You don't pay road tax!

[Basil W Bloke]

I agree that most of the responses to the old "Road Tax" chestnut are much too long and involved for them to be of any use in a traffic situation, so I tend to use the "Yes I do" response rather than hope that a driver would wish to enter into a long winded debate with me.

At times when discussion is possible, with non-cycling mates in pubs for example, one of my favourite comments is, "I can't believe that you could shell out that amount of money on something and have absolutely no idea of what it is you are buying"

I've just remembered a reponse by somebody on another news group.
He suggested flinging 50p in loose change in through the drivers open window and saying "Well, there's your refund for today. Now **** off!"

Not the sort of confrontational thing I'd do myself, but it made me chuckle.

[Tony]

Me like!!! And I could almost see you doing it.....

[Geriatrix]

My own situation is slightly complicated by living outside of the UK, and I don't own a car now, but like thousands of other 'tourists', I spend quite a lot, even when I tour exclusively by bike.

From your previous posts it sounds like you come from Muenster or somewhere close bye. Are the encounters you describe specific to UK or is it a general experience?

[Les Reay]

Not Münster but in the same corner - Oldenburg is a town not far from Holland. There are thousands of cyclists here and it prompted me to sell the car and base my transport needs around cycling.
However, the area is flat and not so interesting from the touring point of view, despite the North Sea Cycle Route going through it, so I often return to the UK for a challenging tour.

The attitude to cyclists here is much more tolerant, although you are generally not allowed to cycle on the roads and often have to share a path with pedestrians. This really irritates me but I love the freedom to cycle everywhere without being considered a crank!

I get the impression from my yearly visits that there is a growing intolerance of cyclists in the UK

[gambatte]

a Neanderthal type in a Fiesta .......

I'd be grateful if somebody could compose a suitable short reply to this for the next time it happens.

Best I heard was a guy who had this "Why don't you pay road tax" thrown at him.

He looked in the car at the guys female companion and said:

"That's 2 I've got over you - I don't pay for sex either!"

[Les Reay]

Nice one!

[WesBrooks]

I was under the impression that roads where maintained by the local council and so was one of the things charged for in the council tax? Isn't road tax to cover the additional wear to the roads caused by motor vehicles? Council tax doesn't go to the government, as the name implies it stays with the local council. Road tax money makes it's way through to the government and then a proportion of that makes it's way back to the council. I think the councils handle the budgets for road maintainance and improvements.

As some one else said thought there doesn't seem to be a clear way of seeing where tax collected on for instance road tax, vat, income, etc specifically funds. I think it is just put into one pot then dolled out to various causes including subsidising train travel (as hard as that is to believe, my local trains are around about 50% subsidsed @ £4.10 for a 22 mile return journey - cheaper to run my car!).

[piedwagtail91]

it doesn't help when a certain car company mentions "road fund licence "in their ads on tv.
i thought it was either vehicle excise duty or vehicle tax.
looking on the relevant website road tax doesn't exist.
it is mentioned ,in the reams of paper that drop though the door with council tax, that a certain amount of council tax goes to road maintainance. so more or less everyone pays for their upkeep.

[gambatte]

I was under the impression that roads where maintained by the local council and so was one of the things charged for in the council tax? Isn't road tax to cover the additional wear to the roads caused by motor vehicles? Council tax doesn't go to the government, as the name implies it stays with the local council. Road tax money makes it's way through to the government and then a proportion of that makes it's way back to the council. I think the councils handle the budgets for road maintainance and improvements.

As some one else said thought there doesn't seem to be a clear way of seeing where tax collected on for instance road tax, vat, income, etc specifically funds. I think it is just put into one pot then dolled out to various causes including subsidising train travel (as hard as that is to believe, my local trains are around about 50% subsidsed @ £4.10 for a 22 mile return journey - cheaper to run my car!).

There is no such thing as 'ROAD TAX'

Check any of the recent government budget reports. Its classified as 'Vehicle Excise Duty'. Essentially a tax against the vehicle, rated according to its ability to pollute

[archy sturmer]

I was under the impression that roads where maintained by the local council and so was one of the things charged for in the council tax?

Council tax goes to your county council (most of it) your district council (most of what's left) and to your local police authority.
This is topped up by annual grants frm central government (which accounts for the biggest slice of local authority budgets)
Roads are maintained either by your local Highways Authority (county council) or The Highways agency (who I believe contract work out to the local authorities).

Isn't road tax to cover the additional wear to the roads caused by motor vehicles?

No it just goes into the the chancellor's big pot, along with VAT, income tax, and all the rest. None of it specifically funds any particular thing.
'Road tax' is just a small proportion of the annual cost of highway repairs etc.
So if you pay tax of any kind, you pay 'Road tax'.

