please empty your brain below
Part of Richmond is within the South Circular - Barnes, Mortlake, half of East Sheen.

dg writes: Fixed, thanks.

Liz | 25.10.20 - 7:23 a.m. | #

Living on the borders of the North Circ this will heavily influence my buying and travelling decisions as I have a 20 + year old non compliant car. Haringay seems hell bent on losing any potential business in the borough. Spurs stadium is approx half a mile inside the zone. It already banned match day parking years ago and destroyed 80% of the pubs/shops trade. Fans park in Enfield Borough and walk 10 - 15 mins. Btw my vehicle is a classic car and does under 3k miles a year.

Ogden | 25.10.20 - 7:55 a.m. | #

The "parked out front" phrase is a key point for many. With the swathes of terraced houses in the outer reaches of the extended zone, many neighbours are asking if we have to pay every day just to have the car parked on the street outside.

I'm guessing they won't put cameras on every tiny residential street, but whether it's mobile camera cars or something they'll find a way to catch you out. So the answer will probably be yes.

dg quotes: "If you are parked but don’t drive, you don’t need to pay the ULEZ charge."

Nick | 25.10.20 - 8:05 a.m. | #

I hope they will apply common sense to the slip roads on the south side of the North Circular.

dg writes: Map shows slip roads are excluded.

Malcolm of Kent | 25.10.20 - 8:40 a.m. | #

The next boundary is the M25, but this would hit more Tory voting areas, in outer London a car is important if you have a job in the home counties that isn't on a direct link from a railway station (or bus route) near where you live.

But I suspect that there will be a ULEZ within the M25 by 2030, also by then natural turnover will have reduced the number of non-compliant vehicles.

Still Anon | 25.10.20 - 8:40 a.m. | #

The reducing of pollution should be non political, we're trying to save the planet aren't we?

mikeH | 25.10.20 - 8:49 a.m. | #

There are lots of relatively cheap electric cars coming on the market now.. for owners who currently insist on driving their Chelsea Tractors in town.

Alex McKenna | 25.10.20 - 9:35 a.m. | #

I don’t know why petrol vehicles get away with Euro 4 when diesels have to meet the most recent Euro 6. There is no particulates limit for petrol under Euro 4. (Perhaps from January we will set our own “Brit 4” and “Brit 6”)

Andrew | 25.10.20 - 9:44 a.m. | #

Rather than buying an expensive electric car and worrying about the inadequate charging infrastructure, we're hoping to trade in our non-compliant diesel car for an even older but compliant petrol version at some out of London car dealer where our diesel will still be appreciated - as long as the deal costs less than £4500, which is a year's worth of ULEZ charges, and twice that if the expanded congestion charge covers 'internal' movements as well

I find it hard to imagine they'll have enough cameras to monitor every vehicle movement within the extended zone, though the new LTN traffic reduction schemes might help them by removing local 'short cuts' and restricting traffic to fewer, main-er roads which might already have ANPR cameras.

ActonMan | 25.10.20 - 9:58 a.m. | #

I'm not sure that any proposed extension to congestion charge would survive a legal challenge. The current one had many days in court, but got through because of proven consultations, a genuine policy need and was NOT primarily a revenue generation exercise.

John | 25.10.20 - 10:18 a.m. | #

This will be interesting for people who live around Alma Road, Wansdworth. When they do the town centre improvements, the A3/A205 corridor will move from East Hill to Swandon Way, taking them back outside, unless Swandon Way becomes a sort of corridor. I wonder if TfL have thought about that? As far as I can find out, the plans are still due to go ahead.

NickW | 25.10.20 - 10:19 a.m. | #

"Saving the planet" should not be at the expense of the less well-off who next year will also suffer disproportionately from the economic impact of Covid-19.

squirrel | 25.10.20 - 10:33 a.m. | #

Looking at the map, it's interesting that South Woodford's George Lane shopping parade is partially excluded, along with the bridge over the North Circular.

This appears to be unique, all the other exclusions look to be for direct connections onto the North/South Circular. I wonder how South Woodford managed to swing this?

the wub | 25.10.20 - 10:40 a.m. | #

Take for instance the Euro 6 car diesel engine date of Sept 2015. I would imagine that this is the date when all newly registered cars had to meet Euro 6. But as manufacturers know well in advance of impending legislation, vehicles made by them and registered before this date would meet that legislation.

So I would suggest that anyone who purchased (new) said car, say 12-18 months prior to that date, check with the manufacturer to see if it meets Euro 6.

If it does, what you do with this information (as an ANPR camera will work on the Sept 2016) I have been unable to find out. My motorcycle is a late 2006 registered model and It was manufactured to (in this case) Euro 3.

