Series of videos explaining what ULEZ is and the impact of it on Londoners
London Mayor Sadiq Khan, is going ahead with plans to expand the ULEZ – Ultra Low Emission Zone – to cover the whole of Greater London right up to the M25 in some places, from 29th August 2023 (See first pinned video below).
Previous London Mayor Boris Johnson, announced the first ULEZ zone in 2015, saying it would come into operation in September 2020. Sadiq Khan, who succeeded him as Mayor, introduced the scheme ahead of schedule in April 2019.
If you drive a non-ULEZ compliant car in London, you have to pay a £12.50 daily charge. It was expanded to cover Inner London up to the North and South Circular roads from 25 October 2021.
Expanding it to cover the whole of Outer London – that’s 32 Boroughs – would cover all of the Capital’s 600 Square Miles. The current ULEZ zone covers 236 Square Miles and includes 3.8m people – this is already the largest zone of its kind in Europe. The extension will include another five million people, in an area almost twice the size of the current zone.
Which Cars are Liable?
A ULEZ compliant petrol car has to be of at least Euro 4 Emissions standards. The Emissions standards are based on NOx (Nitrogen Oxides) emissions. This is usually all models from 2005, and some from as far back as the late 1990s.
For a diesel car to be ULEZ compliant, it must be of at least Euro 6 emissions standards based on both NOx and Particulate Emissions and will usually encompass models from around mid-2015 onwards.
If your car doesn’t come up as compliant on the TFL (Transport for London) checker (link below), but you think it might comply, check with the manufacture. If you can get a CoC (Certificate of Compliance) – sometimes a paid service – that proves it is, then you can apply to re-registered the car with TFL and ULEZ-compliant.
Motorbikes need to be Euro 3 or later, usually from the middle of 2007 onwards. With older bikes you can also get CoC documentation and there are test centres that could also certify your bike as compliant. Find out more at this link.
Classic cars only older than 40 years (on a rolling scale, so presently 1983 and older) are exempt from ULEZ charges if registered as ‘Historic’.
The ULEZ expansion this year will hit hardest on those already suffering from the cost-of-living crisis and will serve to banish modern classics (like my 1989 BMW 325i E30) from the city’s streets.
Plus, the Mayor has no mandate for it as 60% of Greater Londoners were against it in a public consultation, rising to 80% of business owners that responded and 79% of workers in outer London (the area affected by the expansion), although there are accusations of vote manipulation and exclusions.
The main argument against the expansion is that Transport for London’s (TFL) own commissioned report, independently compiled by Jacobs, states that there are minimal to no actual benefits to the quality of air in the expanded area, and in some parts of London it would have a negative socio-economic impact (see second pinned video below).
FACTFILE:
Emissions & Health
The introduction of ULEZ in Central London, reduced harmful nitrogen dioxide by 46%. The 2021 expansion to Inner London (up to the North and South Circulars) resulted in 21% lower levels of NO2. Whilst this is great news, what it also makes clear is the law of diminishing returns applies.
The London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, constantly repeats claims that there are 4000 deaths being caused by air pollution.
In fact, there was 1 death registered in London in the period 2001 to 2021 which had exposure to air pollution recorded on the death certificate. This death was attributed to environmental air pollution; however, in a response to a FOI (Freedom of Information) inquiry, the government confirmed that ‘we are unable to determine whether this involved car emissions.’
As for the ‘4000’ number, it’s simply an extrapolated calculation, based on an estimated additional 5-6 months of life from breathing cleaner air and multiplying by the annual increase in London’s population over a year – and that too based on air pollution levels BEFORE the current Ultra Low Emission Zones as the following confirms.
‘Using the exploratory new combined method gives an estimate for the 2019 mortality burden in London of 2019 levels of air pollution (represented by anthropogenic PM2.5 and NO2) to be equivalent to 3,600 to 4,100 attributable deaths (or 61,800 to 70,200 life year lost) at typical ages.’ This is again from a response to an FOI.
The other claim that the Mayor consistently makes is that air pollution is causing stunted lungs in children.
