I did that last year and ASA's response was that they cannot do anything about it because it's not an advertisement but rather a tariff notification.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: If you were buying a TV today, which brand would you choose?
The Gauteng E-tolling Thread
- Thread starter LazyLion
- Start date
- Status
I did that last year and ASA's response was that they cannot do anything about it because it's not an advertisement but rather a tariff notification.
Sinbad
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Messages
- 88,692
- Reaction score
- 41,235
They now have two billboards up - standard tariff and etag tariff
supersunbird
Honorary Master
There are boards that show the 7 day discount tariff too, also close to the gantries, but yes, not any other info.
Yeah the ASA is a toothless organization, but I'm just doing my part to frustrate SANRAL.
They must have been recently erected or aren't visible at every gantry, because I haven't seen a billboard showing the standard tariff and the e-tag tariff as of 3 Dec. Maybe I'm just blinded by anger when I drive past the gantries
OzzieCapie
Expert Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2008
- Messages
- 1,975
- Reaction score
- 3
But that is the root of your objections. All this 1st world problem bleating is related to the "when we" syndrome.
Yes it 'can', almost like an Obama slogan...it 'can', it 'can' it 'can' is all you guys have said, yet no one has actually said how it 'does' or ever 'did'...so who is trolling in that case?
The fact is that with much more revenue in other 1st world countries (seeing that you want 1st world conditions), they do not come close to maintaining and keeping up with road building....yet R45B --yes Rand that big currency- will pay for a 'ton'...ok for a ton only maybe that's too much money then.
From where I sit it does look like a paradise, especially with regulations that ensure civilised behaviour from the minority who want to misbehave.
We want more laws...make the place even better!!
The aborigines that live in big cities have a higher standard of living than most of you guys and the ones that choose to live in outback do so at their own will.
Every govt has regulations and mechanisms...do you see porn on TV? So why not have filtering laws so that kids don't access it on internet?
Last edited:
supersunbird
Honorary Master
They root of MY objections is unfairness of the system and lack of logic and financial prudence. Don't go projecting other peoples objections or your feelings onto me.
I don't care what other countries do. Other countries kills their own citizens in great number (Syria), other countries ban gay people from even meeting up (Nigeria), other countries sentence people to jail for kissing on a beach (one of the middle east countries did that). Do you want Australia to start doing the same because other countries do it?
If they used the whole fuel levy for road maintenance and improvement, then we would have been in a much better position now and even if they just start now, it would be better. New roads they build they can toll all they want, since normally that implies there is a viable but not the most ideal alternative, like the N1 vs the R101 between Gauteng and Polokwane.
The R101 was the old road and is still free, so one can use it if one wants and it was viable but before the N1 was built, but a journey in it takes probably double the time. The N1 was tolled when it was finished (from what I have gathered asking older folks).
Here is Gauteng the N1 existed for years as a free road, suburbs and industrial areas has developed with it being such, there is no a viable alternative (the possible alternatives like R21 are also e-tolled) from where I stay to my work place. If they had built a whole new super-duper G1 (calling it a Gauteng 1 perhaps) highway they could have left the N1 as was and tolled this fancy super fast highway all they wanted.
So, in closing, you have no valid argument against why a ring-fenced and maybe slightly increased fuel levy cannot be used, do you? And no, what other countries do is not of much concern (unless one can learn from their successful working systems, and why it is so) so isn't a valid argument.
I don't care what other countries do. Other countries kills their own citizens in great number (Syria), other countries ban gay people from even meeting up (Nigeria), other countries sentence people to jail for kissing on a beach (one of the middle east countries did that). Do you want Australia to start doing the same because other countries do it?
If they used the whole fuel levy for road maintenance and improvement, then we would have been in a much better position now and even if they just start now, it would be better. New roads they build they can toll all they want, since normally that implies there is a viable but not the most ideal alternative, like the N1 vs the R101 between Gauteng and Polokwane.
The R101 was the old road and is still free, so one can use it if one wants and it was viable but before the N1 was built, but a journey in it takes probably double the time. The N1 was tolled when it was finished (from what I have gathered asking older folks).
Here is Gauteng the N1 existed for years as a free road, suburbs and industrial areas has developed with it being such, there is no a viable alternative (the possible alternatives like R21 are also e-tolled) from where I stay to my work place. If they had built a whole new super-duper G1 (calling it a Gauteng 1 perhaps) highway they could have left the N1 as was and tolled this fancy super fast highway all they wanted.
So, in closing, you have no valid argument against why a ring-fenced and maybe slightly increased fuel levy cannot be used, do you? And no, what other countries do is not of much concern (unless one can learn from their successful working systems, and why it is so) so isn't a valid argument.
