London Accused of Wrongly Fining Hundreds of Thousands of EU Drivers (theguardian.com) 91
The Guardian reports that "Hundreds of thousands of EU citizens were wrongly fined for driving in London's Ulez clean air zone, according to European governments..."
The Guardian can reveal Transport for London (TfL) has been accused by five EU countries of illegally obtaining the names and addresses of their citizens in order to issue the fines, with more than 320,000 penalties, some totalling thousands of euros, sent out since 2021...
Since Brexit, the UK has been banned from automatic access to personal details of EU residents. Transport authorities in Belgium, Spain, Germany and the Netherlands have confirmed to the Guardian that driver data cannot be shared with the UK for enforcement of London's ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and claim registered keeper details were obtained illegally by agents acting for TfL's contractor Euro Parking Collection. In France, more than 100 drivers have launched a lawsuit claiming their details were obtained fraudulently, while Dutch lorry drivers are taking legal action against TfL over £6.5m of fines they claim were issued unlawfully.
According to the Belgian MP Michael Freilich, who has investigated the issue on behalf of his constituents, TfL is treating European drivers as a "cash cow" by using data obtained illegitimately to issue unjustifiable fines.
Freilich describes the situation as "possibly one of the largest privacy and data breaches in EU history," according to the article.
Some drivers have even received penalties of up to five-figure sums — for compliant vehicles which had simply not yet been registered. And "some low-emission cars have been misclassed as heavy goods diesel vehicles and fined under the separate low-emission zone scheme, which incurs penalties of up to £2,000 a day."
Thanks to Slashdot reader Bruce66423 for sharing the article.
Since Brexit, the UK has been banned from automatic access to personal details of EU residents. Transport authorities in Belgium, Spain, Germany and the Netherlands have confirmed to the Guardian that driver data cannot be shared with the UK for enforcement of London's ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and claim registered keeper details were obtained illegally by agents acting for TfL's contractor Euro Parking Collection. In France, more than 100 drivers have launched a lawsuit claiming their details were obtained fraudulently, while Dutch lorry drivers are taking legal action against TfL over £6.5m of fines they claim were issued unlawfully.
According to the Belgian MP Michael Freilich, who has investigated the issue on behalf of his constituents, TfL is treating European drivers as a "cash cow" by using data obtained illegitimately to issue unjustifiable fines.
Freilich describes the situation as "possibly one of the largest privacy and data breaches in EU history," according to the article.
Some drivers have even received penalties of up to five-figure sums — for compliant vehicles which had simply not yet been registered. And "some low-emission cars have been misclassed as heavy goods diesel vehicles and fined under the separate low-emission zone scheme, which incurs penalties of up to £2,000 a day."
Thanks to Slashdot reader Bruce66423 for sharing the article.
Government data sharing (Score:2)
Re:Government data sharing (Score:4, Interesting)
They probably couldn't get reasonable assurances from the UK that the data wouldn't be misused, and that there would be an adequate grievance process in place. And look, the UK is misusing what data they do have, and also not adequately addressing grievances.
Re: (Score:2)
The question should be... is the UK actually misusing the data, however?
From the description it sounds like the UK's data access was cut off, However, presumably the collection agency they
hired in France would have the capability to gain access to EU citizens' data just like any other collections company in the EU could.
This may be sensible... If there's an issue with this is should Not be that the fines are Unjust and Unreasonable, that's a separate issue.. the UK also while they can send notices; c
Re: Government data sharing (Score:1)
TFA says people drove unregistered vehicles even though they were compliant. The UK doesnâ(TM)t have access to this data anymore, so how do they know the vehicles were compliant? Here are the TfLâ(TM)s instructions: https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/drivi... [tfl.gov.uk]
Want to bet some people thought they could get away with not bothering because the UK had left the EU so couldnâ(TM)t catch up with them?
Many cities in Europe have emissions based restrictions and you have to do your research, not just London. L
Re: (Score:2)
An agency in France would get hold of the drivers details, but they could not pass that information on to an organisation in London.
The situation in the UK with tolls, congestion and emissions charging is that it is not well controlled. I do not know how to pay the charge in London nor what the details are; and those details are different from other cities in the UK. If I travel between two or three big cities, I might pass through two or three charging zones. I have to remember all of these and then pay wi
Re: (Score:2)
The situation in the UK with tolls, congestion and emissions charging is that it is not well controlled
Well, London has the right to do that. It sure makes the city inhospitable to drivers, But They actively want people to use public transportation not only and not drive; they're using that framework to try and discourage bringing cars in the first place. But if you do
really want to or need to bring your car, then you have to follow the rules -- All of the rules, or expect to have to pay those fines.
