ULEZ Scheme Thrown into Chaos?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- Car manufacturers stand accused of fitting "cheat" devices to fool emissions readouts. Over £100m paid out in settlements so far!
Check if you are eligible to claim: bit.ly/3uQTPqc
(Note: NOT for ULEZ claims/charges)
£50 Free for switching Energy suppliers:share.octopus.... Sponsored!)
Join for exclusive content at blackbeltbarri...
)
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #lawyer #barrister
Description contains affiliate links; I will occasionally earn commissions from qualifying purchases or leads generated.
Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.
Imagine thinking that Ulez is about emissions. 😂
It really is I believe somebody died once, it might have been emissions what done it, true story.
Lol I know imagine believing that paying more tax can change the weather.
Or paying £12.50 a day will make pollution disappear.
All vehicles in the UK have to pass an emissions test to pass the MOT.
@@69waveydaveylol, 1 girl with severe asthma died in south London and the coroner put it on the death certificate iirc.
A bit like the decapitated motorcyclist, gun shot victims and suicide jumpers from a tower blocks had covid put on theirs, within 28 days bollox 😂😂😂
No, I think he had the covids@@69waveydavey
yeah, raking money in from "soft target" drivers whilst LOADS OF OTHER THINGS (which are worse than the emissions furore) are not dealt with.
There is no allegedly about it , it’s already been proved in court that they did this
Yeah, I wondered how this came across as a surprise, the Germans had a very expensive day in court in the US years ago over this.
Yes I was wondering about the allegedly nonsense, as there was a big pay out in the states.
What was proven isn't the same as is being described now - proven was emissions fudging/manipulation for initial exhaust quality ratings, not a test mode for annual tests etc., roughly speaking.
Point of order, the MOT does not "put the car on the rollers and stick a tube over the exhaust pipe". The "rollers" are only used to test the brakes. The pipe to test emissions goes up the exhaust and the car is both idled and revved to give an emissions reading once the engine oil has reached a suitable measured temperature.
Correct!
So glad I read your comment , was going to say the same but my language isn't quite so polite
Yeah, coming here to say similar, is this whole thing a scam? How the hell would the car 'go into test mode' without been connected to a computer and physically change the settings. Some may have an EGR plate that would effect emissions, sometimes, or a bottle of Redex 🤭. I do not get this, someone explain how a car can 'change' its' emissions when having an MOT.
@@whitehart11not entirely no, my focus rs is 4wd so no brake test on rollers, any 4wd car is the same and some do a road test yet others just do a visual and drive the car in or out and dab test them
4wd no brake test on rollers for mot
This video isn't about challenging ULEZ: it's an advertisement for a no win-no fee claims company.
This. I'm disappointed. Sold out a bit.
Yep
Yes
and if emissions are higher, are those who get a payout going to pay any extra RFL they would owe or Income tax for any BIK saved on a company car?
Noticed this a lot with this channel recently
TFL still sent the Bailiffs after Noel Wilcox for non payment even though he had court documentation to say hr didn't have to pay, and they tried to take goods from him.
Bailiffs are sent by the High Court with a writ which is a higher authority than lower courts, where it is possible the LEZ/ULEZ lawsuit was held, so it's possible that the High Court is still classing it as a debt against TFL and therefore allowing the Writ & bailiffs to attend. While the lower court said "yes you shouldn't have to pay fines because the signage doesn't say you will be charged & therefore they can't fine you until the signs are updated" it doesn't necessarily mean any previous fines/charges aren't now considered debts because they're beyond the payment term period as far as the High Court is concerned.
@@CoolSteve08no, no TfL bailiffs are sent by third party companies who have no authority from high court - companies like CDER Group, Newlyn etc. TfL fines are not created using a court and will not affect your credit rating it even says so on TfL website - have a look it’s a good read!
CoolSteve08, No, WRONG , if you go to the videos on UA-cam over the past few years you'll find that almost all bailiffs are sent by lower Courts , but Bailiffs will not really tell you nor show you their documentation when asked by the smart public !? Check it out Its their way of trying to get you to pay up rapidly !!!! To put the fear of GOD into folk , just tell them the goods don't belong to you anyway ! And if this fails have an axe to hand and if its furniture ask them which half they would like ? Job done !
CoolSteve majority are from Magistrates with a scribbled signature that any fool can sign ?
@@WendyJones-zx7isNo.
Only a proper court can issue a warrant. If you have evidence that a warrant had been fraudulently issued, please provide the evidence. It would be a serious criminal offence.
Checked out the link. Word of warning. DO NOT SEND AN IMAGE OF YOUR DRIVING LICENSE TO ANYONE.
Why
if your car has an MOT then you are compliant, Khan knows this yet he still is fleecing London and the outer regions. MPs know this so why is he not stopped?
