tax c*ck up?.... rip off britain again.....

B

biffa

Well-known user
Mar 26, 2012
101
15
Castleford
Hi all,

I have a 2.0 zetec 2000 (w plate). The tax is 155 quid every 6 month and this just isnt right at all...
The car was declared as a 2000 manufacture but the dates etc inside the car are a 1999. It is believed the car spent its first 7 years in Jersey and registered with the dvla here in the uk in 2007.
Having spoken to the dvla, they said repeatedly it was down to the co2 from the last mot?

I tried to explain and said it is being taxed as a 2007 car, due to the emissions legislation brought in in 2002. Where the vehicle was made in 2000 regardless of the uk tax system. Other cougars with the same engine etc are in the correct tax bracket for the vehicle.
The dvla said it was still down to the last mot.

Which considering is bloodu stupid to say the least!!! I had a 1979 dolomite 1300 which after an engine rebuild and a carb rebuild etc was producing less co2 than a new 1.25 zetec fiesta!!

I also asked the question of engine changes.. of what you are saying is correct could i not drop a 1.5dci renault engine in and only pay £30 a year road tax. The dvla said yes.. you could however it would have to be passed by vosa and there is no gaurantee you would be able to fall into the £30 year road tax ?!

So... what the hell!!!
Going from what the dvla said... would that not mean the cougar should have an 07 plate on?
Im sure a few of us have heard of the likes of pug, ford etc having left a car unregistered behind a dealership and registering it a few years after production ceased. I.e 306 cabriolets stopped on 2002.. but there is a red 2005 plate because it was a late registered car.

Sorry for the rant but im starting to get a tad miffed with this country and the crap they come out with....

May need shoving in the rant section lol
 
If made and registered pre march 2001 you should only be paying for engine size above 1550 or what ever , I'd be fuming , that is why I'm glad mine is a 2000 model because it saved me a few bob though not much on tax , which in my opinion is a f%%&%£ rip off which ever way you look at it.
*plays taxman by the Beatles*
 
someone else here had the same problem, car was imported from one of the Channel Islands an thereafter fell into the higher tax bracket

not right at all
 
Sorry mate, but that's the way it is.

The tax you pay is based on the first year of registration in the UK, regardless of its age. In your car's case, it was first registered here in 2007, so the tax you're paying is based on the emissions and the rate for that band in that year.

You don't get a later plate though, because no vehicle can have a plate that makes it younger than it really is.

Chapter and verse:

All vehicle registration and licensing is governed by the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act (VERA). VERA states that any vehicle first registered on or after 1st March 2001 on the basis of an EC Certificate of Conformity or UK type approval certificate that identifies the vehicle as having been approved as a light passenger vehicle and specifies a CO2 emissions figure, falls to pay vehicle excise duty (VED) according to its CO2 emissions figure and the type of fuel used.

The term "first registration" used in VERA meant first registration under this legislation and therefore, first registration in the UK. The term did not extend to any initial non-UK registration. Consequently VED was charged according to a vehicle's date of first registration in the UK regardless of whether they were brand new vehicles or imported vehicles that are new to registration in the UK.

That meant that a pre March 2001 car, even a 1995 car, imported after March 2001 was subject to CO2 based tax rather than the normal standard rates for older cars.
Click to expand...
 
Sadly its how they get you, i used to have a 1999 Honda S2000 which was exported new and had spend the first 2 years of its life in Gibralter or some such and was brought back into blightly in 2001 when the then owner came to live back here,

Consiquently it was taxed at the higher rate, even though it was lower Co2 than the 2001 models !!, its wrong but what can you do the barstewards have got you no matter which way to you turn :cautious:
 
Make sure it's freshly serviced and take it for an Italian tuneup before the next MOT to try and keep the emissions as low as possible (y)
 
Also, I've never seen a CO2 analyser in an MOT test station, only CO, NO(x), lambda and optical sensors for particulates. That said I haven't run an MOT emissions test for about six/seven years now.

CO2 is also t as a mass per unit traveled so this would could not be elucidated from a static MOT test.

Think either you've misunderstood, or you've been feed a lot of bull by my reckoning.

This is also a duty, not a tax. Not sure where the problem is to be honest.
 
Last edited:
Sorry... but ive actually owned a car that was older than its plates.. and knpw a few people who have too. A 1986 fiesta but not registered until 1988 sat un registered as a demo vehicle in a show room by ford.

Also...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2132227/Ford-Cortina-market-30-years-rolled-production-line.html

A 2005 plate peugeot 306 cabriolet. Despite the last one rolling off the line in 2002. Higher tax but on a 2005 plate

What gets me is... the car was still made in 2000! BEFORE the emissions based tax bracket came into force in 2002
Just annoys me how the tax can be higher despite the exact same car can be parked at the side of it with a cheaper tax. Even though it could be newer.
As for the registration plate
If a vehicle is registered in the u.k surely it should have the plate from the date of registration NOT the date of manufacture ? The date of manufacture is noted on the logbook anyway.

Another point i would like to make...

Say a classic car from the 70' had an engine change with a car from the 50's early to mid 60's iirc the mot test itself would just be a visual inspection Not a probe inspection. Due to the age of the engine ( regardless of body mileage etc).
So.. based on that theory how can a car that was manufactured before 2002 (emissions tax bracket crap) be tested for emissions, based on tax principles before the vehicles time.


Thats like testingand failing a reliant robin for airbag warning lights on its mot surely?!
 
Last edited:
The pertinent part of the argument is the date of first registration not the build date. Many Cougars are older than their plates because they were such slow sellers but perfectly legal as the plate was issued at registration not when they rolled off the production line. It is an offence to attempt to make a vehicle appear younger than it actually is.
 
Thats my point, the car was first registered in 2007, so should it have an 06 or 07 plate on it? From the post above?
 
It would of been first registered on a Jersey 'J' plate in 2000, it's birth date if you like, but would not become liable for UK mainland tax until registered here in 2007. It would have to adopt the UK plate equivalent to the date of it's first registration in Jersey.
 
Christ.....that is extortion, my fair weather drive is a Jaguar 4.2 V8 Supercharged and that is £155, but for that i gets all that engine!
 
biffa said:
Sorry... but ive actually owned a car that was older than its plates.. and knpw a few people who have too. A 1986 fiesta but not registered until 1988 sat un registered as a demo vehicle in a show room by ford.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry if it looks like I'm arguing with you, but I'm really not. That's exactly what I said, and you've just proved my point (and in any case, every car is older than its plates by some margin).

I agree it doesn't seem fair. One of T's cars was built in 2007, but not registered until late 2008 and it's on an S plate. My conclusion is that the manufacturers get some leeway/trust, since there is no way the car was on the road while they owned it and therefore not liable for tax.

Example: Every Rover Coupe whose reg ends in "HLX" was exported to Japan (without ever being registered) and arrived just days before their emissions laws changed. So they weren't legal to sell there. Most of them were shipped back and sold here at a discount, and registered on the day they were sold...two years later. They're all N-reg, but were built in 1993.
 
I made a boo boo. When I read about the V6 cougar, I thought the engine capacity was 2455cc. Unfortunately, Living on the Isle of Man the tax brackets are slightly different, so it puts me in the +2.5L group at £315.00 per year.
 
We had the 2 cougars and Maria's was an S plate which cost around £225 for the year, mine was a y plate registered 30/04/2001 and I was paying something like £280. The last lot brought in these tax prices and the banding system, what made it especially unfair was that I had owned my car a number of years before they did this so overnight they made my car less desirable due to it costing over a quarter more to tax than a pre March 2001 model. If they just brought a tax banding system for new cars from that year that the system started, at least we can make a decision based on what the road tax will cost. I hope everybody remembers this when it comes to voting next time, most people seem to view Labours time in office with rose tinted spectacles.
It's **** what they are doing with you, but they are inflexible and although it sticks in your throat, what option do you have? I don't blame you for being livid, I would be too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.