This is based on a study, again from 2019 (four years ago) published in the Lancet Public Health. It found the capacity of children’s lungs was reduced by about 5% when NO2 pollution was above legal levels. Lung capacity peaks at age 18, then declines.
‘If your lungs are already smaller than they should be as you enter adulthood, then as they decline with age, you’ll be at higher risk of lung disease and an early death.’ The researchers said doctors should consider advising parents of children with lung problems to avoid living in high-pollution areas if possible, or to limit their exposure.
So, what are the legal levels?
Firstly, it’s important to note that Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) is a collective term for Nitrogen Monoxide (NO) and Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). Nitrogen Oxide is not considered to be hazardous to health at typical ambient conditions. However, Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) at high concentrations causes inflammation of the airways, can cause respiratory problems and asthma attacks. Prolonged exposure to high levels of NO2 can cause irreversible damages to the respiratory system.
The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 require that the annual mean concentration of NO2 must not exceed 40µg/m3 and that there should be no more than 18 exceedances of the hourly mean limit value (concentrations above 200µg/m3) in a single year.
We have been repeatedly told by proponents of the ULEZ extension that the air quality in London is at illegally high levels. However below is the data from London’s official air quality monitoring stations which you can access online: https://www.iqair.com/gb/uk/england/london .
This covers a two-day period and the highest recorded level is 22.5µg/m3 – about half the lower limit.
What about Particulate Emissions? These are measured at PM2.5 and PM10. The PM2.5 are particularly dangerous as they are said to be capable of entering human lungs and the bloodstream.
Road traffic is normally blamed for this. However, while ULEZ focuses on engine-based emissions, government data shows that 52% of all road transport small particle pollution came from tyre and brake wear in 2021, plus a further 24% from abrasion of roads and their paint markings. Just 15% of the emissions came from car exhausts and 10% from van exhausts.
This actually corroborates the findings of my own two-part video series in which I took an Elitech Temtop portable Air Quality test meter, to various locations inside the current ULEZ and the proposed extension. I detected very little emission from vehicle exhausts – in steep contrast to the near dangerous levels of particulate emissions that I found to be prevalent in the London Underground system.
The legal limit for PM2.5 is 25µg/m3. Again, taking a screen grab of the data from the London Air Quality meters shows that over two days it reached 8 at highest.
To be fair I personally recorded higher levels on my test device on occasion, but usually no higher than the safety threshold of 12µg/m3. Yet it read over 100µg/m3 (firmly in the red) on the London Underground.
The independent Jacobs Report (referred to above and commissioned by TFL itself) said ‘Proposed Scheme is modelled to result in a minor reduction (-1.3%) in the average exposure of the population of Greater London to NO2 and negligible reductions (-0.1%) in average exposure to PM2.5’.
So, the improvement will be almost undetectable. How does that resolve against the expenditure of expanding ULEZ?
The financials
The ULEZ expansion is costing about £200m to implement in terms of infrastructure (cameras, signage, enforcement and advertising etc), plus there is a scrappage scheme with a budget of £110m.
I must make the point here that personally I am firmly against scrappage schemes as wasteful and destructive to the environment.
The scrappage scheme essentially provides up to £2000 for replacement cars and up to £9500 in some cases for vans (there’s also provisions for charities and for those buying electric vehicles).
The scheme is accessible to Londoners receiving certain benefits and families getting child benefit. Plus, businesses with less than 50 employees, charities and care-workers.
Over the last few weeks, the Mayor has extended eligibility, but the overall total budget remains the same at £110m. It’s also important to note that the scheme is not available to those living just outside London in the Home Counties who are highly likely to be impacted by the expanded ULEZ.
The current ULEZ made £225m in 2022, with a third of that money coming from fines, rather than the £12.50 daily charge. The fines are £180 reduced to £90 if paid within two weeks.
With the expanded zone likely to create confusion over its boundaries, expect many drivers to be caught out. It’s unsurprising that TFL has estimated that it will earn around £300m from the expansion in the first year, although that is expected to decline to virtually negligible by 2027 as motorists either learn to avoid the zone, or upgrade to newer ULEZ-compliant cars.