My argument and every sane person's too. And warnings be damned. Khan is guilty of extortion with menaces, ie fines.
MOT tests vehicles to the emissions standard they are manufactured to.
For example my car from 2000 is not tested for compliance with EURO 6, standards.. because that standard did not exist at the time.
Many cars from < 1993 will have high emissions due to the complete lack of a Catalytic Converter, but still pass MOT.
simple answer, its part of the WEFs "you will own nothing and be happy" plan that started back in march 2020
Not true. General limits are higher than ULEZ limits.
@@incandescentwithrage Wrong!
The whole thing is a money making scam.
All of the political system is. Have you only realised this?
@@drd6416 No, the political system is about control. Money is the just the vehicle.
Also the legal system @@drd6416
And turning you in to a monitored do as you are told drone.
@@scaryfakevirustrue that..its not about the money..they print the money..its never about the money..
The ulez scheme is too complex to be workable I hope it will be scrapped very soon. I’m still not sure how Kahn managed to get it off the ground anyway!
Yes we had nothing to stop cars under Boris! Then Khan came in and now we’ve had the Congestion Charge and ULEZ!
By lying through his teeth!
Dont worry... Pay Per Mile is next on the agenda!
They will get those pesky cars of the road one way or another!
Unless you are super rich of course..
@@Batters56 ULEZ was a Boris policy.
He just tagged the word "environment" on to it and every brain dead numbtard gave it the thumbs up
Our car, a 14 plate has exactly the same emissions as an identical 15 plate.
Yet in Glasgow, the 15 plate can enter the ULEZ but the 14 plate can't. Allegedly because one car is Euro 6 compliant yet Emissions are identical.
Both cars are in the same family.
Which car and engine is it?
Dave4685 I think your point is extremely relevant, because the ULEZ system therefore is not operating as intended, not as regulated. What your comment confirms is, as suspected, the ULEZ scheme is not about “emissions” (as we know it is not). Surely, therefore, if you prove your vehicle has the required level of emission the date of manufacture cannot be relevant? I think this should be taken up legally.
my car if a year older it be from £35 to the higher upper £150. same engine just year older so only thing i can think of is exhaust system or computer map been re tuned to burn less fuel or both. and both cars are not face lift both the same car. its crazy amount fraud what is legal. im lucky my car exempt from lot these clean air zones. one trick i feel could work on older cars what starting to fail smoke and plant food test do what they did on London buses, they adapted some buses with euro 3 engine and added new upgraded exhaust system and add blue now same euro 3 engine now euro 6, still drinks the same amount fuel but now an added delivery to that add blue, so same amount fuel trucks required but also another truck to drop off the add blue and as liquid it dam heavy. exhaust system might be the thing, mad thing if i want lower tax i need to go diesel, 1.1 diesel £0 and 1.4 diesel £20 and non face lift 1.2 petrol 2011 £35 but if year older £150. i have no idea where they getting numbers from, a lucky dip. i do wonder if you got a car struggling to pass test, engines get old and can burn more oil over time so without an engine rebuild could people do the trick what bus company did is change euro 3 to a euro 6 with same engine, if so if not diesel could it be as simple as putting the exhaust from the newer version of your car, yes not cheap but most options not cheap
Yup, my Captur is the same. The emissions are so low, it pays no road tax - same as my wife's Captur, which is 3 years newer. But she can enter the ULEZ and I have to pay. Both cars have the identical engine.
Therein lies the problem with ULEZ!
The basic theory of emissions based charges or penalties is sound, yet ULEZ's implementation seems bizarre and illogical? Whilst it's nice if you own a classic car, it doesn't make sense for them to be exempt, neither does it make sense for anything other than a genuine emergency vehicle to be exempt? Also the outer border of the zone is weird in places and clearly designed to capture certain income streams, such as the extension around Chessington world of adventures.
What happens when every single car in London is Electric?
TFL seems to be stuck in a position where it's funding has been reduced and reduced by the government, so it's having to pick up the slack with other schemes. TFL and Sadiq Khan are not rolling in money like some more vociferous idiots might claim. How does squeezing TFL into this position help the government? It's all very odd!
It's all a scam if you ask me. If your car was built before 1983 (I think) you don't have to pay. One such car that is exempt is a 27 litre Rolls Royce with a Merlin plane engine in it 😂
Imagine paying for your 1 litre Corsa then that thing rolls past you and you know those rich gits aren't paying a penny while pumping out more emissions in a day than you do all week
My 2014 6.3 V8 is compliant..
@@t28mcd My 2006 5.4 v8 is compliant according to the online checker too
While it's blasting out the Dambusters theme!