H
Re: (Score:2)
The UK has misused personal data even while being an EU member.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu... [europa.eu]
Re:Government data sharing (Score:5, Informative)
There is a legal way for TfL to request information on EU citizens and their vehicles.
The issue is that TfL chose not to get information about the vehicles, instead just assuming the worst possible case for each vehicle and fining accordingly. On top of that, TfL did choose to get information on the EU citizens so they could send out the fines, but they got this information in an illegal way.
The fun part is that TfL not only broke EU law, but also UK law so they're going to get their ass handed to them in court, rightfully so.
Re:Government data sharing (Score:5, Insightful)
This is just another reason why it's a bad idea to put profit motives into law enforcement.
Re: (Score:2)
Transport for London, i.e. the Greater London Authority, i.e. the government is on the hook for this. Even if they contacted it out, it's their job to make sure the enforcement is done properly.
Responsible, but not for the Specifics (Score:3)
Even if they contacted it out, it's their job to make sure the enforcement is done properly.
If you contract a supposedly reputable company to do something that is legal and, without your knowledge, they choose to perform it in an illegal way then it is not your fault but theirs. Your only responsibility is to take appropriate action if you find out they are behaving illegally. If you hire a company to haul away some rubbish from your property and legally dispose of it and, instead, they take it and then illegally dump it it's the company, not you, who will get into trouble.
Here is it even more
Re: (Score:2)
No. A government agency that contracts out work to a private company has a duty of oversight. They must make at least a minimal effort to ensure the contract is being executed in a lawful manner. They can't just hand out the work and turn a blind eye to any abuses of the law and only act when they are made painfully aware of violations of the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there is evidence that TfL knew what the company was doing and turned a blind eye then it is the company they contracted that should face the music.
TfL knew that the information they needed was not available legally. It seems kind of obvious that they knew it would be grabbed illegally. Presumption of stupidity is not a valid defense in the UK IIRC.
Re: (Score:3)
Transport for London, i.e. the Greater London Authority, i.e. the government is on the hook for this. Even if they contacted it out, it's their job to make sure the enforcement is done properly.
TFL does subcontract, especially for infrastructure and management, however the contractors do not ever get a penny of fine revenue, let alone incentives for fining.
You're right that the government has authority and therefore, responsibility. TFL has been caught with it's pants down, which is a good thing as it brings more scrutiny and allows people to address grievances legally.
This is also a knock on effect of the Conservative government chronically underfunding local governments, so local governmen
Re: Government data sharing (Score:1)
From reading the article, the collection was not illegal in the UK, it was done pre-Brexit, itâ(TM)s just that the EU law post-Brexit didnâ(TM)t allow the UK to continue having/collecting the data, but the EU law no longer applies in the UK.
The collection of the data was done legally, the fines were also established legally, the EU however holds that the fines do not apply to its citizens post-Brexit because effectively they dispute the UKâ(TM)s sovereignty over EU citizens in its country.
Re: (Score:3)
From reading the article, the collection was not illegal in the UK, it was done pre-Brexit, itâ(TM)s just that the EU law post-Brexit didnâ(TM)t allow the UK to continue having/collecting the data, but the EU law no longer applies in the UK.
The collection of the data was done legally, the fines were also established legally, the EU however holds that the fines do not apply to its citizens post-Brexit because effectively they dispute the UKâ(TM)s sovereignty over EU citizens in its country.
Not at all. The fines actually seem to be quite fine (pun obvius). What is not acceptable is that the license plate to holder information was obtained illegally. It's fully within the UKs remit to fine drivers for violations of their rules. It's not ok to illegally obtain information on car registration. That's what the UK gets for Brexit - less access to EU institutions and markets.
Re: (Score:1)
It was not illegal to collect or keep the records in the UK. It may have been illegal from the EU perspective, but the UK doesn't care (anymore) about EU privacy laws. This company is also working on behalf of the government, so there is a level of immunity as well (the crown cannot commit crimes and is immune to all claims).
Re: (Score:2)
It was not illegal to collect or keep the records in the UK. It may have been illegal from the EU perspective, but the UK doesn't care (anymore) about EU privacy laws. This company is also working on behalf of the government, so there is a level of immunity as well (the crown cannot commit crimes and is immune to all claims).
Actually, it was also illegal in the UK to obtain the data from foreign sources by bribery. And as I understand it, the company in question was not working on behalf of the crown, but on behalf of the Greater London Council. Moreover, immunity is not transitive - think about what that would imply.