Last edited:
Still haven't received an invoice from 3rd Dec, whilst I expect the amount will be upwards of R500. Sooo... it appears the 30-day window for delivering an invoice has passed. I'm not too sure what the wisest option is now, for me
I take it that the tolls will still be valid and due even if an invoice is only sent out later than 32 days?
Reason for asking, I know with speeding fines the courts have said that in order for it to be fair the fine had to be sent within 32 days as a reasonable person will then still be able to dispute the fine should he or she want to i.e. they will still be able to remember where they drove etc... If sent after this time then the process is no longer fair as a 'reasonable' person will not be able to remember and will thus not be able to dispute the fine.
OMB
Mountain Man
Dude, stop wasting so much energy on your keyboard, the oke is just like House and refuses to accept any other view than his own. It's easy to sit 12000 or however many kilometres away and just throw bait to upset people. Distinct trolling behavior.
Sinbad
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Messages
- 88,692
- Reaction score
- 41,235
http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2014/01/15/e-toll-texts-branded-unlawful-extortion
The SA National Roads Agency has come under fire for using "unlawful, extortionist tactics" to force frustrated motorists to pay "exorbitant" e-tolling bills.
As outrage mounts, various organisations are urging motorists to complain to the National Consumer Commission.
Motorists have started receiving SMSes from Sanral demanding payment. But these messages lack detail and proof of authenticity.
Motorists without e-tags have been shocked to learn that if they do not pay within seven days of passing under a gantry a triple toll is levied.
Justice Project SA chairman Howard Dembovsky said Sanral was in contravention of the Consumer Protection Act, which states that the price stipulated is the price that must be paid.
"I recommend that everybody complain like crazy to the Consumer Commission . This is simply extortion and blackmail," he said.
The chairman of the National Consumer Forum, Thami Bolani, said Sanral was setting a bad precedent.
"The government is trying to use illegal ways to force this thing [e-tolling] on consumers," he said.
Motorists' complaints about Sanral include:
The SMSes demanding payment do not contain the name or registration number of the recipient's vehicle;
The amount given on the SMS increases after only a week;
Some of the recipients of the SMSes are yet to receive invoices;
When invoices are received, the amount that has to be paid is less than 10% of the amount cited in the SMS;
Other motorists receive e-mails threatening that they will be stopped by members of Sanral's toll road enforcement unit if they do not pay up;
A motorist can receive as many as four different billing amounts;
Call-centre agents urge motorists to pay the higher amounts before invoices are received;
Motorists are told to pay now and query later; and
Some bills sent by e-mail refer to vehicles that have been written off.
According to Sanral, a road-user has seven days after passing a gantry pass in which to pay the toll. If payment is not made within seven days, the default is referred to the violations processing centre.
The motorist then becomes an "alternate user". As a result, discounts are no longer applicable and the alternative toll tariffs are applied.
"The alternate-user tariff, which is three times the standard tariff, then applies," said Sanral spokesman Vusi Mona.
He said the SMSes were part of a debt collection process for transactions older than seven days.
Sheeda Kalideen, a Durban accountant, said her daughter used her car in Johannesburg and travelled between the city and Pretoria about three times a week.
Kalideen first received an SMS demanding payment of R418.02. The amount later increased to R1144.50 but, when the invoice finally arrived in the post, the total she owed was just R62.
"This is ridiculous. These people's accounting system is not right," said Kalideen.
Another SMS demanded that a motorist settle a R943.60 bill. But he later received an invoice detailing when and which gantries his vehicle had gone under. The total amount due was R113.67.
"I was told I had to register to pay. Then I was told I had to settle the larger amount first, that I had received via SMS, and they would reimburse me the difference. It is ludicrous," he said.
Thembi Maseko, of Witbank, Mpumalanga, visited Gauteng on Christmas Eve. Six days later she received an SMS saying she owed Sanral R480.70.
"[They] do not have a case against me. They cannot bill me [using] an SMS. I need a printout [showing how they arrived at that figure].
"They cannot threaten me because I have not shown any signs that I'm not willing to pay. Let them prove that I have used their road," Maseko said.
Bolani said: "Our feeling is that consumers should not take the SMSes seriously. They should wait until they get an official invoice proving that they used the freeway.
"If they want to query that, they should be allowed to do so and be able to pay the exact amount that is due. Demanding the higher amount by Sanral is unscrupulous."
Wayne Duvenage, spokesman for the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance , said: "We predicted this and said there would be a lot of problems because Sanral's system is unworkable, technically cumbersome and administratively burdensome."
The SA National Roads Agency has come under fire for using "unlawful, extortionist tactics" to force frustrated motorists to pay "exorbitant" e-tolling bills.
