Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think levying additional charges on SUV owners in London is a bad idea?

394 replies

FirmNavyCat · 14/03/2026 10:51

Saw this article in the Guardian yesterday and it's been prominent in my mind since I read it. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/mar/13/suv-drivers-could-face-extra-charges-for-driving-in-london

Sadiq Khan is talking about levying further charges to SUV drivers due to the evidence that they pose a significantly increased risk of fatal injury to pedestrians in collisions, particularly children. While on the face of it this seems like a noble cause, my belief is that policymakers should be focused on beefing up existing laws. Speed limits should be reduced on roads that have the highest number of fatalities, and drivers who cause injury or death should face tougher sentencing by the courts. I know SUVs are popular on MN (and are popular with mums in urban areas generally). They feel so much safer to drive compared to smaller cars. Also, should the worst happen and you are involved in a collision, I would very strongly prefer to be in an SUV than a smaller car. I'd want my loved ones to be in an SUV as well if I had to choose.

SUV drivers could face extra charges for driving in London

TfL are also poised to increase 20mph zones and cut speed limits on the capital’s fastest roads later this year

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/mar/13/suv-drivers-could-face-extra-charges-for-driving-in-london

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 12:58

BIossomtoes · 18/03/2026 12:31

All of them. Who needs a Land Rover in a city? We live rurally and don’t need one.

People who want to drive them?

What's the issue with our Sportage? We like it and find it useful for our family. Is the Qashqai "bad" as well?

InSlovakiaTheCapitalOfCourseIsBratislava · 18/03/2026 13:14

Yes

There is no need for an SUV, it’s a want. And so, hopefully in future, there will be a hefty tax which will disincentivise people from purchasing them . BEcause of this financial penalty the hope is people will make a choice to buy a car which is less dangerous to pedestrians and takes up less room on the street

SP2024 · 18/03/2026 13:15

What do they mean by SUVs? A quashai? A Dacia duster? A Ford galaxy? Or a huge Land Rover discovery?

For families with three kids it’s really really hard to find cars that can fit three car seats in these days.

Youmeanyouvelostyourkey · 18/03/2026 13:15

BananaPeels · 18/03/2026 12:35

Honestly got me it isn’t a specific SuV issue per se

my view is that the optimum maximum size car for London should be decided. It’s probably the size of a large hatchback.

anything that deviates from that in terms of weight, width, length and height should be penalised. SUV’s will suffer the most as they will likely deviate on every single one of those metrics.

First sensible suggestion in ages. My SUV is shorter, lighter and greener than my old Mazda 6. It also fits comfortably in standard parking spaces

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 13:16

InveterateWineDrinker · 18/03/2026 10:43

If it were up to me I would not allow you to have a Kia Sportage, for all the reasons outlined on this thread and the many articles for which posters have kindly provided links.

However, it's not up to me, hasn't ever been, and you've already acquired one. Punishing you for that by retrospectively hammering you through the tax system wouldn't be fair or particularly effective in dealing with the selfish, antisocial choices you've already made. However, that is not to say that future vehicles which cannot meet more thoughtful evidence-based regulatory standards on blind spots, pedestrian impact, weight, and size shouldn't be taxed so heavily that no sane person would consider one over a less obnoxious alternative.

There are other vehicles on the market which are much safer for you and everyone else around you, which will offer the same or better space and practicality at lower purchase and running costs, with a smaller environmental impact.

Thankfully you are not in charge of automotive policy and can't dictate what car we can and can't have. Nothing unsocial about us. We had a different crossover SUV before and never hurt a pedestrian.

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 13:18

SP2024 · 18/03/2026 13:15

What do they mean by SUVs? A quashai? A Dacia duster? A Ford galaxy? Or a huge Land Rover discovery?

For families with three kids it’s really really hard to find cars that can fit three car seats in these days.

We used to have a Qashqai and then we replaced that with a Sportage after the Qashqai started aging out.

Edictfromno10 · 18/03/2026 13:18

Great idea. SUVs are not required for the flooded rural roads of London.

Flamingojune · 18/03/2026 13:19

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 13:16

Thankfully you are not in charge of automotive policy and can't dictate what car we can and can't have. Nothing unsocial about us. We had a different crossover SUV before and never hurt a pedestrian.

Not even with your fumes and contribution to traffic jams?

InSlovakiaTheCapitalOfCourseIsBratislava · 18/03/2026 13:19

It’s about collective safety. Most SUVs and most cars generally won’t hid pedestrians . But the SUVs that do hit the pedestrians cause more harm than a smaller car. So it’s about reducing risk at a population level
a bit like how sleeping on your side whilst pregnant is unlikely to make a difference to an individual, but if all pregnant women do it then it’s worth it

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 13:30

Flamingojune · 18/03/2026 13:19

Not even with your fumes and contribution to traffic jams?

It's ULEZ compliant. All cars form traffic jams?

InveterateWineDrinker · 18/03/2026 13:46

BananaPeels · 18/03/2026 12:35

Honestly got me it isn’t a specific SuV issue per se

my view is that the optimum maximum size car for London should be decided. It’s probably the size of a large hatchback.

anything that deviates from that in terms of weight, width, length and height should be penalised. SUV’s will suffer the most as they will likely deviate on every single one of those metrics.

Breaking down the particular characteristics causing issues, and then using actual objective metrics, like this strikes me as eminently more sensible than simply allocating vehicles to particular categories and tarring them all with the same brush.