Dave | 25.10.20 - 10:51 a.m. | #

Don't take my "roughly speaking" table as gospel. Check your vehicle online with TfL.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 25.10.20 - 10:56 a.m. | #

There is a suggestion above that the M25 could be a future ULEZ boundary. I'm interested to learn how that might work, given that 40% of the area within the M25 is not part of Greater London (ie. it is beyond the Mayor's jurisdiction).

Alan S | 25.10.20 - 10:58 a.m. | #

The M25 will not become a ULEZ boundary - that was an entirely spurious suggestion.

The next practical boundary is the Low Emission Zone (or LEZ) introduced in 2008, which approximates to the edge of Greater London.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 25.10.20 - 11:00 a.m. | #

The South Woodford 'exclusion' might be to provide access to turn back at the small roundabout where George Lane meets The Viaduct. It would be impracticable (and dangerous) to turn round in the middle of the High Road at the boundary. And looking at the detailed map (no 16) it would appear that the car parks for Sainsbury's, Waitrose and M&S will all be within the expanded ULEZ even if part of George Lane itself is not.

Alan S | 25.10.20 - 11:19 a.m. | #

Thanks for answering the question about not having to pay when parked up all day, in case the proposed congestion charge area is increased, as my car often sits for days without being used. Do I really need it? Probably not apart from trips supporting an elderly relative not readily accessible by public transport.

I'm sorry to have to draw your attention to a spelling mistake in your usually thoroughly proof read blog; "undobtedly" in the fourth paragraph from the end.

dg writes: fixed, thanks.

Tim | 25.10.20 - 11:20 a.m. | #

a) Dave
The details of a car's emissions are recorded when it is registered, so the ANPR system will know if a vehicle is exempt.

b)The Wub
The South Woodford easement, along with similar arrangements at the Hogarth roundabout and Park Royal, seem to involve a grade separated crossing of the North Circular with no access to it. To avoid the zone starting on the flyover they allow you to travel as far as the next roundabout. Similar arrangements exist for the existing LEZ, e.g. you can use the A3 as far as the Tolworth roundabout.

c) Liz
That narrow strip in Kew between the South Circular and the river contains Richmond borough's "amenity site", creating a £12.50 disincentive to dispose of refuse properly. It also includes the crematorium - a facility with a high proportion of visitors unfamiliar with the area and likely to have other things on their mind. Being charged £160 at such a time simply for not knowing seems harsh.

timbo | 25.10.20 - 11:44 a.m. | #

If only places were 'readily accessible by public transport'. It seems perverse to pressure TfL into penalising a significant chunk of the population of London for using their cars at a time when using public transport is officially discouraged.

ActonMan | 25.10.20 - 11:51 a.m. | #

Even households without vehicles are going to feel the impact as their delivery charges, or food prices etc go up to cover the increase in business delivery charges.

Cornish Cockney | 25.10.20 - 12:14 p.m. | #

I have very little sympathy, ever since the congestion charge this has been the natural progression.

What I don't agree with is a time limit on the exemption for 'disabled' or 'disabled passenger vehicles' on the current ULEZ, especially as the modifications could be expensive, and not easily swap-out-a-ble as others above have suggested they will do with their vehicles.

I would have suggested that cars registered as disabled vehicles be exempt, but new vehicles seeking exemption should be already ULEZ compliant

Further North of the River | 25.10.20 - 1:32 p.m. | #

lots of pre-2007 motorcycles meet the ULEZ rules.

ask for a "certificate of conformity" from your manufacturer. this will state the nox and co2 numbers, if they are ok, then submit this to tfl, along with your bike's V5

or... see here to get your bike tested.

bert | 25.10.20 - 1:56 p.m. | #

John above refers to the legal challenges to the original congestion charge, and the perception that it only survived them by being justified in various ways, which would not apply to the extension recently held up as a threat from the current regime.

Sadly that was then and this is now.

Malcolm of Kent | 25.10.20 - 3:13 p.m. | #

If TFL are skint then they should raise fares from the people that use it not burden everybody with a congestion charge (tax) that will ultimately destroy business and people in London. Crazy polititians need sacking.

Boxer | 25.10.20 - 3:26 p.m. | #

A little mentioned issue regarding TfL finances. Vehicle Excise Duty from London's drivers no longer maintains London's TfL roads. Public transport users actually covering the loss & paying for it.

ftmd | 25.10.20 - 3:36 p.m. | #

In 50% of Tower Hamlets households nobody has a driving licence, let alone a car.

