[cue2]

The bill arrived for the tax on the new Kuga we bought last year. I thought; is it already a year since my wife drove if off the forecourt? How time flies!
Well no. It's just over a year since the salesman took my credit card deposit on the basis that we'd soon have the new car. Following that there were indications that the car was imminent , for a while. Eventually the car was in the country. But where? "It's been damaged". Eventually we got the car. It was early in June. The car followed two months after the V5 and that's why the tax is due. It covers the time the Kuga sat at the docks in Belgium and while it was in the ship and travelling to the body shop. Just so the salesman could get his bonus that month.im not impressed.

 

[Verbout]

Cheeky bastid.....go give him a thumpunch:

... or at least a very evil stare.

 

[TheGrimJeeper]

What's "road tax"? Is that an EU thing?

 

[jurdy1]

It's just a thinly veiled tax that supplements French farmers fishing quotas...I think.... hence why when you buy a car in the middle of a month you automatically lose days back to the first of the month. Naughty Brussels, I mean Downing Street. And poor show from the dealer BTW.

 

[TonyGr]

The bill arrived for the tax on the new Kuga we bought last year. I thought; is it already a year since my wife drove if off the forecourt? How time flies!
Well no. It's just over a year since the salesman took my credit card deposit on the basis that we'd soon have the new car. Following that there were indications that the car was imminent , for a while. Eventually the car was in the country. But where? "It's been damaged". Eventually we got the car. It was early in June. The car followed two months after the V5 and that's why the tax is due. It covers the time the Kuga sat at the docks in Belgium and while it was in the ship and travelling to the body shop. Just so the salesman could get his bonus that month.im not impressed.

The warranty will also run from April. Back in 2001 I bought the Saxo as preregistered and lost 7 months of a 3 year warranty. The MOT will also be due in April as it relates to the date of initial registration.

 

[duemila]

Did they not give you some proof of tax and expiration when you bought the car.

 

[cue2]

Did they not give you some proof of tax and expiration when you bought the car.

No . New cars don't have tax discs nowadays !

 

[Verbout]

I think he meant some sort of invoice/sales receipt showing the transaction.

 

[biggreenzebra]

It's just a thinly veiled tax that supplements French farmers fishing quotas...I think.... hence why when you buy a car in the middle of a month you automatically lose days back to the first of the month. Naughty Brussels, I mean Downing Street. And poor show from the dealer BTW.

It's also one of the most unfair taxes in HM Government's array of unfair taxes.
I don't speak on my own behalf of course (as an owner of 4 cars) but on behalf of an elderly neighbour who runs a Jaaag and covers 2/3,000 miles a year.
Dave if you are reading. Sort it. Put the tax on fuel so that the Audi reps who do 50,000 a year pay for the roads.

 

[MalcQV]

Why would they do that Jim? That'd be fair.

 

[duemila]

Fuel is taxed enough, effectively it's not road tax anymore but pollution tax,

 

[MalcQV]

Fuel is taxed enough, effectively it's not road tax anymore but pollution tax,

The point being the more miles/less MPG your car does the more you pay. I'd love it.
Of course I have three cars at my disposal and road tax/year is around £600. I do less than 20k in all of them per year.
That's just me though.

 

[duemila]

The point being the more miles/less MPG your car does the more you pay. I'd love it.
Of course I have three cars at my disposal and road tax/year is around £600. I do less than 20k in all of them per year.
That's just me though.

Fair enough but that is two different problems, usage and MPG, usage you pay for through the tax on fuel so anyone doing 50,000 is paying a fair wack at the pump, MPG or emmisions effectively you pay through road tax, which isn't exactly ideal because a low emmision car is still putting the same strain on road surfaces etc.

 

[TonyGr]

Fair enough but that is two different problems, usage and MPG, usage you pay for through the tax on fuel so anyone doing 50,000 is paying a fair wack at the pump, MPG or emmisions effectively you pay through road tax, which isn't exactly ideal because a low emmision car is still putting the same strain on road surfaces etc.

It's worth noting that all roads are designed to carry a certain number of standard axles before fatigue failure occurs. This is because the heavier the axle load the more damage is caused. In the days when the theory was developed the maximum permitted axle load was 8 tons so that was defined as a standard axle. A 9 ton axle has an equivalence of 1.6 while a car with two axles of less than 1 ton each will be in the order of 0.0004. Clearly it is HGVs that wear out roads not cars.

Personally I agree with the idea of removing the tax on the vehicle and adding it to the fuel.

 

[cue2]

And now the dealership has sent an email to say the 12 months service is due! We've only had it ten months but the warranty says its 12....

 

[duemila]

It's worth noting that all roads are designed to carry a certain number of standard axles before fatigue failure occurs. This is because the heavier the axle load the more damage is caused. In the days when the theory was developed the maximum permitted axle load was 8 tons so that was defined as a standard axle. A 9 ton axle has an equivalence of 1.6 while a car with two axles of less than 1 ton each will be in the order of 0.0004. Clearly it is HGVs that wear out roads not cars.

Personally I agree with the idea of removing the tax on the vehicle and adding it to the fuel.

Fair point but how do you move varying tax rates to fuel, my mum pays £30 for her panda, I'm paying £240 odd for a 145, we both do around 6000 miles a year, either she will end up paying more or I could theoretically pay less, given her panda is probably 12 mpg better, sounds complicated but a good discussion point.

 

[cue2]

It's worth noting that all roads are designed to carry a certain number of standard axles before fatigue failure occurs. This is because the heavier the axle load the more damage is caused. In the days when the theory was developed the maximum permitted axle load was 8 tons so that was defined as a standard axle. A 9 ton axle has an equivalence of 1.6 while a car with two axles of less than 1 ton each will be in the order of 0.0004. Clearly it is HGVs that wear out roads not cars.

Personally I agree with the idea of removing the tax on the vehicle and adding it to the fuel.

Especially as I have paid two months tax on a new car without putting it on a road or using any fuel in it because I got the V5 two months before the car ; SORN should apply?

 

[MalcQV]

Fair point but how do you move varying tax rates to fuel, my mum pays £30 for her panda, I'm paying £240 odd for a 145, we both do around 6000 miles a year, either she will end up paying more or I could theoretically pay less, given her panda is probably 12 mpg better, sounds complicated but a good discussion point.

The tax added to a litre of fuel. You don't need to differentiate between a Ferrari 458 and a Panda. You don't have to because you pay the tax on the litres you use. How far, how many MPG does not matter, you simply pay for what you use.

I will concede that this ignores g/km emissions, however you generally find the better MPG the lower the g/km rating. Mostly.

 

[TonyGr]

And now the dealership has sent an email to say the 12 months service is due! We've only had it ten months but the warranty says its 12....

Yep more or less what I said 2 weeks ago in post #5

 

[Verbout]

My advice at post 2 is still an option.

I'll lend you an "Evil Stare" mask if you want! Or a knuckle duster.

Take your pick.:biglaugh: