"SandyT" <andy.t (AT) nospam (DOT) net> wrote

wot?

The date being 15 Jul 2007, "Spook" <cpo (AT) misse (DOT) com> decided to write:

That rather misses the point. The concession encourages people to
preserve our motoring heritage. Moreover the Government should be
encouraging people to keep older cars on the road. If they are not
doing high mileages then it is much more environmentally friendly to
keep a car on the road than to scrap it and cause a new one to be
manufactured. Of course the politicians pay lip service to the planet
and then do whatever the big multinationals tell them to do.

--
Richard Porter
ricp at / www. minijem.plus.com
"You can't have Windows without pains."

In article <ae3144034f.news (AT) user (DOT) minijem.plus.com>,
Richard Porter <dontusethis (AT) address (DOT) uk.invalid> wrote:
Genuine heritage milestones will be valuable enough in their own right
without needing a subsidy.

Most cars are scrapped long before they get to 25 years old. That
argument would be better applied to more recent vehicles that produce less
emissions.

My feeling is it might distort the classic market and increase the value
of borderline age cars making them too expensive for some true enthusiasts.

--
*If at first you don't succeed, avoid skydiving.*

Dave Plowman dave (AT) davenoise (DOT) co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" <dave (AT) davenoise (DOT) co.uk> wrote



Indeed, a true enthusiast will preserve a classic car regardless of
any tax breaks.

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:38:58 +0100, ":Jerry:" <INVALID (AT) INVALID (DOT) INVALID>
wrote:

them is higher than the tax (though the exempt ones do also benefit from
cheaper insurance being over 30 y.o). I could afford to pay for them all
if I had to, but it's nice not having to worry about it. It also makes
me more inclined to keep them taxed if something breaks; if my modern
car breaks and needs to be off the road for a while I consider SORN (and
have this year once); with the exempt cars I leave them with a tax disc
while they have MOT. For the same reason my project Minis are insured on
the same classic policy as the Elf, because it doesn't cost any more,
even though they're not going on the road for a while.

I suspect the majority of classic tax-exempt car owners also have a
taxed modern car as well, and in most cases the classic is only driven
occasionally. Perversely I choose to drive my Elf to work (25 miles no
less!) and leave my full-rate taxed modern car on the drive!
--
Regards, Chris (Please take out my car to reply by plain text email)
---1967 Riley Elf---1978 Mini 1000---1971 Mini Clubman---
----1972 Mini Clubman estate----------1979 Ford Capri----
-----1966 Triumph Herald Estate------1957 Standard 8-----

"Chris Bolus" <chrisB (AT) 78MINIb0lus (DOT) com> wrote

Wait till congestion tax, New Labour will screw you even more than they are
now, trust me,

Steve68s.

morning Richard

Shame our GOVT in NZ dosn't see it he same way LOL, we only get a cheaper
rate at 40 yrs plus. the good news is that my jem is nearly finished!
Engines in, wheels are on, just sorting the wiring and then the interior and
glass can go back in.

Tim

"Richard Porter" <dontusethis (AT) address (DOT) uk.invalid> wrote

Tim,

It's the same here in Australia although the "Conditional Registration" ($60
a year compared to about $250 for normal rego.) has the sort of conditions
that makes it useless if you want to use the car outside of club events.
What I suspect is that, unless we are vigilant, cars older than 10 years
will be legislated off the road. There are lots of ways it could be done.

Graham


"Tim" <tim_lis(NOSPAM)@clear.net.nz> wrote