At the other end of the scale are Bromley, Havering and Sutton where just 21% are car- and licence-less.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 25.10.20 - 5:49 p.m. | #

Is this such a big issue when even my old Aston Martin qualifies as ULEZ compliant? Interested to know the number of people this would affect. I got rid of my diesel 2 year ago due to the Company Car tax issues/emissions.

dg writes: Answer's in the post.

Lurker | 25.10.20 - 7:35 p.m. | #

The radio adverts for the ULEZ extension seem to have been made by someone who has never looked at an A-Z - going "East to East Dulwich" is a case in point.

Jay | 25.10.20 - 10:00 p.m. | #

There are a number of nasty catchouts

1/ replacing a non compliant used car with a compliant used car? Well the trade in value of you compliant car has plummeted (and there will be a glut depressing prices countrywide) and compliant used replacement increases in value (ditto shortage countrywide). No transitional payments or scrappage scheme to mitigate this.

2/ potentially have to pay to re-park your vehicle a short distance away due to parking bay closure, very harsh, especially if caught by a mobile camera.

3/ certain leisure vehicle owners (motor caravan, horse box, or racing support) get hit hard, especially if they can only have one vehicle so it is multipurpose. Very expensive to replace converted vehicles.

PS. I seem to recall that residents would get a grace period when implementation starts if they register their vehicle (but not replace it or transfer it to another resident)

MilesT | 26.10.20 - 12:06 a.m. | #

To correct a couple of comments, this has nothing to do with saving the planet, i.e. CO2 emissions, as it's about localised pollution such as diesel particulates and NOx. Indeed it's penalising diesel vehicles, which actually produce less CO2 but are worse for air quality

It's basically an anti-diesel change. If anything the worst affected people will be small businesses in outer London with an older van, as vans were always diesel until recently. I imagine secondhand newer vans will be VERY expensive

Mikey C | 26.10.20 - 1:32 a.m. | #

I don’t know for certain, but I suspect it is to do with the NOx emissions being 0.08 g/km for both, while the limit drops to 0.06 g/km for petrol under Euro 6. But under Euro 4 there is no requirement to limit particulates from petrol cars.

Andrew | 26.10.20 - 9:21 a.m. | #

I suspect real world emissions from the average Euro 4 petrol are comparable to Euro 6 diesel emissions, even if there's no specific requirement in the rules.

Annoyingly I've never been able to find a document with TfL's working for how it came up with the ULEZ rules.

(Also those emission tests are as new. Diesel vehicles have emission reduction systems that age badly or are routinely defeated, and aren't really picked up by MOTs)

Graham | 26.10.20 - 10:02 a.m. | #

I'm sure there'll be a resident's discount for the congestion charge if it's extended. But if it is a congestion charge, how can all of inside London (as opposed to inner London) be in the same zone?

Hubert Berlye | 26.10.20 - 10:09 a.m. | #

Don't take the number plate checker as gospel. Our car qualifies for ULEZ exemption as an historic vehicle and the plate checker used to confirm that. It no longer does, though the ULEZ exemption rules haven't been changed.

ap | 26.10.20 - 12:15 p.m. | #

Interesting that there is a limit for petrol engines at all.

Compare with the emission zones in Germany and the Netherlands where more or less every petrol car with a cathalytic converter (i.e. every car made for about the last three decades) are allowed, while diesel cars has to be rather new.

In Germany and the Netherlands the emission zones strictly prohibit using a car that doesn't comply with the regulations. No option to just pay to be allowed to drive around with bad emissions.

Btw doesn't the MOT check emissions throughly? The equivalent to a MOT here in Sweden always performs test on the exhausts and the inspector does a visual inspection to check for any obvious tampering. Old cars that just fail the tests get scrapped or used as parts donors.

Kind of sad to see that cars that otherwise drive fine and have no rust go to scrap just due to that there isn't really any good information for hobby mechanics to read up on how to diagnose those kinds of problems.

MiaM | 27.10.20 - 2:37 a.m. | #

Ultimately I think the ULEZ will need to be extended to the current LEZ boundary, maybe in 5 years, definitely 10 years (as EVs become mainstream). Then we'll still have the congestion problem, possibly getting worse as those who previously avoided owning a car on environmental grounds no longer have that motivation to stop them. So an extension to the C-charge will be needed OR road pricing. Extending an existing system using existing ANPR cameras is more likely though I think. My view is that any extended C-charge should follow the same pricing as existing public transport zones, with the centre being more expensive than a trip avoiding the centre. The C-charge cost should then be set at the same rate as a Travelcard for the relevant area +10% to encourage use of public transport over driving.

Rob C | 08.11.20 - 4:54 p.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy