Compulsory Bicycle Insurance - Yes or No?

[Cyclone]

Well, if we consider VED to only be a pollution related charge, then I'm still in line for a rebate on days I use my bike aren't I?

 

Originally the purpose of VED was to help fund the maintenance and construction of roads, with those who use them contributing to them, and those who cause greater wear and tear (ie commercial vehicles) paying commensurately more.

Of course now VED is just a revenue stream and roads are paid for out of general taxation, but then what's the argument for taxing bikes?  (And that's before we remember that low pollution vehicles are already taxed at a ZERO rate).

 

Whatever angle you try to look at it from, using my bike is good for everyone, lower pollution, lower congestion, lower wear on the roads.  In order to encourage such virtuous behaviour I should get a refund on the VED I've paid for on a car that stays at home in it's garage, right?

Edited June 26, 2019 by Cyclone

[Tickling]

38 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Well, if we consider VED to only be a pollution related charge, then I'm still in line for a rebate on days I use my bike aren't I?

 

Originally the purpose of VED was to help fund the maintenance and construction of roads, with those who use them contributing to them, and those who cause greater wear and tear (ie commercial vehicles) paying commensurately more.

Of course now VED is just a revenue stream and roads are paid for out of general taxation, but then what's the argument for taxing bikes?  (And that's before we remember that low pollution vehicles are already taxed at a ZERO rate).

 

Whatever angle you try to look at it from, using my bike is good for everyone, lower pollution, lower congestion, lower wear on the roads.  In order to encourage such virtuous behaviour I should get a refund on the VED I've paid for on a car that stays at home in it's garage, right?

If there was some accurate simple way to prove/demonstrate this then yes.

[Cyclone]

Yeah, that would be a problem...  But the theory is sound, no one could argue against the premise of it I think.

[Pettytom]

5 hours ago, Cyclone said:

Well, if we consider VED to only be a pollution related charge, then I'm still in line for a rebate on days I use my bike aren't I?

 

Originally the purpose of VED was to help fund the maintenance and construction of roads, with those who use them contributing to them, and those who cause greater wear and tear (ie commercial vehicles) paying commensurately more.

Of course now VED is just a revenue stream and roads are paid for out of general taxation, but then what's the argument for taxing bikes?  (And that's before we remember that low pollution vehicles are already taxed at a ZERO rate).

 

Whatever angle you try to look at it from, using my bike is good for everyone, lower pollution, lower congestion, lower wear on the roads.  In order to encourage such virtuous behaviour I should get a refund on the VED I've paid for on a car that stays at home in it's garage, right?

How do you get to pay £550 per annum in VED.

 

My two cars combined cost me £50.

[ads36]

I'd say he probably drives something more interesting than a 12 yr old vauxhall zafira.

 

(Which is what we've got, and comes with a ved charge of £300/year. The idea that cyclists don't contribute to the system is clearly nonsense)

Edited June 26, 2019 by ads36

[Janus]

I don't know what the maximum VED is in ££s  for a car/age but I know a 13 year old 2Lt turbo diesel is 200 quid. There are larger/older cars.

https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables

 

Edited June 26, 2019 by Janus
Link posted

[Janus]

----

 

 

Edited June 26, 2019 by Janus

[Pettytom]

54 minutes ago, ads36 said:

I'd say he probably drives something more interesting than a 12 yr old vauxhall zafira.

 

(Which is what we've got, and comes with a ved charge of £300/year. The idea that cyclists don't contribute to the system is clearly nonsense)

So do I. At least, one of my cars is more interesting than a Zafira. The other one is quite dull😀

 

I just thought it odd that someone who bangs on about reducing congestion/ pollution/ road  damage would drive something which attracts massive VED.  But then again, VED is very complex, so perhaps there is a different explanation 

Edited June 26, 2019 by Pettytom

[ads36]

Ved is based on CO2.

 

Consequently, older petrol cars are quite expensive - I dread to think what my lovely old Subaru would cost! 

 

It's also worth pointing out that some of the most pro-cycling forum-regulars are also enthusiastic petrolheads - we don't hate cars.

 

 

Edited June 26, 2019 by ads36

[Pettytom]

29 minutes ago, ads36 said:

Ved is based on CO2.

 

Consequently, older petrol cars are quite expensive - I dread to think what my lovely old Subaru would cost! 

 

 

 

VED isn’t based solely on CO2 emissions, although that is what I was alluding to when I mentioned pollution.

 

Expensive new cars attract a supplement.