The merlin engine Rover that I think you are talking about is technically not allowed, as to have Historical vehicle status it needs to not be significantly modified, including a change of engine.
That’s a Rover SD1 with the merlin engine. I watched it on UA-cam the other day.
Well Done Sir, for fighting the good fight! And bringing these Snake Oil dealers under public’s light and scrutiny.
🤣🤣 he is a snake oil dealer
The scam is the Khunt, nobody else
This sounds a lot like the VW emission scandle.
See Richard Vobes video today. He didn't know he'd been in a ULEZ zone in Bath and didn't open the letters which were fines for £20 but that escalated to £500 so they came to take his van ... supported by the police!
Poor bloke was as sick as a dog at the time, maybe he should of said he was self isolating and asked them to return in a week.
Worth adding that he didn’t open the letters because the name on the window envelope wasn’t spelled like his name and he was worried that it might not be intended for him and that it would be a criminal offence to open someone else’s mail. He wrote on the envelope not known at this address and return to sender and he reposted them.
Probably got him some clicks, though. Loved his "I'm ill" act, and setting his glasses askew.
He's excellent at what he does.
@@ncmcdonnell5486 So didn't match his V5?
I was in a TFL meeting about ULEZ and only small part is for emissions.The main decustion was on road charging and your time on the road hence the 20mph Zones.
TFL did not want to answer questions on TFL Scoot traffic light control system.
Thank you for bringing this video about Sadiq Khan ULEZ and what you have said.
When it comes down to it we are legally at the moment getting scammed my the Mayor of London and TFL.
Who needs to be investigated
The wheels don't need to be rolling for an emissions test 🤦🏼
Technically they do. There's a vast difference between an engine just revving at 2500rpm and an engine under load at 2500rpm. This is how a full SET is conducted. The test you have during an MOT isn't a full SET, just a check against a known point. This is how people get away with EGR deletes and decats.
I ve been working on cars for fifty years I’ve never heard of this they certainly don’t Dyno them on a mot I’m a dvsa tester.
or even a good working clutch, my clutch basically failed only just got car to garage but passed mot 3 years in a row a clean pass no advised work. i said to my local mechanic and said what if it fully fails he said that be fine, as mot was booked before new clutch fitted as to busy so it looks like a car what cannot move can pass an mot
@@markjones-vx3kp yep same here
@@JaenEngineering a uk mot emissions test is carried out on a stationary vehicle at 2500 rpm and when it fails the BET test then the machine will go into a full 3 minute test using manufactures data supplied whilst the car is still stationary ... no mot bay if been a tester at has never had a rolling road for emissions only for doing brake tests also egr deletes and decats are easy to spot
As someone who used to work in the vehicle exhaust emission field, I can clear up some of the confusion about the various tests and the method(s) that unscrupulous manufacturers might employ. When a new vehicle is certified, it has to meet certain emission standards which are stated in terms of mass emissions, usually expressed as gms per km for each of the major "pollutants" which are Carbon Monoxide (CO), Total Hydrocarbons (THC) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). Diesel vehicles also have to comply with limits on particulate matter but that's another story. In order to calculate the mass of a gas, you need to know the concentration, the volume and the density. So during the development phase and for final type approval, vehicles are installed on a rolling road which exactly simulates the load that would be on the engine if it was being driven on a "real" road. A device called a Constant Volume Sampler (CVS) is fitted to the exhaust system and this measure the total volume of exhaust gas. The vehicle is then driven over a predefined drive cycle and a continuous sample of the gas is extracted and stored for post test analysis. This analysis determines the concentration of the various gaseous emissions (pollutants). So then we can calculate the mass emissions by multiplying the concentrations, by the density (which is a constant) by the volume (corrected to standard conditions of temperature and pressure). Then we can dived this sum by the distance in order to express the results as gms per km (or whatever unit is appropriate for the particular test). This is called type approval testing and the facilities involved cost many hundreds of thousand of pounds. In addition to this final type approval test, manufactures must also test a small proportion of every vehicle produced. This is done using the same test procedure and equipment and is called "Conformity Of Production" (COP) testing. The final test is an in service test which is the one done as part of an MOT but this is very crude and simply measures the concentration of the various gases. Its purpose is just to determine if sensors and control devices are working more or less as they should be. Now here is the kicker. The type approval and COP test result could differ depending on how the vehicle had been driven immediately prior to testing. So before the actual test, the vehicle undergoes a pre-conditioning cycle. It is installed on a rolling road just as it would be for the test proper and it is driven to the exact same drive cycle. It is then removed from the test facility and placed in a soak area where it will sit for at least 6 hours (usually overnight) at an ambient temperature of between 20 and 30 deg C. The test proper will then commence, usually the following day. Now the engine management system is akin to a small computer and contains one or more "maps" of fuelling and ignition advance for any speed/load combination. So it is perfectly feasible that the engine management system could detect when the vehicle has just completed a preconditioning cycle and then switch to "emission mode" the next time it is started (all type approval and COP tests start from a cold start). Why would manufacturers want to do this? Quite simply because in order to meet emission standards fuel economy and maximum power output can be compromised.