[archy sturmer]

And here's another way we're all having to shell out for the inadequacies of (some) drivers...
I was talking to a highways engineer the other day who told me that any road death now has to be treated as a crime scene.
Well good, that means they take it seriously.
But it also means the local highways authority can be sued for corporate manslaughter if they can be held to blame. (Maybe that's why Mick F's devon gritters were gritting in the rain).
I'd always thought that it was drivers' responsibility to drive according to the conditions - if the road was dangerous in some way, be cautious accordingly.
But apparently, as of last year the highways authority - ie you, the taxpayer - may have to shell out if some idiot fails to spot a red light.
Hence they're looking at costly 'safety schemes' anywhere there might be another accident.
I blame the blame culture!
- AS

[thirdcrank]

In England and Wales any sudden death must be reported to HM Coroner and a fatal road accident has for many years been one of the categories of death where the coroner must sit with a jury at the inquest.

Although highway authorities have a duty of care to road users and can be sued if their negligence leads to injury or loss, it seems to me that most of the decided cases go the other way.. For example, not so long ago a woman sued Kirklees Council (?) because when she overtook another vehicle on the brow of a hill she met something very large coming the other way. Somebody investigating this on her behalf discovered that there had previously been a SLOW road marking which had not been reinstated following roadworks. She sued and the court told her not to be silly (although in much more legal lingo.) Of course, most of these cases are decided by haggling rather than in front of m'lud but it is my impression that when payouts are made, it is not a so-called compo culture but inadequately maintained roads, which as cyclists we see constantly.

[2Tubs]

Just so you know, I do pay road tax.

I pay income tax.

I pay VAT on goods purchased.

I pay a load of taxes direct to the treasury.

And the treasury use some of that money for building roads, most of which were built before the introduction of Road Tax.

And I pay VED for the car I drive.

Every time I use my cycle in preference to the car I do a lot less damage to the roads.

I look forward to my VED rebate.

Gazza

[WesBrooks]

Every time I use my cycle in preference to the car I do a lot less damage to the roads.

Be very carefull with that argument, particually if you are on a road racer, or tourer with particually narrow high pressure tyres. The pressure on the road from your bike tyre may well be close to that of say a big tyred sales rep wagon. Increased pressure leads to a higher rate of wear. Therefore if your using your bike instead of the car, assuming your doing the same mileage you may even be more likely to cause damage. - I'll check this later today if I get a chance.

However if you think the Motor Vehicle Road Tax (Tax as in a charge imposed by an authority), VED, whatever, is a charge imposed because of the pollution (which has only been the case for the past few years, and only for new cars - the rest is on engine size which is a poor measure) then you have a case to argue. That said the charge imposed is based on an average milage, rather than the milage you will actually acrue. So some fortunate people pay less than they should and some more - ie yourself. The only way to counter this would be to move all motor vehicle related road charges to the fuel.

[2Tubs]

Every time I use my cycle in preference to the car I do a lot less damage to the roads.

Be very carefull with that argument, particually if you are on a road racer, or tourer with particually narrow high pressure tyres. The pressure on the road from your bike tyre may well be close to that of say a big tyred sales rep wagon. Increased pressure leads to a higher rate of wear. Therefore if your using your bike instead of the car, assuming your doing the same mileage you may even be more likely to cause damage. - I'll check this later today if I get a chance.

I had a similar argument with a 4x4 driving colleague and we did some rough working out, and I was amazed to find that lbs/inch were roughly the same for my road bike and his Jeep.

Determined not to lose out on this one I suggested that horse power and friction also contributed to wear on the roads, and unless he drove very very carefully, he was always going to do far more damage.

Not sure how accurate that is, but it shut him up for a while while he went off to find another reason why cyclists shouldn't be on the road >;o)

Someone must have spent time working this out objectively. I wonder where the research is?

However if you think the Motor Vehicle Road Tax (Tax as in a charge imposed by an authority), VED, whatever, is a charge imposed because of the pollution (which has only been the case for the past few years, and only for new cars - the rest is on engine size which is a poor measure) then you have a case to argue. That said the charge imposed is based on an average milage, rather than the milage you will actually acrue. So some fortunate people pay less than they should and some more - ie yourself. The only way to counter this would be to move all motor vehicle related road charges to the fuel.

Agree about increased taxation on fuel.

Unlike congestion charging and sat tracking options that have been discussed, it is: -
* Less costly to impliment
* Less likely to break (unlike technology)
* Less likely to be fraudulantly abused.
* More likely to encourage more ecnomical car ownership.
* And a load of other good stuff I don't have time left in my lunch break to type.

>;o)

Gazza