[Viju]

Originally Posted by saket77

No. As I said, LTT is for life time; means until your vehicle is fit and has a valid fitness certificate even after 15 years.

Well, if there is a reference document which says that, it would be nice. I have re-registered at least 5 or 6 vehicles at the end of the first 15 years, and every single time, I have paid the road tax again (bi-annual tax). The 'life' of the vehicle is determined by the validity of the registration certificate.

That is why I posted a screenshot of my own vehicle registration details. It is clearly mentioned that the tax is paid upto 30-Jun-2020, right? That means, from July 1, 2020, if I have to ply my vehicle on the road, I have to pay road tax again.

[Sherlocked]

Wonder if Automobile manufacturers have any part in influencing Govt. Of India to come up with such idiotic rules.
Rules such as banning diesel vehicles once it crosses XX years and now this rule of de-registering the vehicles automatically will only make people dispose off their old car and buy a new one instead which will immensely benefit the car companies in form of increased sales.

Folks who go by the rule of playing safe and sound will buy a new car instead of a used one so as to avoid any hassles for next 15 years at least.

We all know how many people are having WagonRs, M800, Zen, Santro as their sole family car which are running in perfect conditions even after crossing 15 years mark.

This possibility of lobbying in such rules cannot be disregarded considering how Maruti is benefiting with their "Mild Hybrid" system in Ciaz (Excise duty benefits, Odd-Even exemption).

[saket77]

Originally Posted by Viju

Well, if there is a reference document which says that, it would be nice. I have re-registered at least 5 or 6 vehicles at the end of the first 15 years, and every single time, I have paid the road tax again (bi-annual tax). The 'life' of the vehicle is determined by the validity of the registration certificate.

Please go through any RTO's website for the process. Here's link for most controversial state's procedure when it comes to LTT- Karnataka. It does not say a word about road tax, only the fees and the process in detail:

http://rto.kar.nic.in/RRC-PROCcss.html


And TN state as well:

http://www.tn.gov.in/sta/eng%20cc/fc.html

http://www.tn.gov.in/sta/eng%20cc/fc1.html

I have too renewed my dad's scooter registration once in past and I did not pay the road tax again. If your state has a concept of 5 year tax or annual tax then you will need to pay road tax at the end of the period, in my opinion but not in case of LTT.

I believe a lot of people on TBHP would have re-registered their vehicles and should be able to verify it.

Regards

[drmohitg]

I think that their focus is still misguided. 15 years is too long a period. People who don't maintain their car and two-wheelers can end up causing significant damage to their vehicle in under 5 years whereas if you maintain your vehicle well, then probably it can last you a lifetime. So arbitarily forcing people to give up their vehcile is not the best idea to tackle this issue. More so who is to check if the vehcile has crossed 15 years or not. With so many cars and so many models, I am sure any non-petrolhead cop has no idea whom to stop and whom not to stop, unless you are travelling in a 1980s car.

More so, I feel they should try to reign in the commercial vehicles which are much more abused, not well mainatined and run in much more than a private car. Even in this sham of the odd-even rule, it is stupid and frustrating to see people being forced to leave their relatively non-polluting private cars at home and travel in black smoke emitting diesel taxis.

I honestly feel before bringing in new ideas, they need to ensure the implementation of the current laws, most basic one being PUC.Ensure that it is strivtly adhered to and then take on more meausres from there. Bringing down more laws will only look good on TV channels and nothing more.

[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by Chethan B G

This is the step in the right direction. It is not just the case of pollution. It is about safety and road worthiness too.

Supporting system needs to be built parallely. But once vehicles are available for scrap, other systems will become available. It becomes part of business cycle.

How exactly? This seems like a move done by some idiot who has no clue about how stuff works and has maybe been payed off by some automotive majors. If we buy a car, it is our right to keep it and use it however we please for however long we want as long as it is roadworthy. Besides, in most cases it actually pollutes more to manufacture a new car than to run the car you already own.

Price diesel optimally for private cars instead of letting it be priced so low, maintain buses properly and actually perform proper fitness inspections on heavy vehicles. Mandate that every company that pollutes x amount needs to get y percent of their energy needs in a green self sustaining manner, etc. These are in my view, the right actions

[Viju]

Originally Posted by saket77

Please go through any RTO's website for the process.

Cool.

Thanks for providing the links.