For what it's worth, I'd determine a standard driver's eye height based on population average physiological measurements, and then apply it to each model of vehicle with the driver's seat at its mid-point height setting. From there, it should be easy to determine the total volume of blind spots from the driver's seat. That would be one factor in the tax rate. I'd also come up with some sort of standardised measure of the blind spots created for other road users by the vehicle itself; how easily can another driver see over the bonnet, or through the windows, of one from a standardised eye-height in a normal hatchback for example.

EuroNCAP assesses most, but not all, new vehicles for pedestrian impact. I'd expand this to make it mandatory for every version of a vehicle, and use that too.

I'd also use the vehicle's kerb weight and physical dimensions.

Combine all these things together into a weighted measure which then determines the tax rate. Big, heavy vehicles with massive blind spots, that cause more harm to pedestrians in collisions, would be hit far harder than smaller lighter cars with good visibility and pedestrian-friendly design. Whether the vehicle is marketed as an SUV, a two seat convertible, a limousine, or a family hatchback becomes irrelevant.

HRTQueen · 18/03/2026 14:52

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 13:30

It's ULEZ compliant. All cars form traffic jams?

Yes all cars cause traffic but like I have pointed out before even the smaller SUV's are bigger than standard hatchbacks. And a standard hatchback seats 5 people maybe the boot is slightly smaller and it is a different driving experience.

So yes I support a higher tax for all SUV's and parking charges the larger the more tax/parking costs

I would prefer a total (not just in London) ban but Sadiq Khan is keen on keeping his voters happy so this unfortunately wont happen just yet.

The issues of these cars have been spoken about for many years, safety, extra traffic and simply not made for cities/towns in the UK but people ignored the issues of these cars because they became fashionable.

No one is stopping you buying a fashionable car because you want one but as owners have chosen to ignore the issues that are created by having so many SUV's on the road then the owners have to pay for it. Hardly fair if the rest of us who were sensible in our choices when buying a car to pay

Flamingojune · 18/03/2026 15:01

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 13:30

It's ULEZ compliant. All cars form traffic jams?

Quite, your life choices can have a negative impact on others

ArtAngel · 18/03/2026 15:41

We all need to be realistic and play our part.

London is built and developed on a road network laid down in mediaeval times. The roads are narrow and twisty. Housing and business density is high - there simply isn't room for vehicles associated with each dwelling and if vehicles are bigger a million or two million extra 12" on the length of each adds up to a lot. Land is tight - an extra 12" on the width of every supermarket and other car park spaces adds up to a bigger need for parking land.

Traffic is heavy - every extra 1000Kg puts pressure on the road surface and if a million SUVs travel over the roads every day that's a lot.

London simply isn't built for numerous cars and every unnecessary inch of car adds up,

We just need to take responsibility.

Take up more space, fine - pay for the impact.

MikeRafone · 18/03/2026 16:01

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 10:46

To my recollection no.

The percentages don't matter when it's your loved one and you're sat next to their hospital bed or worse. Unfortunately I've had two badly injured and my dds best friend died, my other dd lost a friend, not a best friend but a friend all the same along with 2 others. They weren't percentages of 70 million but living breathing people with loving families who make up the stats

All their families started afterwards to campaign for changes in driving regulations in one form or another

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 16:26

MikeRafone · 18/03/2026 16:01

The percentages don't matter when it's your loved one and you're sat next to their hospital bed or worse. Unfortunately I've had two badly injured and my dds best friend died, my other dd lost a friend, not a best friend but a friend all the same along with 2 others. They weren't percentages of 70 million but living breathing people with loving families who make up the stats

All their families started afterwards to campaign for changes in driving regulations in one form or another

I'm very sorry they passed away. I don't know that circumstances. I hope the driver is prosecuted if they drove recklessly or dangerously.

Don't think it's an excuse to blanket ban a whole class of cars.

Alouest · 18/03/2026 16:39

insightnumber9 · 17/03/2026 22:45

What a lot of hysterical sanctimonious attitudes here about “giant” and “huge” SUVs. Someone just suggested you could fit two or 3 smaller cars in the space occupied. Utter nonsense. We have a polo and an x5. 25 cm difference in width, 85cm on the length. Last time I looked both models are perfectly legal to own and drive in this free country. And yes, I live in London.

My personal problem re parking with very large vehicles is the fact that they take up most of a parking space in a car park. I was at a busy supermarket today and there was a huge vehicle parked. It basically took up an entire parking space with maybe ten cm to spare either side and none at the front and back.

This in fact did make both parking spaces either side unusable for anyone except those with extremely small cars. I could maybe have just about parked in a way that meant I was able to squeeze out of my driver's door (it would have been a close thing) but I definitely couldn't have let a passenger out as well. I'm driving a very small car compared to almost every other car around so the spaces were essentially unavailable to probably 90% plus of cars on the road.

I should have taken a photo for the thread!

GingerBeverage · 18/03/2026 16:51

Sddbdbd · 18/03/2026 16:26

I'm very sorry they passed away. I don't know that circumstances. I hope the driver is prosecuted if they drove recklessly or dangerously.

Don't think it's an excuse to blanket ban a whole class of cars.

No one is talking about a blanket ban on a whole class of cars though? So far all I've seen is chat about a higher cost for CPZ parking, hardly earth-shattering.

sashh · 19/03/2026 05:32

You should need to pass an additional test to drive one, with education on the dangers of them.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page