Re: (Score:1)
Then the EU should seek conviction of that claim by UK courts.
Re: (Score:2)
The fun part is that TfL not only broke EU law, but also UK law so they're going to get their ass handed to them in court, rightfully so.
LOL, no they won't. They might not be able to collect some of the fines on the say so of a judge, but their ass will continue doing what it is doing, but maybe make it more muted so these kinds of articles do not come out.
Authority refuses to be interrupted. Even by other authorities.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You'd think some sort of data sharing agreement would be in place
There was, many agreements for many things. You may recall the UK had a spat and went home crying about how they didn't want to play anymore.
Re:Government data sharing (Score:4, Informative)
You'd think some sort of data sharing agreement would be in place
There was, many agreements for many things. You may recall the UK had a spat and went home crying about how they didn't want to play anymore.
There actually still is a data sharing agreement. But this now only applies to criminal cases. The one that would allow data sharing for civil violations went out the window with Brexit.
This is silly (Score:2, Insightful)
If they want to avoid their residents' vehicles being misclassified, maybe just sharing the data with London would help. Wilfully concealing it because of Brexit sounds self-defeating, the constituents suffer. This reminds me of Chris Christie and his Bridgegate thing back a decade ago, closing down lanes on the Lincoln Tunnel as a tit for tat with local authorities for purely political reasons. People stuck in traffic was the end result. I should say angry people.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
be just sharing the data with London would help. Wilfully concealing it because of Brexit sounds self-defeating
Government entities can only do things when legally permitted. UK pulling out of EU means the arrangements within the legal framework of the EU ceased to exist. Within GDPR, personal data is private by default, so if this data sharing was not included in the post-Brexit agreement with the UK agreeing to abide by the terms of GDPR (which they probably don't want for sovereignty reasons) then the data cannot be shared.
The UK pulled out of Judicial Cooperation (the EU Arrest warrant) in 2014 by their own decis
Re: (Score:2)
Government entities can only do things when legally permitted.
Then what is this article about if not for a government entity doing something they were not legally permitted to do?
Are you really sane if you can believe two opposing thoughts in your head?
Re: (Score:3)
Wilfully concealing it because of Brexit sounds self-defeating
Data cannot be shared without a treaty which allows and regulates that according with the laws in EU countries.
It was not the EU which kicked out the UK. The UK stepped out of the existing treaty, so they should negotiate a new one if they want access.
Re: This is silly (Score:2)
The EU GDPR laws do not apply in the UK unless a treaty was signed to that effect. I donâ(TM)t believe there was such treaty and a traffic ticket company probably wasnâ(TM)t considered in the negotiations. GDPR is about the use of data about EU citizens and applies only to companies and organizations in the EU, outside of the EU, you can collect just about any data you want about EU citizens.
Re: (Score:3)
outside of the EU, you can collect just about any data you want about EU citizens.
The problem in this case is that the data was obtained in the EU, from the article:
In October, the Belgian government ordered a criminal investigation after a court bailiff was accused of illegally passing the details of 20,000 drivers to Euro Parking for Ulez enforcement. The bailiff was suspended in 2022 and TfL initially claimed that no Belgian data had been shared with Euro Parking since then. However, a freedom of information request by the Guardian found that more than 17,400 fines had been issued to Belgians in the intervening 19 months.
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless where it was obtained from, the EU laws or court cases do not apply to companies in the UK. It does not make my statement incorrect. You can collect data in the UK from the EU and sell it, or use it for traffic tickets, whatever the Belgian court system thinks of that is irrelevant. Note that the court bailiff was suspended, that is the appropriate action perhaps, but that does not give the UK government/companies the mandate to delete the data from its sovereign soil.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, and that is true of just about any crime you commit while abroad with few exceptions (again, unless there is a treaty).
Just don't go back to the UK.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
If they want to avoid their residents' vehicles being misclassified, maybe just sharing the data with London would help.
You happy for your government to blindly share your data with another without being subject to any oversight or treaty? You may recall there was such oversight up until a certain country decided they didn't want to play by the rules anymore.
Re: This is silly (Score:3)
Why would you want to drive your car from the continent and then actually drive it in London? Most Britons outside London and many of its residents wouldnâ(TM)t want to do that. If youâ(TM)re really keen, follow the rules and register your vehicle so you donâ(TM)t get charged or fined. If youâ(TM)re from outside the UK, TfL canâ(TM)t know from automatic number plate recognition that it vehicle is compliant. There are plenty of cities in Europe that have restrictions, although the
Re: (Score:2)
So the issue is (Score:1, Redundant)
Not that the people were fined because they weren't registered, but that they were identified. Sounds like the EU wants their people to be immune from other nation's laws/rules.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the EU wants their people to be immune from other nation's laws/rules.
