View Single Post
  #28  
Old 22nd February 2018, 09:02
NeilF355's Avatar
NeilF355 NeilF355 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Teesdale
Posts: 151
NeilF355 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Towed View Post


As such, I would avoid any kind of rant in response and also any phrases suggesting that thousands of cars will be affected. That may well be counter-productive, giving ammunition to whoever dreamt up these changes.

Instead, a FOI subject access request could be made to DVLA to establish how many specialist cars are registered in the UK, and how many miles are driven in them each year as recorded on their MOT returns. That could then be presented as proof that introducing such legislation is a waste of taxpayers' money as the benefits would clearly be minimal when compared to the costs involved.
Hi Towed
As Peterux has already stated the authors of the proposal actually included their own estimate of the number of cars whose emissions would be improved.
It is 523 (Appendix A, Section 3, item 1)and when compared with a total of 37.5 million vehicles registered with the DVLA (https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...march-2017.pdf) it represents a 0.0014% improvement!

If you use an average figure of 3000 miles per year for kit car annual mileage then that represents 0.0005% of the 323.7 billion miles driven on Britain's roads in 2016 (https://www.racfoundation.org/motori...s/mobility#a25)

Personally I don't think such a pitiful improvement is worth anyone at Realm, Suffolk, Chesil etc losing their job.


Neil

P.S. I've just sent in my response to the Consultation questions...must admit I couldn't help myself when I reached question Q45. What are your views on our analysis of costs and benefits? Give supporting evidence wherever possible: My views included "a waste of time for the projected benefits which would not be tolerated in my former employment".

Last edited by NeilF355; 22nd February 2018 at 19:43.. Reason: Post script
Reply With Quote