Separately it’s widely believed that the Mayor plans to introduce pay-per-mile road charging to replace ULEZ around that time. The fact that the ULEZ expansion is intended for revenue generation, rather than tackling air quality, becomes obvious as the Mayor recently admitted they have no ‘Plan B’ to replace the revenue should the expansion not go ahead. And why does he need the money? Because TFL has a budget gap of an astonishing £1.5bn-2bn a year.
Meanwhile some experts have estimated that the annual loss to the economy from the imposition of the ULEZ expansion will be £500m a year. This is what businesses in London are expected to lose.
Who’s affected
Again, that explains why the consultation for the expansion saw 69% of households oppose the expansion in Outer London, but as much as 80% of business owners that responded and 79% of workers, again in outer London.
It’s worth remembering that the consultation itself was controversial in terms of alleged manipulation of responses, responses that were dismissed, and canvassing of targeted demographics to evoke the desired result. Yet, despite all this, there were demonstrably nearly 70% opposed to the expansion.
It’s understandable when you realise that more people in outer London rely on car transport – 69% of households versus 42% in inner London. And many of these tend to be poorer communities and thereby unable to obtain more expensive ULEZ compliant cars, yet desperately needing their vehicles for commuting, business, work and social engagement.
TFL claims that only 1 in 10 cars in Outer London are non-ULEZ compliant, something like a total of around 200,000. This was based on monitoring by a selection of ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) cameras on unspecified main arteries in London, so hardly representative.
Meanwhile as a result of an FOI, the RAC revealed data from DVLA indicated that as many as 700,000 cars in Greater London were actually non-ULEZ, and that rose to 850,000 when all vehicles were included (not just cars).
According to similar research by the Lib Dems, 1.6 million (out of 5.8 million) cars in the 10 counties around London are not ULEZ compliant (and are not eligible to the scrappage scheme) yet many commuters use those cars to come to work in London (such as NHS staff, Police and Emergency Services employees, care workers and even TFL employees as well around 10,000 workers at Heathrow Airport).
Inevitably this will force people to seek alternative transport or upgrade their cars despite great financial hardship during a cost-of-living crisis. Data has shown the previous expansion led to a 60% reduction in non-compliant vehicles within the zone, taking the equivalent of 74,000 vehicles off the roads per day. It reduced overall traffic within the area by almost 5% – approximately 50,000 cars.
The problem is that in Outer London there is far less provision and connectivity of public transport services, far fewer, if any, London Underground stations in some areas, and sparse bus services.
Use this TFL ULEZ checker https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/check-your-vehicle/
PINNED POST
London Mayor Sadiq Khan, is going ahead with plans to expand the ULEZ – Ultra Low Emission Zone – to cover the whole of Greater London right up to the M25. This is terrible news. It will hit hardest on those already suffering from the cost of living crisis and will banish classic cars from the city’s streets. Here’s why it’s wrong!
PINNED POST
ULEZ Expansion – which will cost London 100s of millions in infrastructure and scrappage schemes, will have a virtually negligible impact benefitting the climate or London’s toxic pollution, according to Transport of London’s own commissioned report.
According to The Express today, sources indicated that Sadiq Khan will NOT contest the next Mayoral election and Labour is scrambling to find a new candidate as it recognises Khan’s deep unpopularity over Crime, Housing and Especially the ULEZ Expansion.
This comment about having the right and freedom to own and use a personal car, being compared to a smoking, got me thinking, especially the truth that ‘Health Costs’. It does, but what is the right price, and what is too high a price? And are cars really bad for our health, or are they actually, as I’ve said before, a force for good?
The Mayor insists only 1 in 10 cars in Outer London will be affected by the ULEZ Expansion on 29 August, but everyone else, including the BBC, find the number is much higher, more like 1 in 6. How does that work? And if it is only 10%, why is it worth all the investment and effort to expand the zone?
Extraordinary results from 1500 people for a poll on whether citizens should disable or remove the new cameras put up for the ULEZ extension. Here are the staggering results.