I'm sure there is a legal process to get the info they need. Perhaps they should use that instead.
Re:So the issue is (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure there is a legal process to get the info they need. Perhaps they should use that instead.
Ok, but Add the cost of doing so on top of the fines, add gates at the UK borders to Not allow vehicles in from those countries until confirming all Driver License, Vehicle information, and Personal details are scanned into an electronic database, and Verified to match their file, and of course Impound any vehicle Until payment if the Vehicle or Driver that was trying to come in has delinquent fines..
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, but Add the cost of doing so on top of the fines, add gates at the UK borders to Not allow vehicles in from those countries until confirming all Driver License, Vehicle information, and Personal details are scanned into an electronic database, and Verified to match their file, and of course Impound any vehicle Until payment if the Vehicle or Driver that was trying to come in has delinquent fines..
Seems reasonable. EU countries should also do the same for British vehicles so it is fair all around.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, but Add the cost of doing so on top of the fines, add gates at the UK borders to Not allow vehicles in from those countries until confirming all Driver License, Vehicle information, and Personal details are scanned into an electronic database, and Verified to match their file, and of course Impound any vehicle Until payment if the Vehicle or Driver that was trying to come in has delinquent fines..
Seems reasonable. EU countries should also do the same for British vehicles so it is fair all around.
The thing is, before Brexit the EU and UK did share information. I suspect that TFL just haven't realised they can't keep doing things the way they used to when the UK was part of the EU.
Re: So the issue is (Score:2)
This isnâ(TM)t a nation scheme, but just a London one. Therefore this isnâ(TM)t a border issue. If I drive to Amsterdam and its emissions restrictions from Romania, should my vehicle be blocked nearly 1,700 km away at the Hungarian border when I enter the Schengen Zone?
Re: (Score:2)
This isnâ(TM)t a nation scheme, but just a London one. Therefore this isnâ(TM)t a border issue.
Valid point. I guess you would need your checkpoints at the London (Amsterdam, Paris, etc) city limits then. I suspect that would be all around shitty for everyone, but the whole idea is apparently discouraging traffic in your city so that would be the most effective way.
Re: (Score:3)
If I drive to Amsterdam and its emissions restrictions from Romania, should my vehicle be blocked nearly 1,700 km away at the Hungarian border when I enter the Schengen Zone?
Well, maybe. I would say it makes sense for the Nation to require the paperwork and data entry in order for you to bring your vehicle into the country So that all localities can enforce compliance with their laws, and not just the Romania-specific rules, but all the traffic codes of the different local governments.
And If you personal
Re: So the issue is (Score:2)
These vehicles arenâ(TM)t prohibited in London and why would you have border paperwork for something that might not happen?
Itâ(TM)s probably better to have a system in place where people canâ(TM)t board Le Shuttle or a ferry with their vehicle until all outstanding charges are paid or sufficient data is provided while appeals are ongoing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only recourse for Transport of London would be to wait until the EU citizens enter the UK again and then impound
Yes.. Well, the UK could also pass a law that any government fine against other countries' citizens that is declared "invalidated" or refused to be enforced by other countries' governments are to be tabulated, held as an outstanding balance due and Payable to the UK as an amount owed by the citizens of that country, and the proceeds of any Fine or Civil judgement that was going to be paid fr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we could continue to do very stupid things, that is always an option, especially before the next election.
Both the EU (before and after Brexit) and the UK always had SoVeRiGnTy and were always free to say "my way or the highway". Turns out the highway is for the UK a very lonely road. We could continue to be antagonistic to our largest neighbor and biggest trading partner, but that's a colossally stupid thing to do.
Now you might argue that it is rather bad that the EU can basically do what it wants and
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What we want is for the governments in general, and the government of UK in particular, to follow due process.
It's up to the UK police to set up procedures to take note of foreigner's names and licence plate at the border; or failing that, to later formally request cooperation through interpol or through diplomacy. It's not ok to steal a database.
Re: So the issue is (Score:1)
They didnâ(TM)t steal the database, they obtained it through legal means within the UK. The EU disagrees, but the EU laws donâ(TM)t apply in the UK.
