'A recovery vehicle cannot sensibly be assessed at the same rate as an LGV'
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
4 I want to challenge the proposal to abolish the concessionary vehicle excise duty rate on recovery vehicles
from 1 July this year.
The concessionary rate for recovery vehicles was first introduced in January 1988 when the use of trade plates on vehicles was abolished. The initial rate was £50 a year—now £85 for any weight of vehicle. At the time the authorities sensibly recognised that the average recovery operator required upwards of 12 vehicles of differing types to cover all aspects of his work.
Many of these vehicles would not move for days, sometimes weeks. At other times, during blizzards or treacherous winter weather, most of the fleet would be used in motorway and other rescues working in conjunction with the police and other services.
It is now proposed that recovery vehicles are taxed at commercial rates according to weight and in accordance with large goods vehicles. But recovery vehicles cannot be ranked in the same categories as large goods vehicles. A recover), vehicle responds to emergency calls and rescues broken-down vehicles or clears motorway pile-ups as and when required. It is used intermittently. A large goods vehicle runs every day of the week, possibly for 16 hours or more with a change of driver, and is earning more money per hour, Logical), a recovery vehicle cannot sensibly be assessed at the same rate as an LGV. For example a three-axle recovery vehicle would be taxed at £2,160 annually as against the present rate of £85. A heavy recovery vehicle would be £5,000. The recovery trade as a whole has suffered as with any other type of business through the recession. Many operators have gone out of business, the majority have worked for the major motoring clubs for a mere pittance. They are expected to turn out for a fee of £20 with advanced equipment probably costing more than £20,000. A repairer of washing machines driving a car-derived van will command a turnout fee of £70 with parts extra.
If LGV rates are applied to recovery vehicles many operators will be forced out of business. As things stand, they are barely making ends meet. It is 6cliculous to think that an operator should have three or four
heavy vehicles on his fleet, used spasmodically, yet costing more £2,000 a year each in tax, as well as other hypes Of rescue vehicles taxed equally heavily. Imagine the most unwelcome scenario: all recovery operators down tools for, say, three days in the middle of a horrendous period of winter storms. The police, who rely entirely on the independent recovery operator, would not be able to cope. The country would come to a standstill. Exemptions are made within the new tax classes, under category 2.3. These include ambulance, fire service, mine rescue, lifeboat haulage and police vehicles. Recovery vehicles are emergency vehicles and should be included in this class.
Failure to do so will risk the livelihoods of hundreds of recovery operators. Manufacturers of recovery vehicles such as ourselves will also be affected. The recovery trade is a dedicated emergency profession, quite equal to the nursing, fire and police services. It would be a tragedy to destroy it.
• if you want to sound off about a road transport issue write to features editor Patric Cunnane.