As outrage mounts, various organisations are urging motorists to complain to the National Consumer Commission.
Motorists have started receiving SMSes from Sanral demanding payment. But these messages lack detail and proof of authenticity.
Motorists without e-tags have been shocked to learn that if they do not pay within seven days of passing under a gantry a triple toll is levied.
Justice Project SA chairman Howard Dembovsky said Sanral was in contravention of the Consumer Protection Act, which states that the price stipulated is the price that must be paid.
"I recommend that everybody complain like crazy to the Consumer Commission . This is simply extortion and blackmail," he said.
The chairman of the National Consumer Forum, Thami Bolani, said Sanral was setting a bad precedent.
"The government is trying to use illegal ways to force this thing [e-tolling] on consumers," he said.
Motorists' complaints about Sanral include:
The SMSes demanding payment do not contain the name or registration number of the recipient's vehicle;
The amount given on the SMS increases after only a week;
Some of the recipients of the SMSes are yet to receive invoices;
When invoices are received, the amount that has to be paid is less than 10% of the amount cited in the SMS;
Other motorists receive e-mails threatening that they will be stopped by members of Sanral's toll road enforcement unit if they do not pay up;
A motorist can receive as many as four different billing amounts;
Call-centre agents urge motorists to pay the higher amounts before invoices are received;
Motorists are told to pay now and query later; and
Some bills sent by e-mail refer to vehicles that have been written off.
According to Sanral, a road-user has seven days after passing a gantry pass in which to pay the toll. If payment is not made within seven days, the default is referred to the violations processing centre.
The motorist then becomes an "alternate user". As a result, discounts are no longer applicable and the alternative toll tariffs are applied.
"The alternate-user tariff, which is three times the standard tariff, then applies," said Sanral spokesman Vusi Mona.
He said the SMSes were part of a debt collection process for transactions older than seven days.
Sheeda Kalideen, a Durban accountant, said her daughter used her car in Johannesburg and travelled between the city and Pretoria about three times a week.
Kalideen first received an SMS demanding payment of R418.02. The amount later increased to R1144.50 but, when the invoice finally arrived in the post, the total she owed was just R62.
"This is ridiculous. These people's accounting system is not right," said Kalideen.
Another SMS demanded that a motorist settle a R943.60 bill. But he later received an invoice detailing when and which gantries his vehicle had gone under. The total amount due was R113.67.
"I was told I had to register to pay. Then I was told I had to settle the larger amount first, that I had received via SMS, and they would reimburse me the difference. It is ludicrous," he said.
Thembi Maseko, of Witbank, Mpumalanga, visited Gauteng on Christmas Eve. Six days later she received an SMS saying she owed Sanral R480.70.
"[They] do not have a case against me. They cannot bill me [using] an SMS. I need a printout [showing how they arrived at that figure].
"They cannot threaten me because I have not shown any signs that I'm not willing to pay. Let them prove that I have used their road," Maseko said.
Bolani said: "Our feeling is that consumers should not take the SMSes seriously. They should wait until they get an official invoice proving that they used the freeway.
"If they want to query that, they should be allowed to do so and be able to pay the exact amount that is due. Demanding the higher amount by Sanral is unscrupulous."
Wayne Duvenage, spokesman for the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance , said: "We predicted this and said there would be a lot of problems because Sanral's system is unworkable, technically cumbersome and administratively burdensome."
supersunbird
Honorary Master
No! It just gets easier and easier hehe, and I keep coming up with new ideas like the N1/R101 Polokwane thing.
OzzieCapie is incapable of putting up any links or figures that back up his "argument". He can never address issues on its unfairness and say why it is fair when something we think is unfair gets highlighted. He now resorts to half hearted measures like talking about 1st world countries this and that.
Sinbad
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Messages
- 88,692
- Reaction score
- 41,235
Yeah he keeps going on about first world problems. Where in the third world has a massively expensive etolling system been implemented correctly? By definition it's a first world problem - and it hasn't been that successful there either.
OzzieCapie
Expert Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2008
- Messages
- 1,975
- Reaction score
- 3
The 'other countries' ' example is merely to show that this is not some sort of product of corruption dreamt up by ANC as most of you allude.
No, I did'nt have an argument for that, so have no requirement to back up .....I just asked a question i.e. does the current fuel levy plus licence pay for roads...that hasn't been shown at all here for the present nor past.
By you saying a 'slightly higher fuel levy', is that an admission that currently it is not adequate? If so , how much more is required? Show the calculations...you are going down the right track now, because whether a toll on roads or fuel levy it is the user paying , right?...Glad you admit that.
So tell me how much more on fuel levy...you may be surprised and that will be the next thing you protest against when you see how much is needed.