If you think ULEZ won’t affect you, the presence of these cameras on your local street should make it real. If not today, be sure that these cameras are coming for you, and sooner than you think. And they won’t stop at cars – smug cyclists better take heed, you’re on the radar too.
Yesterday I joined the first Anti-ULEZ Expansion rolling protest convoy into the heart of London, on one of its busiest weeks as it preps for King Charles’ Coronation. I drove my classic 1989 BMW 325i SE (E30) – follow #BCGBMWE30
Protestors were dubbed conspiracy theorists by the BBC – where’s the conspiracy in these clear facts? And as for Far Right – do I look ‘far right’ to you?
Report, including my own speech, from the Anti-ULEZ protest yesterday afternoon at Trafalgar Square on Saturday 15 April 2023. I speak to protestors, councilors, and even candidacy hopefuls aiming to run against Sadiq Khan in the next Mayoral elections.
ULEZ News Update: Breaking News – Judicial Review Approved! [12 Apr 2023] This couldn’t wait. The Judicial review is approved – what happens next? Plus Sadiq proposes pay-per-mile and why that’s a bad idea. And pollution in your cars is worse says the mayor – is that true?
ULEZ News Update – 7 April 2023 – Comedians Dick & Dom question ULEZ publicly, The Sunday Telegraph says ULEZ has reunited London and could bring a bigger political shock than Brexit, plus news and details of a moving protest, a convoy of cars to head to the heart of government and mainstream media!
In light of London Mayor Sadiq khans super loopy bus network alternative solution for those of us that live in what will soon be a ULEZ zone but don’t drive ULEZ-compliant cars, I thought I’d take the bus to Friday prayers today.
In my latest ULEZ News Update, I look at the RAC report that reveals 700,000 cars will be impacted by the ULEZ Expansion, the Mayor’s Superloop, or should that be superloopy nuts plans to rescue all those who won’t be able to afford to run their non-ULEZ cars, plus details of the next big protest!
Report from the Anti-ULEZ protest yesterday afternoon at the Orpington War Memorial roundabout on Saturday 25 March 2023. We speak to Gareth Bacon, Member of Parliament for Orpington and someone who has been strongly arguing against the ULEZ Expansion in Parliament. Plus I speak to members of the Orpington community directly affected and concerned by the ULEZ Expansion due at the end of August this year across the whole of Greater London. I talk to real people about real issues and real hardships – watch now!
In my latest ULEZ News Update, I look at what MSM (Main Stream Media) or in this case, the BBC in particular, really say about ULEZ. Turns out there is a page on the BBC News website, that is surprisingly fair and frank in its assessment. Perhaps there is hope after all. Now if only they’d come and cover the protests! See the page here https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-64798395?fbclid=IwAR0WVziW-SwdvGbXLGRoEAknMN1dWsoJe2BTP4yYLIaAUC-J_dWr3x3mPk8
Report from the Anti-ULEZ protest at Trafalgar Square on Saturday 18 March 2023. We speak to Harrow Council, Hatch End Councillor, Matthew Goodwin-Freeman (who aged only 23, spoke up so powerfully and eloquently directly against Sadiq Khan – which has been viewed over a million times on the internet now) plus of course the community directly affected and concerned by the ULEZ Expansion due at the end of August this year across the whole of Greater London. I talk to real people about real issues and real hardships – watch now!
In this ULEZ News Update, I look at what might be the true motivations behind London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s insistence on expanding the ULEZ zone, What is the C40 cities agenda, why private cars are NOT the main culprits when it comes to toxic air and how you’ll lose thousands of pounds if you try to change to ULEZ-compliant car now.
Since I posted this video https://youtube.com/shorts/l__FPrMo8Oo?feature=share some have countered that the emissions are worse at street level and on busy roads and that most monitoring equipment tends to be placed high up and not near busy roads. In the video I mostly referenced the air monitoring point near IKEA in Brent. I just looked at the IKEA air quality measurement equipment on Google Street View – it’s right on one of the busiest part of the North Circular road, adjacent to the pavement, and at face level. I think my point regarding air quality being fine stands.