Re: (Score:2)
They didnâ(TM)t steal the database, they obtained it through legal means within the UK.
Kind of like how 3 letter agencies in the US "legally" snarf up all your data without any due process either. I can see how you would be a fan.
Re: (Score:1)
US agencies can indeed legally get data from non-US citizens. Why is that weird, every country can do the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
US agencies can indeed legally get data from non-US citizens.
And citizens as well, as any reader of /. knows.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is that weird, every country can do the same thing.
It is weird because the other countries reserve the use intelligence-agency methods to fighting threats to national security, not traffic tickets. The method of investigation seems out of proportion for petty crime.
One would expect the UK to either 1) issue the fine and wait for the citizen to show up again with their car entering the UK at the customs or 2) follow usual procedures including formally requesting the cooperation of the other countries through diplomacy.
It is also inconsistent with the attitud
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Off course that is the right of the EU to say, it is the right of the UK to then arrest those people next time they come to the UK. It's no different than someone hiding out in a South American country.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, it is. They're whining that London found a way to identify EU people who weren't registered for the zone and now have to pay a fine. That's the issue.
The reason we know that's the issue is because the people didn't register. They're claiming because the EU and England don't have an agreement they shouldn't have to registered. Which is a ridiculous position. That would be like someone from another state driving into New York City and claiming they shouldn't have to pay the congestion fee [nbcnewyork.com] the city ha
Re: (Score:3)
They're claiming because the EU and England don't have an agreement they shouldn't have to registered. Which is a ridiculous position.
No, that is not the claim. If the UK policed had stopped and fined the drivers in London, then all would be OK.
The claim is that the UK should follow the EU laws and proper procedures to obtain data from EU citizens in stead of going through illegal channels (in the case of Belgium through personal contacts with a Belgian bailiff, who was suspended for illegally providing the data of 20k Belgian citizens to an American private company working for Transport For London) to obtain the identities of the drive
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Try reading the summary again. No one is complaining about people being identified and fined correctly. Please try and understand the issue here.
Green laws = legalized shakedown (Score:2, Insightful)
Always has been, always will be.
Some of them may peripherally improve air and water quality, but that's at best hit or miss.
Prime example: emissions and waste disposal rules that make manufacturing more expensive here have the effect of pushing manufacturing to the third world where there are zero emissions or pollution controls. Same amount of pollution, if not more (accounting for extra transportation), but the tree hugger compliance specialists get to buy a Tesla or three with their windfalls.
Re: (Score:3)
Some of them may peripherally improve air and water quality, but that's at best hit or miss.
Yup, exactly. It's why the rivers in the U.S. keep catching fire or the smog is so thick around cities you can't see properly [youtube.com]. Let's not get into all that lead being deposited every day from vehicles [bbvaopenmind.com] or the acid rain destroying crops and forests [gizmodo.com]. There is absolutely no evidence to show environmental laws make a single bit of difference.
To paraphrase Rainier Wolfcastle, "The laws do nothing!"
Re: Green laws = legalized shakedown (Score:2)
s/America/China/g and try again.
Displacing pollution to the other side of the planet is not the same thing as reducing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Out of interest do you work at being that stupid, or does it come naturally?
Re: Green laws = legalized shakedown (Score:5, Informative)
All those issues improved or changed well before the laws were changed.
Bullshit. Lead was removed from gasoline only as a direct result of the law phasing it out. Acid rain decreased because laws mandated scrubbers and other measures to reduce pollutants.. Rivers stopped being polluted because laws required companies to clean up their own mess.
such as the laws on CFC, not only was the issue already solved by the time the laws came into effect, the alternative (HCFC) are now found to be much worse
The bullshit keeps flowing. HCFCs have a shorter lifespan [epa.gov] than CFCs as well as less chlorine which means they contribute less to ozone depletion [noaa.gov].
and the worst offenders (China and India) never stopped emitting them\
Which has what to do with the U.S.? Just because someone else isn't doing their part doesn't mean we can't do what we can to reduce the crap we throw into the atmosphere. The overall result is still less than before.
Some of those claims (like the acid rain claims) were never scientifically substantiated
No, of course not. All those people who've been studying its effects for almost two hundred years [acsh.org] have no clue what they're talking about [usgs.gov]. Only experts such as yourself know the real truth.
while others were debunked as to cause, origin, impact and effect.
Like everything else you said, not even close to reality.
Laws, rather than market solutions, always are the worst solution.