I guess the process is different according to the state, then. I do remember my friend paying 'Green Tax' for his motorcycle when he did the fitness certification in Chennai. Guess Kerala RTO charges tax as 'Road Tax' itself after the first 15 years instead of 'Green Tax' and 'Road Safety Tax' in case of other states. Hope we have a uniform MV act across the country sometime in the future.

Back to the topic at hand, as long as the government does not ban re-registration of vehicles of a certain age, I am fine with it. Even in developed countries, increasing the tax on vehicles after a certain age is usual, to encourage people to move on to newer, less polluting vehicles. But of course, this means that annual tax should be allowed and state governments should not resort to looting tax payers with another round of LTT.

[vnabhi]

This appears to be an initiative by some retarded persons in the government. My WagonR will complete 15 years this August, and it is very well maintained. The PUC certificate shows all parameters well within the normal range.
As a person who's just taken VR, the only expenditure i can foresee is the annual service and insurance renewal, both of which will cost not more than 10 K combined in a year. This is pocket-friendly to me as i don't need to divert a huge sum on a new car.

Why the heck should I be forced to buy a new car by shelling out 5 to 7 lacs? It will badly affect my retirement corpus.

[The Rationalist]

What is the basis of this 15 year old scrapping idea? Is there any scientific reason that 15 year old cars are more polluting than abused younger cars? Why bother with PUC henceforth? Just keep the car and scrap after 15 years. What happens to scrapped cars, the recycling of parts won't cause pollution? Or will they be left to rot in some dumpyard? This has to be the brain child of car manufacturers I think. Suddenly you are assured of minimum yearly sales! I'm sure many will move court questioning the reasons and if the government can't show credible proof that pollution incurred while making a new car is less than while using an old car, then it won't be allowed. I thought Tuglak was long dead

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by The Rationalist

What is the basis of this 15 year old scrapping idea?

Its how our nation in general deals with problems, however there must be a limit to imagination where it ends when dealing with core realities. This solution is akin to stopping water supply/banning water as a solution to end water pollution, it works but just not in a way which helps anyone or anything.

We've seen many such ideas come and go, in the end its all about fruitlessly bouncing opinions over one another till the time that "no action" would seem like the best solution. Manufacturers need to sell, buyers need to buy so basically every practical solution is a checkmate till the time when the situation would go out of control and measures such as congestion tax, unique methods of traffic regulation (like Delhi's odd-even scheme), or even restriction of vehicle registrations (as is being proposed in Bangalore) will have to be enforced full-time.

For the last time, someone in the urban transport department has to understand that banning/de-registering older cars is the last thing India needs today. This country has trouble disposing of daily trash consisting of biscuit wrappers and cola cans, how do they intend to handle the PVC, metal, rubber, steel and fibre of a 1000 kg car, of which there will be lakhs older than a decade?

[AutoNoob]

Originally Posted by IshaanIan

How exactly? This seems like a move done by some idiot who has no clue about how stuff works and has maybe been payed off by some automotive majors. If we buy a car, it is our right to keep it and use it however we please for however long we want as long as it is roadworthy. Besides, in most cases it actually pollutes more to manufacture a new car than to run the car you already own.

I may be in minority on this thread for my thought process but I would like to put forth my opinion.

1. The government process (assuming no corruption) works considering the majority situation and decisions that work for larger population. So, I do feel for the people (including me) who keep their vehicles in pristine condition, follow periodic maintenance schedules and ensure vehicle is road-worthy. But if we consider the all vehicle owners in the country, such owners form only a fraction of the total.

2. The net pollution during manufacturing of any product is definitely a concern, but all types of pollution and their environmental impact in short and long term are not same. Also, there are different ways of handing each category of pollution. So, a balanced approach is needed. To say that (without any data reference), it actually pollutes more to manufacture a new car than to run the car you already own, might be misplaced.

3. The news report is part of a roadmap (like many other plans / ideas) under discussion or evaluation. This is absolutely normal process for any government/ private/ corporate structure. So what we are reading now may not be the final direction. In my experience, government invites experts from related fields (including Automobile manufacturers in this case) to have a balanced view before issuing a final notification.

4. I do agree with the lobbying factor for such recommendations that is done by vested parties to any government in the world. But this is how the system works. Automobile manufacturers will definitely be delighted if this proposal goes through or incentives for scrapping old vehicles are announced. The upward movement in their share prices will be an immediate sign.