Thanks. So many Muppet comments about mot emissions, which of course are nothing to do with the type approval /emissions process you've excellently described.
"because in order to meet emission standards fuel economy [...] can be compromised"
So what you're saying is, to meet emissions standards, cars actually become less efficient and burn more fuel per mile?
@@tr_slimey6811 That certainly used to be the case but I should add that I have been retired for a number of years and technology may have changed (but I doubt it given the number of manufacturers caught cheating). By way of explanation, back in the 70s (or it might have been 80s) the European emission standards were les stringent than the America standards. At that time, most UK and European car manufacturers were pouring millions into something called "lean burn technology" but it was some years away from being perfected. Had it fulfilled it's potential, then engines would burn less fuel and also meet very low emission standards. But due to pressure from environmental groups, and the knee jerk reactions of politicians, the EU decided to adopt the American approach which involves 3 way catalytic converters, exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) and various other technologies. So lean burn technology was abandoned. Now in order for a catalytic converter to perform optimally, the air/fuel ratio going into the engine has to be very tightly controlled so that the composition of the exhaust gases are within a very tight band. What this means in practice is that for part throttle operation (as opposed to full throttle) the air/fuel ratio has to be controlled at around stoichiometric which for gasoline is around 14.7 : 1 by weight - i.e. 14.7 Kg of air (which is a huge volume) to 1Kg of fuel. But in part throttle conditions (where most of us drive most of the time) engines can perform just as well if not better with a much leaner mixture (i.e. more air for the same amount of fuel). So in order to meet emission regulations, the fuelling of the engine is much richer (uses more fuel) than it needs to because that is what the catalytic converter needs. Conversely, for full throttle operation (maximum power) the engine needs to be fuelled a bit richer than stoichiometric( more fuel) but this can't be allowed to happen because that's not what the catalytic converter needs, so we have less maximum power. Here is the big kicker - When those emission regulations were introduced, nobody cared too much about CO2 because it isn't harmful to health in the way that CO, THC and NOx are. But by fuelling the engine to suit the catalytic converter (i.e. richer than it needs to be), and the fact that CO gets converted to CO2 means that roughly 10% more CO2 is produced at the tailpipe. It is my opinion that the knee jerk reaction of the various "green" lobbies and weak politicians who bowed to their demands, has led us to this situation where more CO2 is being produced than would have been the case had lean burn technology been allowed to continue. We could have had lower emissions of "nasty" pollutants while at the same time better fuel economy and lower CO2 emissions if a more pragmatic and less hysterical approach been adopted. There are always consequences..................
Nicely summed up.
@@tr_slimey6811 So what you're saying is....
Just another legal “no win no fee” type of litigation that’s going to push car and insurance prices up for the ordinary folk.
How?, he is not suing an insurance company.
@@Outdoorshuntingshooting he’s suing a car company, I’m sure that the 100,000 other cases will push car prices up..regarding the insurance, this is an example of what can happen.
Richard Vobes has posted a good video this morning, but it relates to the ULEZ in the City of Bath.
Poor old Richard. He sounded and looked fkd with that stomach bug he's got.
And then having to deal with all that bs when feeling so ill.
@@bigbasil1908 shocking that there is no compassion any more, even for the elderly, from the police etc.
meanwhile.. EVERY school in uk has at least 40 parents in cars waiting outside or in the car park.. TWICE a day with the engine running to keep warm... they are NOT worrying about kids breathing
And the rest. Where I live the cars block every street near me and are parked along the nearby main roads as well. 100 TO 150 more like and the kids are smoking and vaping almost as soon as they are out of the gates.
the scandal is ULEZ
I wish you the very best of luck! Go get 'em!!!
£25 million in the first month of the expansion tells you everything you need to know!
Yep! Definitely a tax hidden behind Green Smoke and Mirrors! If they really cared about the environment they would simply ban vehicles full stop that didn’t meet the criteria as opposed to charging you for the pleasure! Remember just like the congestion charge, one of Ulez’s older siblings, this doesn’t affect the small minority that won’t care anyway or have the means to buy a ridiculously expensive EV! It’s a tax on the vast majority of the population who are just trying to survive! There are many new fuel options out there (without the sort of conversions required like that for example, changing to LPG) that will allow many older working daily drivers and individually loved cars to make the emissions cleaner and meet the said criteria but that’s not what they want, they want big business to continue to sell new vehicles and to continue make those profits and dividends for their shareholders! They don’t want you driving an old car or keeping cars for long lengths of time as that is not in their interests! Problem is their propaganda campaigns and that of having politicians and the media in their pockets pounding away at you with their message that most sheeple just don’t fight for their rights or question anything! I hope we can all one day sue TFL, the local governments and the national government for their unjust actions in forcing people into things that they should not be allowed to do and that’s including the bbc tax that is the licence fee!