More bullshit. Without laws requiring companies to clean up they wouldn't have done it. The reason we have to resort to laws is because market solutions don't work. If market solutions worked we wouldn't need to subsidize Tesla or Exxon. They would be able to survive on their own. Domino Sugar wouldn't need millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Here's one. If market solutions are the answer, why have ethanol producers demanded laws be passed to include ethanol in fuel and receive hundreds of millions of taxpary money for over three decades? Shouldn't those market forces be jumping all over using ethanol without the need for laws mandating its use?
Companies won't do anything unless they are forced to change. Looking over history that is quite clear.
Re: (Score:1)
The issue of acid rain to take a simple example, was caused by CO2 and global cooling and other emissions was it not?
Now the issue of acid rain has been disappeared completely since the 90s, you pick the reason:
- CO2 and other emissions are decreasing and global warming/cooling claims are a hoax
- Acid rain disappeared on its own, cause unknown
- Acid rain was never a real issue
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong acid rain was caused by sulphur in coal. When burnt you get SO2 and this dissolves in rainwater producing sulphuric acid. It was solved by scrubbing the SO2 from the flues of coal plants and then stopping burning coal in the first place.
Re: (Score:1)
Again, global SO2 measurements have not decreased significantly, especially as Asia has increased their emissions more than 10x since 1990s.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of those claims (like the acid rain claims) were never scientifically substantiated while others were debunked as to cause, origin, impact and effect.
Son, you are lost.
Re: (Score:2)
People are dying in London due to the pollution. Pollution has been cited as a cause at more than one inquest.
The government has a responsibility to protect them, and the ULEZ has measurement and significant effects.
Re: Green laws = legalized shakedown (Score:2)
Bullshit. Processed foods are "killing" people too if you define "killing" down to pushing the frail but not-quite-dead over the edge. In fact, any kind of prolonged stress can contribute in the same way, and if that's in the picture too, then anything and everything other than padded corners and unalloyed praise is literally killing people.
Screw you.
Re: (Score:3)
As I recall the first case was a 7 year old girl who had breathing problems. Asthma and similar correlate with pollution, and it's widely accepted that there is a causal relationship.
Re: (Score:2)
The government has a responsibility to protect them, and the ULEZ has measurement and significant effects.
Necessity is always the plea to take away Freedom.
Yes, it is necessary to deal with the pollution problem.
No, it is not necessary to use illegal (both internal and external laws were broken) means to deal with the pollution.
Re: (Score:1)
Always has been, always will be.
There is a proverb that states something to the effect of: 'Never attribute malice to what can be adequately explained by incompetence and stupidity'. If you had bothered to read the summary you would have discovered this:
Re:Green laws = legalized shakedown (Score:4, Interesting)
Living up to your name I see.
I know one of my neighbours has given up his old diesel and dropped down form tow cars to one as a direct result of the ULEZ. And he, like me lives juuuuust inside the south circular. Mission accomplished!
The ULEZ is absolutely the right thing to do. I suppose I can also get some amusement from right wing tears of rage.
No EU vehicles then (Score:2)
TfL charges aren't legal fines (Score:2, Informative)
At least one person is very legally wearing dinosaur cosplays [mylondon.news] to block their local cameras during peak t
Re: TfL charges aren't legal fines (Score:3)
Wrong. As a resident of London, I donâ(TM)t want my son, my wife or myself breathing unnecessary fumes from some obnoxious arsehole. Iâ(TM)m fully in support of the ULEZ, and polluting aresholes can fuck off. Park your polluting vehicle and take a train in to the city instead of polluting my home.
Re: (Score:3)
Since nobody in the UK (including environmental campaigners) wants the ULEZ scheme in place
I'm searching for the word, what is it, which describes that...?
Oh yes! Bullshit. That's the word!
The majority of Londoners support it. It's by London, for London. Everyone else can take their death fume spewing machines and fuck all the way off, frankly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
London? Like the entirety of London? (Score:1)
Wow, that's intense, the WHOLE of London fined hundreds of thousands of EU drivers.
I thought it was just TfL (Transport for London) that was fining EU drivers.
Clearly now I know the entirety of London is involved, it's a lot more serious /s
"Slashdot, the home of sub-standard 'journalism'"
It does not even work within EU (Score:2)
Low emission zone shenanigans do not even work properly within EU, just ask the Belgians! There are three separate such zones in Belgium and even with a modern EU plate, they allegedly do not know if your car complies or not. So now you have to sign up for the zone.
But you have to sign up individually for each of those forsaken three zones because apparently it does not even work WITHIN BELGIUM!!!
And one of those zones is in Belgium, where the whole EU offices are.