wrote in message




Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've
never
heard that before.

No it isnt based on occupancy...

As I thought.

it is based on screwing the car owner for as
much as possible.



Get yourself an exempt vehicle and you'll be ok.

London Eye
 

London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge is
(was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The
joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease
congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the
Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I have
used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN
Glen

--
I was an only child.....eventually!
"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message
...

"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message
...

"JB" wrote in message
...

"gay merrington" wrote in message
...
Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the
London
Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control
......Does
that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more
than
one
person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London?
Glen


Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've
never heard that before.


Neither have I.
As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle.


PS
What is this doing on :-
uk.rec.humour?

(Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!)

London Eye
 

gay merrington wrote:
London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge is
(was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The
joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease
congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the
Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I have
used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN
Glen


Yes.

Francis

London Eye
 

"gay merrington" wrote in message
...
London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge
is
(was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The
joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease
congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the
Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I
have
used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN
Glen

--

The joke is that the congestion charge worked. It did reduce the amount of
cars so well that they are not getting in the money.


I was an only child.....eventually!
"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message
...

"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message
...

"JB" wrote in message
...

"gay merrington" wrote in message
...
Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the
London
Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control
......Does
that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more
than
one
person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London?
Glen


Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've
never heard that before.


Neither have I.
As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle.


PS
What is this doing on :-
uk.rec.humour?

(Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!)

London Eye
 

On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:32:49 +0100, "gay merrington"
wrote:

Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London
Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does
that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one
person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London?

How sweet! Did your Mummy and Daddy help you with that post, or did
you manage it all on your own?
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

London Eye
 

And how many bikes (aside from those with sidecars) have you seen that carry
more than 2 people?
Glen

--
I was an only child.....eventually!
"Colin Rosenstiel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(JB) wrote:

"Paul Cummins" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(JB) wrote:

The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've
never heard that before.

Yup - if you drive a vehicle with only enough wheels and seats to
carry 1 or 2 people, it's free.

I hadn't thought about motorcycles I have to admit, but that's not the
same as vehicle occupancy. It's just that motorcycles are included as
of the exemptions.

Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement system
on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

London Eye
 

Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed
it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a
helpful lot....That's why I just love it here!
Glen

--
I was an only child.....eventually!
"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:32:49 +0100, "gay merrington"
wrote:

Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the
London
Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control
.......Does
that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than
one
person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London?

How sweet! Did your Mummy and Daddy help you with that post, or did
you manage it all on your own?
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

London Eye
 

Nothing wrong with cutting down on congestion,though in other cities what
has worked is occupancy within the cars.What they do is that they have
cameras (similar to the speed cameras here) that take a picture of the
car,and within certain hours of the day (7am-7pm) any car that has more than
2 seats (ie Smart Cars would be exempt for example) that have les than 3
passengers are ticketed/fined/sent a bill for carrying less than the alloted
3 passengers with the exception of motorcycles,cabs,commercial vehicles
(read in delivery vans/company vehicles on call/or applied for exemption) or
similar types of vehicles.Seems to me that would work equally as well in
reducing the congestion within London.Just a thought of what I've seen work
elsewhere.
Glen

--
I was an only child.....eventually!
"Trev" trevbowdenATdsl.pipexDOTnet wrote in message
...

"gay merrington" wrote in message
...
London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion
charge
is
(was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The
joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease
congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think
the
Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I
have
used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN
Glen

--

The joke is that the congestion charge worked. It did reduce the amount of
cars so well that they are not getting in the money.


I was an only child.....eventually!
"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message
...

"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message
...

"JB" wrote in message
...

"gay merrington" wrote in
message
...
Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the
London
Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control
......Does
that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more
than
one
person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in
London?
Glen


Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy?
I've
never heard that before.


Neither have I.
As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle.


PS
What is this doing on :-
uk.rec.humour?

(Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!)