This is nothing new, VW and others have been taken to court in the USA and Germany about it ages ago.
No road roller used in the testing of exhaust emissions. The vehicle would know it is being tested because the abs system would tell the ecu the car is not moving and the revolutions of the engine could be used to set the vehicle in cheat mode, as the engine is being held at higher revs than tickover
Why not suing Khan for passing extended ULEZ without following any procedure, costing people tax money and punishing them for moving around?
Because who would have known you could fix global warming with tax.... How uncanny
Is paying a fine admision of guilt? If not, can people ask for their fines back if there is an issue of any sort afterwards?
Hope so....
I believe they're Penalty Notices , NOT FINES...Only Courts can Issue FIne's..
The whole this is a complete scandal and we are paying for it all.
Good luck. Never about emissions, just a tax for tzar Khan.
Great channel. As a retired lorry driver, I support the delivery industry. Look around you, everything in view has been on a delivery note.
Dam, this doesn't cover the unicycle I bought new in 2009!! Only brand new vehicle I have ever bought too 🤣
The fact that a vehicle passes the MOT on emissions does not say it’s OK. It’s the engine spec out of the factory.
On the Martin Lewis website it says that it’s possible you could be liable for manufacturers legal costs if the court rules in favour of the manufacturer (unlikely, but not impossible). That’s what keeps putting me off.
Agreed. Also I have thought what actually does No win no Fee mean. Who decides what is a fee and a cost. E.g. the Litigants via the solicitors firm employs an expert if you lose you don't pay the solicitors fee but the expert costs have to be met. Always sounds a bit woolly to me.
Lets not forget Birmingham, Bath etc and CAZ! Clean air zone!
All it says is pay online when entering, that's it! No website or details of where to pay!
How can that be legal?
Hopefully this results in pro right to repair policies, like making diagnosis software available to consumers/3rd parties so they can also check stuff like this cars
When that scandal broke VW was involved, how come they aren't on the list?
It wasn't fooling MoTs was it? I thought it was tricking the tests of prototype vehicles when undergoing tests to achieve type compliance, ie a one off "trick", not an ongoing one.
In the U.S. several years ago it went into designated "test mode" and reduced normal emission levels WHENEVER it detected " test mode".
How can the public be charged to use THEIR OWN PUBLIC HIGHWAYS????
Crikey, its shocking we have to pay taxes for stuff isn’t it. For the same reasons we pay for schools even if you have no kids, or the NHS even though you’re fit and healthy and don’t need to visit the docs.
Technical comment 😀 There is a very big difference between type approval testing and that for the annual mot test. The incremental bands vehicles were placed into for VED after type approval tests are quite probably lower than they should be, especially for diesels.
Shhh.
Sincerely, a Euro 5 compliant diesel owner.
I drove into London last weekend and I couldn’t believe how much cleaner the air was.😂😂
I am a little confused ... or stupid.
If manuactures installed cheats into their vehicles to enable showing 'lower' emissions during DOT testing how does that affect Ulez fines ?
The affected vehicles, rightly or wrongly, meet the requirements to be exempt.
It makes no sense.
(Meanwhile Geoff Buy Cars 1969 Fiat is free to roam around London without having to pay such fines) Haha
more to the point, if your vehicle is putting out more than is actually recorded , where does khan get his figures that since the expansion pollution levels have fallen?
The only reason these 'cheats' might have been installed in the first place is to meet entirely unrealistic targets set by climate fanatics. Nett zero is the same.... only attainable if no one ever flies and we all use horse drawn cabs or cycle the 30 miles to work and back.
What complete and utter load of tosh.....I am so disappointed you are getting involved with this.
This item interests me from a legal stand-point.
The emissions scam has been going around for a while. No matter what the emissions, what is the loss to the vehicle owner that entitles them to make these claims?
@nutzandy - I have been suspicious of these "ambulance chasing" claims companies for years, as you say what "loss" would people be actually claiming for? I had a diesel Golf on lease for 3 years and it did amazing fuel consumption and i was satisfied with that and its reliability and performance. I dont know what I would be claiming for ?
@norfolkpartisan5767 I disagree but the resale point is irrelevant, as he also states that people can claim if they leased a vehicle, in which case, there is no possibility of resale depreciation due to the emissions as the resale value is "agreed" at the start of the contract.
