FLEET bodies and environmental campaigners have clashed over congestion charges after the High Court ruled that there were no legal restrictions to delay the introduction of £5 per day tolls for vehicles entering London.

Justice Maurice Kay ruled there was nothing unlawful or in breach of human rights law in London Mayor Ken Livingstone's plans for a congestion charging scheme in London, starting next February. But the scheme still attracts crticism.

John Lewis, director-general of the British Vehicle Rental & Leasing Association, said he had 'deep reservations' about the scheme, claiming it was being rushed in too quickly and was too complex for fleets.

The Association of Car Fleet Operators has also voiced scepticism about whether the scheme will work, casting doubt on whether the various methods of payment can be set up in time.

However, environmental lobbies, such as Friends of the Earth and the London Assembly Green Group, applauded the High Court ruling. They claimed the scheme was necessary, despite the cost to business, and will have a beneficial impact on pollution and congestion.

Westminster Council hoped the judge would stop the scheme's introduction in its tracks.

It claimed that Livingstone made the decision to go ahead without making a proper environmental impact assessment, did not hold a public inquiry – which was unlawful – and ignored the human rights of people and businesses affected by the scheme.

For

Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London: 'We are happy that our approach to the introduction of congestion charging has been vindicated. We look forward to being free to proceed with addressing the problems with congestion in London.'

Derek Turner, managing director of street management, Transport for London: 'This vindicates our careful preparation and advice to the mayor to ensure charging is within the law.'

Stephen O'Brien, chief executive, London First: 'Congestion charging is the best way of dealing with the poor performance of the public transport system and chronic traffic congestion. '

David Begg, Commission for Integrated Transport: 'This hearing is symptomatic of everything that is wrong with transport in this country today. Every time some brave politician or council sticks its head above the parapet, there's someone around to knock it off.'

Stephen Joseph, director, Transport 2000: 'We are a long-standing supporter of congestion charging as a measure which will reduce traffic and bring substantial environmental benefits.'

Paul de Zylva, campaigns co-ordinator of Friends of the Earth, London: 'Congestion charging needs to be matched with other measures giving people real choice about how they get about.'

London Assembly Green Group: 'Doing an environmental impact assessment on congestion charging would be like paying consultants to report on whether David Beckham is good at freekicks.'

Against

Councillor Kit Malthouse, deputy leader of Westminster Council: 'This scheme will have substantial impact on our businesses and residents. We still believe a major scheme of this nature should not be implemented without more effective scrutiny and question whether Britain's first congestion charge scheme should be introduced in a large and complex city such as London.

'This remains a flawed scheme. It will not generate the funds to make a substantial difference to the Tube and the bus improvements are not an alternative to those seeking to travel in from the suburbs.'

Association of Car Fleet Operators: 'The legality is not the issue. What really matters is how it is implemented and the success of achieving its aim which is to make London a better place for Londoners, and to improve public transport. There seems to be a huge number of issues to be addressed. One is, can the many methods of buying tickets be properly started up. There is going to be a lot of money coming in but it will be a long time before tangible improvements to public transport are seen.'

John Lewis, British Vehicle Rental & Leasing Association, director-general: 'This will be severely damaging, especially to rental companies for whom central London will now become a desert.
'That has implications on employment in the congestion charging zone and our members won't be the only ones pulling out – other businesses are sure to follow.
'For leasing businesses, the result will be increased administration and cost as they will have to handle fines for non-payment by their customers' drivers. These costs will have to be passed back to the customer.'

London's congestion charging: what it means for fleets

Fleets of more than 25 vehicles will have two different 'bulk' payment schemes. Both schemes avoid the need for employers or company drivers to pre-pay congestion charges daily, but do involve extra costs.

Employers will have a one-off fee of £10 to register each vehicle.

One scheme demands 'pre-payment that reflects the anticipated number of charges for the first month as predicted by the fleet operator', with a list of vehicles that entered the charging zone on each day of the month. Each vehicle will pay a £5 per day charge

Transport for London (TfL) will then check this list against the vehicle number plates captured by its network of cameras, with any additional vehicles spotted by the cameras to be charged to the fleet operator's account.

Fleet operators will also have to predict anticipated charges for the following month.

The second payment programme also requires pre-payment, but instead of the fleet submitting an end-of-month itemised schedule of individual journeys for its vehicles, TfL does the work, logging each registered fleet vehicle in the charging zone and then automatically debiting the relevant fleet's account.

To cover the cost of the extra administration involved, TfL will raise the daily charge per vehicle for fleets operating this second scheme by 10% to £5.50.