5. On a personal note, I believe in limiting access of old vehicles, certified on 2 or 3 generation older pollution norms (e.g. BSII vehicles when BSV is adopted, in present case BSVI) to the regions facing severe pollution issues (e.g. NCR). Such vehicles, even with best of the maintenance, pollute more than the latest vehicles.

This is my opinion and I would appreciate to hear the counter-opinions.

[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by AutoNoob

2. The net pollution during manufacturing of any product is definitely a concern, but all types of pollution and their environmental impact in short and long term are not same. Also, there are different ways of handing each category of pollution. So, a balanced approach is needed. To say that (without any data reference), it actually pollutes more to manufacture a new car than to run the car you already own, might be misplaced.

Quoting historian Mark Foster who estimates, "fully one-third of the total environmental damage caused by automobiles occurred before they were sold and driven." He also cites a study that estimated that fabricating one car, produced 29 tonnes of waste and 1,207 million cubic yards of polluted air. One could get into the specifics and analyze what percentage of which pollutants are being talked about, but the sheer amount of waste and air pollution incurred in manufacturing a single new car as opposed to driving your existing one which may be a couple of euro emission standards down, is a statement in itself.

[KiloAlpha]

Having gone through this thread, and thinking about the issue of having the registration expire at the end of 15 years, some things come to mind.

Suppose we give the benefit of doubt to the government (they are not all out-of-touch, and are fairly canny), this policy could be the thin edge of a wedge. In what ways could this policy evolve over time?
- Refusal to renew registration for certain classes of vehicles
- This provides an opening to levy fresh round of taxes at the time of re-registration at the 15-year mark
- Stricter (and environmental) criteria for renewing registration at the 15-year mark could benefit the environment and/or the RTO officer(s) bank balance
- Ability to introduce specific "classic & vintage" norms/rules for registration

Currently, the Fitness Certificate regime is a bit of a joke. I would bet my bottom dollar that a majority of the 15+ year old vehicles on the road today don't have FC. Also, since the vehicle's registration technically does not expire, it can continue to be insured and used. So maybe this rule just hardens the existing policy somewhat?

I am all for it, as long as it is properly implemented after taking into account that there are plenty of 15+ year old private vehicles that are perfectly road worthy. And the process is straight forward enough for a layperson to follow.

[commonman]

Current PUC check is a farce.I am giving an example of the PUC check I had done on my 2014 TB350, some days back. (Please see the image attached). I did the check twice in 5 minutes. The values were different each time. The Carbon Monoxide and Carbon dioxide level increased in the second time and the Hydro Carbon and Oxygen level decreased. Now, my question is how much we can rely on these road side Pollution check centres ? This also means the pollution certificates can be manipulated ?

Mods: If this doesn't fit in here, kindly move or remove.

[Swapnil4585]

Certain questions come to my mind.

1. How shall a traffic police catch a 'de-registered vehicle'?
2. What will he do to such 'de-registered vehicle'?
3. How will the Government know as to how many 'de-registered vehicles' were caught by the police?
4. Currently, whether the process of obtaining a PUC / FC fully righteous and according to law?

Till you don't have completely error proof machinery to implement, you must not think of making restrictive laws.

[IshaanIan]

Carrying over from my previous post, I think the government should actually promote used car sales and the maintenance of existing cars. If the government takes steps to ensure certain guidelines for maintenance are followed, promoting consumer laws and 10 year warranties on products while also ensuring that A.S.S. remains transparent in their dealings with a customer, this could vastly improve the current situation wherein many people replace their cars every 3-5 years simply because they don't drive like new anymore when in fact in most cases it would hardly take under a lakh to have the perform at their best. This use and throw attitude is what is ultimately the most polluting and it is a shame that it happens only because people are not educated enough or it is not convenient enough to maintain a product worth millions of rupees. I find several cases abroad where people log lakhs and lakhs of kilometers on their cars without any fuss. Over here it is either a huge, rare, unheard of accomplishment or the car is a taxi. Doesn't that say something?

Better roads that don't lead to people having to break and steer to avoid pot-holes and other obstacles, better lane discipline, well maintained cars that need not be replaced everytime there is a new euro emission norm, efficient enforcement of laws to protect the consumer from fraudulent sales of used cars etc. these could all draw us much closer to a sustainable future than some silly law like this IMO. If the government is actually serious about tackling such issues, they ought to go the mile instead of putting some half-arsed effort forward which effects the middle-class and us enthusiasts.