My view as well. They have suffered no detriment so should have no grounds for compensation. No-one, ever, bought a vehicle based on its emissions. Miles per litre maybe...but not exhaust characteristics.
@@martyndawson7484 I agree completely but I'd argue that the matter goes even deeper. The only claimant body that can show a detriment, the legislature that enacted the emissions legislation, has already issued fines to the manufacturers.
Everyone jumping on the bandwagon yet again. A bit like the PPI reclaim thing....are folk that stupid to think that the banks didn't just put up charges to cover PPI claims or indeed that car manufacturers will simply increase the cost of their new cars to cover all these emissions pay outs? The fat cats & shareholders won't suffer; It's not free money, you end up paying it back in other ways.
If everyone went along with ULEZ and paid the fines to drive about London there would be the same emissions.
I currently have an open claim with a vehicle I currently own, as it turns out mine also fell into the emissions cheat scandal bracket too.
Will see how mine goes too .. But good luck Daniel! hope your claim goes well too.
How many executives of the German automobile manufactures whose vehicles were fitted with 'cheat devices' have been prosecuted?
I think you should probably state this is just one big advert and a paid promotion...!?
It was never about pollution. All about control and money.
Just out of interest. Does this apply to only new vehicles, or used ones as well?
It's ironic that the emissions regulations force manufacturers to include systems that actually make the vehicle create more emissions. Software remap and DPF delete every time.
This will bring the car company's to there knees .........this is all part of the plan ! THE END OF YOU BEING ABLE TRAVEL UNDER YOUR OWN FREE WILL !
Yep I live up in Burnley Lancashire and we have almost every road , lane , backstreet being dug up and worked 9n all at once ? Folk cannot get to and from their place of work , or Schools , hospitals ! Strange thing is though , the Man designing or deligating the roads in Burnley is from LONDONSTAN ? Their attempting to make an humble little mill town into a City with traffic lights at every corner ? Ridiculous with no thought 9r consideration for the Citizens at all Something has to give
It wouldn't be the first time car manufacturers have made false claims.
Hearing you talking about this here now.... I think this was an issue in Germany a year or two ago. Where the cars changed their output when in a test environment. There was a big deal about this and and I am sure even a trial, because otherwise I would not know about this, as I am Swiss and not that interested in German news. You might want to check that out for your case. Sorry I can not remember which cars were involved.
Volkswagen were the first and were fined $ BILLIONS in the U.S. The big problem for owners was the immediate reduction in the value of their vehicles.
Genuinely surprised that Londoners especially just rolled over and took the ULEZ charges, but that’s what Khan knew would happen.
Biggest problem i have with these types of claims is that no cancer victims received compensation.
Like in the financial crash , there was a compensation scheme and the ppl who caused the problem , namely ppl buying houses were in some cases then given compensation in different form linked to the type of credit they used and insurance packages tied to all those loans.
Here yet again we have a massive crisis that impacts the poorest disproportionately and a compensation scheme that pays off the ppl causing the problems, namely drivers and car manufacturers.
'The poorest'?
It's just a transfer of wealth upwards as per usual.
@@ef7480 yeah, the ones not buying brand new scammy German motors but breathing in the pollution.
You seem to be claiming that certain customers of mortgage contracts were covered by insurance.
Anyone whose health is affected by pollution would have no such contract.
Yes. Poor people tend to live in densley packed terraced houses with traffic driving by a couple feet from the front windows.@@ef7480
Not as bad as The Post Office accounting scandal. Nobody committed suicide, went to prison, lost homes or got divorced because of car emissions.
Poor air quality has been shown to adversely affect health.
@@stephenwabaxter And poor air quality can come from a variety of sources, not just vehicle emissions. Why single them out..?
Fair point, but I was just trying to add a bit of perspective@@stephenwabaxter
The issue about whether your vehicle achieves a set standard of emissions os one where the ambulance chasing, no win, no fee lawyers are generating business and therefore profits for themselves. The whole emissions saga stems back to VW being charged in California for somehow creating one set of emission results for the official tests and then not achieving that in everyday use. they admitted to creating a computer algorithm that detected the testing procedure and adjusting the engine performance to suit. You have to say that since the advent of motorcars the manufacturers have always quoted performance figures that were taking under ideal conditions and NEVER reflected day to day performance of the vast majority of the vehicles they produced and only the stupid would expect the figures to be achievable. Also, there will be variations between vehicles that is not surprising given the number involved, let alone the quality of maintenance received. The MOT test also only checks that the minimum standards are achieved, not how accurate they are to the manufacturers figures, the test is nowhere near sophisticated enough for that.
