50 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRoad Tax
Reported or suspected cause
come into effect in 2010, not sure
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Identified cause
1
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause
I thought that the massive hike was due to come into effect in 2010, not sure which month though.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I would hate to have to struggle and argue the toss with Saga like I did with my laptop should I be unfortunate to have an accident and the sooner I change the better.
Leading evidence: 'come into effect in 2010, not sure' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'come into effect in 2010, not sure' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace better' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I would hate to have to struggle and argue the toss with Saga like I did with my laptop should I be unfortunate to have an accident and the sooner I change the better.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Even if they decide to sell it, its still being used by someone.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Replace better
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I would hate to have to struggle and argue the toss with Saga like I did with my laptop should I be unfortunate to have an accident and the sooner I change the better.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
50 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Porsche Club GB: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T035758Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Just renewed my road tax which is Band F at £210 but am I right in thinking that next year it will be a Band M at £440? It looks like the March '06 first registration thing has been removed.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/Budget2008/DG_073093
[rant]
I wonder what percentage of vehicles emit less than, say, 130 g/km and what the new charges will make to the total revenue from Road Tax. Another exercise in spin, trying to make themselves appear greener, wheras it's just another way of making the motorist pay for all the other mismanagement of funds by the "Government".
[/rant]
I intend to use the car more as a result in order to get my money's worth on the road tax..... no point in paying so much to have it sit there, so I will use it more.... where do these decision makers live, let's go round and drive up and down their street..... soon won't be able to go anywhere as people in my street petitioning to make it pedestrian only with a bus lane....wtf? Where do they think the traffic will go as a result. Let's say 1000 people use it every day, 2 will stop using their car as a result maybe if it's not raining and they happen to have a bus stop outside home and work, the rest will now have to find another route which will mean more jams and more fumes defeating the purpose....rant over (for now)
WeeJohnyB
I keep wandering whether to make it my daily driver and get rid of my daily car. Once you take in the tax, insurance, servicing and extended warranty its a fair sum to leave in the garage. Interesting effect on tax take for the revenue that though, increase tax but reduce overall tax take. A bit like the changes in company car tax, put them up but reduced the overall take.
Mine is my daily driver as I have two wheels for weekend mayhem! Only way I can justify having it. As you say, what with road tax, insurance, warranty, servicing etc etc I can't rightly put it in the garage. Bad thing is it racks up the mileage, good thing is that its so much fun to be in - especially now that Chris Franklin at Centre of Gravity has sorted the handling - WOW what a difference, best money I've ever spent on a car (followed closely by the MPS2 tyres all round the day after)
I spent ages looking through the VED information and I am still none the wiser about how much I will have to cough up at the end of May
996 C2 registered July 2001 if anyone knows and is prepared to spill the beans - ta
Guy
I'm a bit confused now!
I found the following information on the same site:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524
Also : http://www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles.aspx
It would make sense to try and put of people buying new cars with high emissions to be charged higher taxes, but it seems very unfair to charge someone who has brought there car many years ago or someone like me who has just brought a 2nd hand one after saving all my life so I could own the car of my dreams!
What do they expect owners of older cars to do with there cars? Sell them cheap to someone who can afford the running costs? How's that going to limit the amount of high emission cars on the road?
Have they made a mistake on the first link with the year? Maybe it should be 2006 and not 2001. I hope so!
I'm not sure that 'call me Dave' and his bicycle will be any better, but it would be good to get rid of the socialists.
Dunno why everyone's so surprised. New Labour was always Labour, it was just a matter of time. Just further evidence IMO that most of the electorate are probably too stupid to be allowed to vote.
All seems a bit arbitrary to me... no disrespect to the 3.4s, but it seems unfair to charge more tax on a 3.6 which emits less CO2.
Surely they should have bands based on CO2 regardless of how old the vehicle is, or not?
I appreciate that the govt might want to encourage people to buy 'greener' new cars, but surely someone with a post march 01 car is stuck with it? Even if they decide to sell it, its still being used by someone.
In any case, how much of a cars whole of life emissions is in the manufacturing/delivery stage? Surely the use of older cars is making better use of the worlds resources rather than selling the Porsche and ordering a new Prius.
Don't worry. It will be an oversight they will soon correct. Whatever happens/changes you will pay for it, its this Governments way. Trouble is we don't have a loud opposition ony another bunch of the same so I guess the country is really in the poo. Can't imagine how that happened but I can imagine who will pay for it!
The direct.gov.uk website gives details of the cost of taxing your car today. agtlaw has helpfully outlined the position as of 1st April 2009 above - cars registered on or after 1st March 2001 will be reclassified into 6 new bands and that's when the big rise hits. If I tax my car for 6 months when it expires, it will run out again on 31st March 2009 - I wonder what would happen if I SORN it for a few days in February and apply for 12 months tax from 1st March? If I could save £230 I may be tempted.
I think the two things that come into play is a) not every car had an official CO2 rating before March 2001 and b) These tax classification are generally applied from a particular date onwards, so if you bought a car before the concept of CO2 based emissions was dreamed up, you wouldn't be retrospectively penalised for a change in policy.
Surely you don't need to go to that complication, couldn't you just send your old tax off for a refund on 28th Feb and buy a new 12 month tax on 1st March ?
wrong. a flat rate of £200 is payable and the treasury says this will rise with inflation.
agree with diesel that early redemption of your 'tax disk' looks like the way to go.