You know if the ULEZ Extension happens at the end of August, even if I just use my classic BMW once a week – £12.50 x 52 weeks – it will cost me an extra £650. Double my annual road tax, which I still also have to pay! 
Couldn’t help having a bit of rant after someone commented, is Pay-Per-Mile road charging really so bad? YES IT IS!!
How much do our personal cars ACTUALLY contribute to air pollution? What percentage exactly? Mike Rutherford of AutoExpress has found out – see his article here https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/opinion/359702/its-disgraceful-single-out-car-cause-air-pollution Plus further confirmation that ULEZ is just a stepping stone to charging EVERY driver on a pay-per-mile basis. This is why ULEZ impacts EVERYBODY and why we all need to stop it now.
Report from the Anti-ULEZ protest this afternoon at Trafalgar Square on Saturday 25 February 2023.
Car Fans – Make your Voice Heard now, before it’s too late!
Is it possible to get a ULEZ-compliant car for under £2000? Can you get a fun car or even a ULEZ-friendly classic for under £5000? Watch this video now!
More lies about the ULEZ Expansion – we were told less than 200,000 cars would be affected, turns out it’s nearly twice than in London, and up to 1.5 million in surrounding Counties!
Check out my latest ULEZ Expansion NEWS UPDATE – Conservative councils, including Home Counties are going to court, Labour MPs are speaking out, Boris blasts Sadiq Khan, and could Downing Street veto it? Plus don’t forget the protest this Saturday (25th Feb).
I’ve been taking a close look at the news that ULEZ has had a positive impact on air pollution in London, that the Mayor’s Office released last week. True or False? What do you think? Tell me in the comments.
Report from the Anti-ULEZ (Ultra Low Emission Zone) protest this afternoon at Bromely Market Square. We speak to Councillor Colin Smith, Leader of Bromley Council plus Peter Fortune, the Conservative London Assembly Member for Bexley and Bromley, as well as protestors and participants directly affected and concerned by the ULEZ Expansion due at the end of August this year across the whole of Greater London.
What ChatGPT said about ULEZ:
“The expansion of the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) in London is not justified for several reasons. Firstly, the cost of compliance is too high for many drivers and small businesses. The cost of upgrading or replacing vehicles that do not meet the emissions standards can be prohibitively expensive, particularly for those on a tight budget. This has led to concerns that the ULEZ is a regressive tax, disproportionately affecting the less well-off.
“Secondly, the ULEZ does not address the root causes of air pollution. While it may encourage some people to switch to cleaner vehicles, it does not address other sources of air pollution, such as construction sites, factories, and shipping. The ULEZ may simply displace air pollution from one area to another, without addressing the underlying problem.
“Thirdly, the ULEZ may have unintended consequences. For example, increased congestion caused by the ULEZ may lead to a rise in emissions from other vehicles on the road. Additionally, small businesses may face increased costs and job losses as a result of the ULEZ, which could harm the local economy.
“Finally, the effectiveness of the ULEZ in reducing air pollution is questionable. The zone only covers a small area of London and may not have a significant impact on air quality in the short term. There are other, more comprehensive measures that could be taken to reduce air pollution, such as promoting the use of public transportation, investing in clean energy, and implementing stricter regulations on industrial emissions.
“In conclusion, the expansion of the ULEZ in London is not justified due to its high cost, limited impact, unintended consequences, and failure to address the root causes of air pollution. Alternative measures should be considered to reduce air pollution and ensure a fairer, more effective solution.”
Today I was invited on Ridge Radio to talk about ULEZ. This is a recording of the Amanda Weston show from this morning. Lots of discussion on the problems with ULEZ expansion in this one!
Report from the Anti-ULEZ protest 28 January 2023, at Trafalgar Square. We speak to the community directly affected and concerned by the ULEZ Expansion due at the end of August this year across the whole of Greater London. Strong views, valid points, high passion – watch now!