The figures used to select the compliance of vehicles to be exempt from charging must be those published figures as no ULEZ scheme defines actual emission figures other than saying it meets a specific Euro standard.
I strongly doubt that most people buying a new or a used car do so on the basis of its emissions unless they have a specific reason such as living within a ULEZ so to now chase compensation for something that was not part of your criteria for purchase is nothing short of profiteering. To sue the manufacturers as many do they ought to show that they actively considered the emissions at the purchase point and I doubt they can in most cases.
@clivewilliams3661
> I strongly doubt that most people buying a new or a used car do so on the basis of its
> emissions unless they have a specific reason such as living within a ULEZ so to now
> chase compensation for something that was not part of your criteria for purchase is
> nothing short of profiteering. To sue the manufacturers as many do they ought to
> show that they actively considered the emissions at the purchase point and I doubt
> they can in most cases.
There were people who bought diseasels because they thought they were better for the environment than petrol cars.
@@anonnona8099
"There were people who bought diseasels because they thought they were better for the environment than petrol cars"
And quite a lot because they were more economical to drive and were crucially encouraged by the Govt, who also declared that diesel cars were less polluting because of the low emissions per mile. .
Thanks 4 sharing. Very useful. Massive motor industry scam by the sounds of it.
You really think this is the biggest scandle of the century?
Its just a scam
Mmm possibly the scandle is this click bait!
well the leaders have the biggest fraud in human history, globally. green deal alone cost per a person £30k plus min cost, uk about a trillion £ and usa 11 trillion $ set aside for the fraud stolen money from tax
Its bigger than you think...billions has been taken unlawfully..
ULEZ is 100% the biggest scandal of the century. The numbers in the statistics are fudged, it's another car tax and it has unlawful practices proven in court.
I live in Bromley and was part of the expansion scam. We have proven low emissions and have countryside in the borough.
You realise that it will be electric cars only and then it will go pay per mile. It's a huge scandal and we aren't even at those stages yet.
I don't think its likely thats its on mot test as others have said, [normally just a pipe up the exhaust doesn't have to be on rollers] If you put a more modern car on a dyno/ rolling road to test the cars power output and exhaust gases you set the cars computer to test mode, which maybe when the hidden software kicks in.
This is an advert 😡. I used to trust this video channel but not anymore!
Imagine if a Mayoral candidate, or indeed PM, said they would end ULEZ, LEZ and CC in London and all equivalent elsewhere? Could be rather popular. But that would assume we lived in a democracy where the will of the people prevails, of course.
I bet even a electric car would give out some harmful emissions.
Lithium oxide when the battery sets on fire. Lithium reacts with water to produce flammable hydrogen so you cant extinguish them.
The mayor's office told me Ulez is not based on emissions of my car. it's based on the year my car was built. And its EU number (EU4 for petrol and EU6 for diesel) So whether your emissions is low or more that makes no difference.
No shame in your game Daniel?
MOT does not put a car on rolling road for emissions test, the roller's in a MOT station are for brake testing only.
Brilliant work. Thank you so very much for all your hard work❤
Not again they did this to Diesel vehicles and paid out millions in compensation!
No ; this is purely a contemptible lawyer feeding frenzy ; because virtually no one chooses cars on this basis.
The air is cleaner than its ever been. CO2 emissions in the UK have plummeted to below 1880, NoX emmissions are also record low, as are particulates.
How can we possibly have falling emissions if cars are not complying with regulations ?
It may be the case that durung normal use, emissions are very low, it certainly explains why we have plumetting levels of particulates, CO2 and NoX
In addition to the car manufacturers listed ......... Cars which have recently switched over from hydraulic to electric assisted steering have cheat code: If no signals are received from the steering for several seconds (which they wouldn't be under MOT emissions testing conditions) then the cheat code kicks in and outputs a cleaner emissions burn signal to the engine management processor. Thus providing an MOT pass. If however someone is sitting in the drivers seat during the emissions test and rocks the steering wheel from side to side, then that same vehicle which just passed will now fail.
I don’t go to London. And against this net zero nonsense
A 2005 Mercedes 4x4 3.5litre car with 17mpg and £500+ car tax is ULEZ compliant. Our 2013 Volvo V60 40mpg and £20 car tax is not. It's all BS
No-one buys a low emissions vehicle because they care about the emissions, but rather to pocket government grants and/or avoid charges from various clean air zones. So, unless you're being picked up by such a zone or getting a grant revoked, why would you care?
And as for "cheat devices" - good on the manufacturers. Finding ways to to keep our road tax low and avoid such clean air charges while keeping the cars "cheap" economical and performant.
👍👍👍
So, you really think it is OK for manufacturers to con their customers and, potentially, leave those customers with cars that incur fines ?