My tax will expire 31st March 2009 so my first day of my new tax will be day one of the new rate. So I intend to SORN mine towards the end of Jan, leave it the garage for a week, then re tax it early Feb. Should keep them happy and give me Feb/March to play with if the paper work gets screwed up by the DVLA.
Having just re-read agtlaws post with the details in, section A.99 looks like the government are wise to the concept of getting a rebate and retaxing to avoid the extra duty for a year. Might have to go for a December SORN.
there might be financial implications for anyone who imported a 'modern classic' car and date of first registration is after 1st March 2001. who knows?
luckily my lancia delta integrale was imported in August 2000.
shame about the inaccuracies on this website. e.g. "From 1st March 2001 the annual car tax (or Vehicle Excise Duty - VED) rates are determined by CO2 emissions".
try 1st april 2009. the rest of their site refers to a change in march rather than april. oh dear. read the 2008 budget parkers. hint: it's online.
This looks bad. My 996 C2 (MY2003) will be up for a tax renewal this November (2008) - I guess that will be £210 and then £420 to renew it again in November 2009...?! Am I right here...?
Adrian.
Quote; shame about the inaccuracies on this website. e.g. "From 1st March 2001 the annual car tax (or Vehicle Excise Duty - VED) rates are determined by CO2 emissions".
This is an accurate statement is it not, thats the way VED rates have been applied since that date to my knowledge
.
Quote; the rest of their site refers to a change in march rather than april. oh dear. read the 2008 budget parkers. hint: it's online.
The second point is ambiguous, I initially read it to mean that increases were from end of March i.e to take effect from April
[/quote]
just re read their website and the
(i) it should read from
1st APRIL 2009
the annual car tax (or Vehicle Excise Duty - VED) rates are determined by CO2 emissions and type of fuel used. ...If your car was registered before the 1st March 2001 then car tax is based only on the engine size, with one rate for engine sizes up to and including 1549cc and one for engines over 1549cc.
it looks like a typo to me as they have wrongly repeated 1.3.01
(ii) read the budget extract i posted above. first line is "with effect from 1st April 2009" so it's a mistake to say from march when its actually from april.
Small consolation for pre 2001 996, 993s and earlier from the Telegraph:
"However, cars made before 2001 are excluded from the banding system and owners will pay a flat rate of £200, which will rise with inflation".
Hi,
So from the Parkers website a new 997 TT will cost circa £1000 to tax in the first year then drop?
Amazing how this government have shafted us. Use taxpayers money to buy all the toys for thier second homes really is taking the p**$.
This 50 billion to bolster the BOE can only be trouble in the long term if there is a default. Hmmmmm times are bad. Certainly looking at leaving the Country again.
Alan
That's right. The interesting thing is that so many people I've spoken to - who don't happen to be car nuts - have no idea about next year's changes. I'm convinced there's going to be an uproar about this, just like the 10% tax thing this year (which was also announced way back). hopefully most Porsche owners will be able to afford it and pay up, but what about all those 'normal' families with a 7 year old 5-series BM, or Audi or something that is not worth so much, but get clobbered for the 440 GBP's worth.
Uproar seems to be mainly Lab MPs who've been away in their constituencies for a few weeks and have found that their voters aren't too happy about it! Oops! Vote loser!
There's a record of delayed implementation - e.g. the last increase to NIC (and, whilst on the subject, let's not forget that there's another due from April 2009) - the idea being that with time people tend to forget and grumble less when the new legislation eventually kicks in. How long a gov't can go on using that strategy remains to be seen.
The changes to VED are typical,
"We need more money; where can we get it from? Hang on chaps, we'll soak motorists again; they can't avoid it and will have to cough up. And if we call it "green" everybody will agree (or have to agree at least) that we're good people and are doing all we can to save the planet."
Yeah, right!
Rob,
Assuming yours is a Y-reg or newer - i.e. liable for the new tax - then it just scrapes in as a band K (225g exactly = £300) if its a manual or band L (245g = £415) if its an auto :-(
P.S. Calculator here ...
http://www.smmtco2.co.uk/co2search2.asp
Steve ... Does this mean you've got your insurance for less than 440 GBP for a 2003 C2 then ? Maybe green ones are cheaper to insure as they're considered a non-agressive colour or something ? Or maybe you've aged 10 years since your renewal last time at £515 and joined Saga insurance or something ...
... reveal all on "The ultimate insurance thread"
I have 3 policies with Saga - home / contents / and 911. I went with them initially because they had Uk call centres and people on the end of the line who I could understand and who could understand me.
I will not renew any of them with that company - I would rather pay double than give them my business again.
I fell out with them over their payout of my accidentally damaged laptop. It was agreed value of £900 as specified on the policy and when the chips were down all I got was a voucher of £299 to get one from PC world!! I had no choice in the matter, even though as I explained to them, that I am in the trade and could get a great deal from one of my suppliers!. Absolute rip off - they wriggled like hell!!
My 911 is insured with Saga - approx £650 with limited 6,000 mile pa. It runs out next month and I have been quoted £450 approx with Swinton (inc monthly payments) for 12,000. No brainer then.
I would hate to have to struggle and argue the toss with Saga like I did with my laptop should I be unfortunate to have an accident and the sooner I change the better.
I am also led to believe that Saga is part of the Norwich Union group of companies.
Thanks for the interestng input ... I heard they used to be good, but not anymore it seems.
Saga were actually bought by the AA (not NU) last year, so that's probably why ....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/06/25/bcnsaga125.xml
I'm below 400 this year. I think it was 379 or something like that. Leisure use only and limited to 5000 miles and no Nurburgring ! The company is Admiral
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.