London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, keeps claiming that the ULEZ Expansion in August will save 4000 lives. I have already done a video revealing these figures are spurious – see below. Meanwhile someone also put in a Freedom of Information Act Request with the Office of National Statistics (ons.gov.uk asking) “How many deaths are recorded in London as a direct result of car emissions?”
Why are there so many traffic bottlenecks just outside the North and South Circulars right now? Why are these cones blocking off two lanes for no apparent reason?! What exactly is the motive here?
In this video I explain the new scrappage scheme, how it works and what you need to be aware of.
[UPDATE 17 January 2023]
It is now being reported that new documents released today reveal Sadiq Khan made ‘false and dishonest’ statements to the London Assembly on six occasions. The documents also show thousands of responses, 90% of which opposed the expansion, were secretly and improperly excluded from the final ULEZ consultation results after an intervention by the Mayor’s senior advisers. The intervention lowered the overall level of opposition in the final count by 3 percentage points (from 62% to 59%). You can read the story and download the actual documents here
I asked former Top Gear presenter, Motoring Expert and TV Personality, Quentin Wilson, as well Ian Plummer from Auto Trader, the most influential car classifieds organisation in the UK, about their thoughts on the ULEZ Expansion.
We MUST act now to save Modern Classics from the ULEZ threat!! The UK Government classifies classic cars as being older than 40 years old – that excludes tons of amazing classic cars, and potentially condemns many affordable modern classics to be crushed at the hands of a scrappage scheme. The government is WRONG! UNESCO partner FIVA defines classics as being 30 years and older and even recognises newer cars between 20 and 30 years old as potentially collectable and classic
I posted this video in May 2022 when London Mayor Sadiq Khan, first proposed plans to expand the ULEZ. I warned then, what we know now, this was a bad idea that would be harsh on those living and working in Greater London with little or no real benefit to our health.
Personal Cars Will Be Extinct Within A Generation! At Least for most of us – In less than 30 years from now, most of us won’t be able to have our own cars, and many of the major car manufacturers we know and love today – will have disappeared. Schemes like ULEZ could be the first step in killing our cars.
Brown Car Guy 
Hi Shahzad, I really appreciate all your good work in calling out the expensive (and very anti-working class) sham that ULEZ Expansion is and in trying to hold TfL/Mayor of London to account. I think there is a good opportunity to continue this on Friday 10th February when the MoL is appearing on the LBC James O’Brien show (probably at around 10am). I am sure the producer will ‘filter’ calls so as to avoid too many arguments/differences of opinion with the MoL (as you may know, Mr O’B is somewhat woke and relatively sympathetic to left-leaning politicians and very rarely holds them fully to account- unlike what he rightly does with the current Government!).
I think it would be great if you called in under your own name, as they may well assume you would be sympathetic to the MoLs terrible plans for ULEZ, and therefore put you on, and you can then surprise them and summarise all the reasons why he is gravely mistaken (based on the great research you have done for all your videos) in imposing this huge charge on working-class people in outer London!
In particular you should absolutely call him out on the mendacious ‘4000 deaths per year’ statistic that is very dishonestly totally misrepresenting the fact that he is in fact depending on Imperial College research that estimates 61000-70000 ‘Life Years Lost’ for children born in 2013, which when averaged over the 8M people in London actually only means a 5-6 month reduction in life expectancy at around 2093 when those children die (based on an average 80.9 year life expectancy). He even more duplicitously then breaks back this ‘4000 deaths’ figure to a per-Borough total of extra deaths- thus compounding the deeply-flawed and tenuous spinning of relatively innocuous statistics.
Many thanks and hope you manage to get on to this show to spell out the truth to all the listeners that are constantly bombarded with TfL propanda adverts re. ULEZ on LBC and many other radio channels.