Really?
Not sure you have thought that one through.
We are so far behind in the UK and Europe. Take a look at what happened in the US. They proved the customers were conned, they forced the manufacturers to remove the cars from the road, pay for storing them and compensated all the customers. There's a documentary on YT all about it.
As a barrister as some people would call you, what do the regulations say?
If the car knows its being tested, like any person who cares it will be on its best behaviour.
Its not necessarily cheating if the vehicle is set up to do something at a given load / rpm. Is it totally ethical? yes if you are leaving your emissions behind you, no if you are exposed to those emissions.
Are the regulation's fit for purpose? Probably not
What about car tax? Not to mention that official emissions figures are illegal as they say G/KM instead of g/km
Road roller on an MOT is for testing the brakes, not the emissions
All the manufacturers have been doing this for years!
Not just diesel vehicles.
I personally worked as a mechanic in the motorcycle mystery, and there’s a number of baffles and fixtures to pass. The mission standards were required before being registered in the country they were manufactured for once they were registered. These were removed to unlock the full power of them motorcycle.
So things have been happening to motor vehicles all sorts throughout the world for years. Specially when there’s European emission rules which are too extreme to be able to manufacture vehicle to meet these standards.
Why does everyone worry about vehicle emissions when the main polluters are power stations and massive manufactures around the world that are just paying carbon tax and carrying on producing their toxic waste?
Is this not counter productive? The enemy is the government, not the car companies.
ULEZ is based on homologated NOx emissions. The MoT measured CO or HC emissions has absolutely nothing to do with its compliance.
The emissions are nox and they are not tested as part of an MOT test.
The emissions test is not conducted on a rolling road so there is no initiation of a "test mode"
That's disgusting we buy these cars in trust it should be running Lower emissions all the time not just for a MOT 😮
Wheel rotation sensors used for abs on rear wheels know the car is stationary and only the front wheels ate turning, and vice versa for rear wheel drive.
I'll never understand why VW is still in business (or why anyone would still buy one) when they were caught doing this for about 10 years! And these days they pretend to be 'green' with their electric cars.
FYI, never seen a car go on a "road roller" to test the emissions. If i'm not mistaken, that roller tests the brakes and the emissions are tested without any roller, just a probe in the exhaust pipe and possibly some other probe elsewhere.
ULEZ.... Charge to pollute... carry on polluting... the irony
It's taken this 'legal person' a long time to catch up with this old chestnut.
My 1994 Volvo 940 Estate isn’t ules compliant, but at its last MOT the mechanic emission tested it twice as it was so clean he thought the monitor wasn’t working correctly.
Did you know that some versions of the Volvo 940 are exempt from the advanced emissions test (CAT test) on an MOT ? I had a 2 litre wentworth turbo which was. It's mentioned in a schedule of vehicles which were never able to comply with the emissions limits when new. The MOT examiner didn't believe me until I printed the details and showed them to him.
Car buyers get the compo, but the commuters sat behind them in traffic deserve it most, lol.
If these cars are capable switching to a low emissions mode then why isn't it kept in that mode permanently? 😂
I have owned five diesel Mercs during the period mentioned but the emissions made no difference to me using the car. I couldn't care less what the emissions were so why would I need to claim other than greed. These emission claim scams have been around for years.
The biggest question that should be getting asked is....
If the air has been cleaned up so much, which it does appear to have been, by the introduction of vehichles which dont get close to being as clean as they make out, do we really need such stringent vehichle emissions rules or could we have simpler vehichles without all the added systems which creat more manufacturing waste and servicing problems? Simole, well tuned and serviced vehicle id say is the way forward
Given Khan's form on ULEZ do not expect him to allow cars that fall within this category some sort of exemption. It's a cash cow, nought to do with emissions.My local council put the poll tax by 2% and 3% for social care. Khan put the mayor's tax up by 8%. He's nothing if he's not greedy !
Talk to those citizens who voted for him - and will now doubt vote for him again.
This is the problem with having a modern day car which is run by a computer and might possibly leave itself open to hacking. I have a 43 year old classic which uses original, simple, economical to repair technology, It does not have a computer which could potentially be modified, and therefore does not give false readings.
Accuracy is very important. When you put your car through its annual MOT test the tester uses a rolling road to test the BRAKES. The emissions are tested with a probe which is inserted in to the exhaust pipe whilst the engine is idling. An idling engine does not require a rolling road.
BBB, I thought you would know this ?
The declared emissions of a vehicle is NOT based on an MOT it is based on type approval by the manufacturer. You can remove a diesel particulate filter from a vehicle exhaust and it will fly through a MOT. It is a total nonsense
ULEZ is particulates based not CO2 emissions. That’s important.