Best regards, Eric
PS. Suggest you also have a look at this Facebook group, if you are not already watching it:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/stoptheulez/
LikeLike
I’d just mention that there are some factual inaccuracies in at least one of the videos on that site. For example he says blue badge holders will have a grace period until 2027. That’s not correct. It’s only cars with a disabled tax class, for individuals, or disabled passenger vehicle tax class for things like charities. If someone with a disabled badge is over state pension age, and in receipt of Attendance Allowance they can APPLY for the grace period to apply to them. All other blue badge holders, with a non-compliant vehicle will have to pay ULEZ. All disabled drivers will have to pay ULEZ from October 2027 if there car isn’t compliant at that time.
LikeLike
Hello Shahzad,
I was pleased to catch you at the last Trafalgar Sq protest. Your work, research and dilligence to expose the insidious treachery of the Ulez expansion is excellent. As isyour website and presentation.
TFL continue to invest in media propaganda to win over public opinion. I have just had to switch off an LBC radio ad that claims air pollution in all London Boroughs is below the agreed minimum World City Air pollution limit. What the ……. !!!
Could you please provide some probity on this claim.
Thank you Shahzad. Please keep up your focus. Much appreciated.
Steve (Carer for my Mum)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah those adverts make me cringe when I see them on the TV or hear them on the radio. If you see my latest ULEZ news video, you’ll see I put up screen grabs at the end of monitoring the air in Brent just adjacent to the North Circular for over three weeks and it’s predominantly been in the green!
LikeLike
Hello Shazad, Thank you for the very informative report on classic cars and the FIVA organisation of the United Nations (I didn’t even know of the existence of FIVA until now! Thank you so much for that excellent reportage).
I would like some advice etc please on ensuring the longevity of my late father’s car, a Ford Mondeo 2.0litre ‘Ghia’ Estate, X353 KCE, which I would like to ensure can beat ULEZ and also have some coverage under FIVA or whatever regulations can ensure I continue to enjoy my car (which also provides essential transportation of members and equipment of my local model club, local model railway society, local wargames club and local railway preservation society. As you can see, I am quite a busy man with lots of demands upon both trusty Mondeo and myself!).
I look forward to hearing from you about this and also the Ford Capri Series III as I owned two of them some years ago years ago (1.6GL CGJ 116X which was in an article for Kent Capri Club and 1.6 ‘Laser’ C951 SMY) and would like to acquire a 2.8 Injection model too. Thank you once again for all your very informative articles and invaluable advice and guidance. Next time we meet at the next ULEZ protest I’ll buy the coffees, sir.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ford Capris are awesome! Back in the day I was desperately saving up for a 2.8i but got seduced by a Mk 2 Supra instead (also a 2.8i), so never did the Capri thing – a great regret! Anyway, Capris up to 1983 will be exempt from ULEZ because they can be registered as ‘Historic’ at 40-years old. I think they went to 1986, if you get a later one you will have to pay ULEZ (if it comes in for Outer London – where do you live?) just as I will for my E30.
As for the Mondeo, great cars to drive, and yours sounds like it’s a solid and dependable workhorse, but sadly it will not fall under classic status.
I’ve just checked on the TFL site and it is NOT ULEZ compliant I’m afraid. Some petrol cars as car back as that did have Euro 4 standard emissions, but you’d have to get a certificate from Ford if that was the case.
Sorry about that.
LikeLike
Hello Shazad. Great to meet a fellow Ford Capri enthusiast! Mk2 Supra 2.8i also a very classic car too (someone offered me one but the black Ford Capri 1.6 ‘Laser’ got to me first! LOL!). Thank you for the information regarding Capris and ULEZ (officially ‘D’ was the last registration for Capri 2.8i, including 2.8i Specials and 280 ‘Brooklands’ Special Edition but some were kept back by crafty motor traders to just get into the ‘E’ registration, I saw one once, a 280 ‘Brooklands’, amongst the cars in the Kent Branch of Ford Capri, now All-Ford Cars).
My friend Paul (a welder by profession and does the occasional car maintenance for owners to make extra money) has a ‘D’ plate 2.8injection and Ford certified his as a ULEZ-compliant vehicle (the engineer, a former premium apprentice and Ford Motorsport mechanic before reaching the upper pillars of engineering management) furnished him with a covering letter which also included his comments that ULEZ was not a valid charge and that only the manufacturers could classify cars they make and no-one else. My friend got a similar certificate and letter from Rover with regard to his Rover ‘Fastback’, used by both him and his wife (an ex-company rep’s car which he acquired in immaculate condition).
Whilst my trusty Mondeo will not fall under classical status (AWW!) I hope to get a certificate from Ford and also receiving assistance on this from the wife of a Railway Station Manager friend of mine (his Hybrid is ULEZ-comp, the wife’s 22-year-old work and leisure runabout is not and she is hopping mad about Khan and ULEZ!). As proof that TFL are up the creek I also have evidence in a book from my local bookdealer by Ford Tech Staff about the Mondeo, the information it contains renders TFL’s and Khan’s arguements invalid! Bookshop is ‘Falconwood Transport & Military Bookshop, 5 Falconwood Parade, The Green, Welling , Kent DA16 2PL Telephone & fax 0208-303-8291, e-mail: falconw@globalnet.co.uk The shop is open on Saturdays, 930am-5.30pm (other days and times by prior appointment),
E-Bay Shop is http://stores.ebay.co.uk/FALCONWOOD-TRANSPORT-BOOKSHOP
The proprietor is Andy Doran who is a very courteous and helpful man (feel free to mention me, he knows me very well) and he does feree booksearches too! The shop also has old workshop manuals and parts catalogues for which should also be of interest and use to motorists. I live in Eltham, S.E.9, in what we dub ‘The People’s Republic of Greenwich’.
Look forward to meeting you again, sir.
Kind regards,
Steve
PS:- My friend Paul and myself plan to attend Brands Hatch Racing School to learn racing as we both wish to become F3 drivers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks. But wait… back up. Are you telling me a D-plate Ford Capri 2.8i has a ULEZ certificate of compliance from the manufacturer?
LikeLike
Hello Shahzad, my apologies for not being able to reply earlier as I had left the computer to cook my dinner and prepare dessert and a hot Coffee.
Yes, my friend Paul appears to have got this via his conversation with the Ford Engineer manning the phones at the time. Mind you, from what I can gather, the engineer recognised my friend’s car from a bit of ‘Top Gear’ where my friend beat Jeremy Clarkson in a race (Capri vs BMW I am given to understand) and in return for my friend and his Capri (or just the Capri on its’ own) in future adverts of ‘then and now cars advertising’ the Engineer fixed up a certificate for him. I’ll have to research into this further as Paul and his wife are away visiting her parents at the moment.
With reference to my Mondeo, the book I acquired from my bookshop friend is entitled ‘Mondeo – The Story Of The Global Car’ by Arturo de Andres, Fulvio Cinti, Vic Heylen, Ray Hutton, Jurgen Lewandowski, Edouard Seidler and Martin Wyler (published by World Publishing & Publicity Consultants SA, Luxembourg, ISBN 2- 919983-00-8. No year given but looks like post-1993 going by the appointment of Jacques Nasser to succeed Lindsey Halstead as Ford of Europe Chairman on 1st January 1993). All the authors are well know and established Motoring Correspondents and engineers and certainly ‘know their onions’, so to speak!
The book has full co-operation and support of Ford, in particular their Research & Development people. It is packed with colour and B/W photos and a lot of line drawings on the Mondeo (Project ‘CDW27’) including Jackie Stewart himself helping out! The crucial evidence to support my Mondeo, and the diesel variants, is located on pages 116 and 117 in the chapter aptly entitled ‘The Green Offensive’ where there is a colour cut-away of the electronically controlled three-way catalyst of all petrol Mondeos which reinforces what my mechanic and MOT Test Centre staff have always said; it complies with emissions and thus no charge! The pages also confirm this for the Mondeo 1.8Litre TDI too!
I am more than happy to show anyone with a Mondeo this book and would strongly advise any ULEZ protestor to visit my friend’s bookshop (or one near them) for any books and manuals on their vehicles as the manufacturers are the experts, not ‘Sadman Khant’ and the TFL!
LikeLiked by 1 person