So what is your view on the cost of building and maintaining roads...how much is required...happy to accept figures backed up with references
Sinbad
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Messages
- 88,692
- Reaction score
- 41,235
You are ENTIRELY missing the point of most of the objections to the eTolling system, which is its INEFFICIENCY. The cost of collection of the money is a significant portion of what is collected. We're paying to be charged.
AfricanTech
Honorary Master
Precisely!
In the meantime, SANRAL is busy cheesing off even those who are willing to accept their iniquitous T&Cs - let's see for how long Nazir and Vusi can keep Parliament 'comfortable' with their strong arm, "treat the public like criminals' behaviour.
McSack
Executive Member
Money to build roads in the past came from somewhere didn't it? Even if the entire fuel levy was paid over to Treasury and they allocated funds to build the roads ...the taxes we paid financed the infrastructure
The entire "ring road" freeway around JHB was built from scratch without necessitating tolls ... that's a whole new road ... not just upgrading current infrastructure.
supersunbird
Honorary Master
Well, did those other countries where it was successful get user buy in before they implemented it? What about where is was less successful like Portugal? From what I read they didn't get user buy in. So if they didn't get buy in, it was not implemented as it should have been to be successful andthus it can die and you should stop defending it.
Unfortunately I do not know how much they earn from the vehicle license system, but I think that goes to municipal or provincial coffers. What I do know is that the fuel levy (there are other levies on for pipeline systems and RAF and such) is about R2.12 per litre and they make something like R41 billion annually from it, the figures might be more now, my figures are 2012. Of the R41 billion, R18 billion gets sent to the provinces and municipalities for roads, the rest gets spend on other stuff.
From the above one can deduce that for every R1 of fuel levy they earn about R20 billion. If in 2008 they had increased the fuel levy by 50c they could have funded the GFIP road construction in 2 or 3 years. And then they could have kept improving the other unimproved Gauteng highways to their hearts content.
By now they would have been earning over R50 billion a year, and if ring-fenced for road use, our roads would have all been in a much better condition, without all this media and internet drama, and more roads would have been improved.
I just tried to do a rough calculation for vehicle license fees, and depending on whether the average is R300 or R400 per year, it would earn the collector R3 to R4 billion a year from the 10 million vehicles as well.
I have no problem with tolling (e-toll or physical) of brand new freeways where development hasn't taken place due to it being there and free before.
EDIT: And thank you for your reply
Last edited:
MrGray
Honorary Master
I really think OzzieCape is just another SANRAL shill. Been a lot of that going around lately. Anyone with half an ounce of common sense can see what a rip-off and disaster this R16bn E-Toll abortion is.
The majority of the E-Toll money goes to operating expenses and debt repayments for the system itself. How does that make any sense vs just using the fuel levy which costs nothing more than a government gazette update, not to mention that it would be unnecessary in the first place if the government didn't blow R40bn per year on dodgy or unaccounted for expenditure?
Don't engage it further, because it just keeps on regurgitating the same pro-EToll nonsense in all the threads regardless ad nausea, so purely a waste of time. Let's rather focus on positive ways of eradicating or circumventing this tyrannical system that has been forced down our throats.
The majority of the E-Toll money goes to operating expenses and debt repayments for the system itself. How does that make any sense vs just using the fuel levy which costs nothing more than a government gazette update, not to mention that it would be unnecessary in the first place if the government didn't blow R40bn per year on dodgy or unaccounted for expenditure?
Don't engage it further, because it just keeps on regurgitating the same pro-EToll nonsense in all the threads regardless ad nausea, so purely a waste of time. Let's rather focus on positive ways of eradicating or circumventing this tyrannical system that has been forced down our throats.
HAL 9000
Honorary Master
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 21,308
- Reaction score
- 24,693
E-toll shock for Durban driver.
A Berea mother and son who have never driven their silver Honda Civic outside Durban were informed this week that they owed R460 in Johannesburg e-tolls.
Helen and Mark Ziegler also received a R750 speeding fine in 2013 – the photographed vehicle on the fine being a replica of their car.
However, on the date in question, Helen - a teacher - was at a school conference in Durban, using her vehicle to get there and back, while Mark - a hockey coach - was in Johannnesburg, but had flown there.
Helen said on Wednesday: “I was a bit concerned, and got the school to write a letter confirming where I was.
“I sent it to the traffic department and just thought of it as an error, as I never received a response to my e-mail or heard anything of the fine again.”
But when she opened her post on Tuesday, Helen found two e-toll invoices, each for R230.
At the time of the alleged e-toll charges, Helen had been in Johannesburg, but had flown there, while Mark had been in Cape Town for a hockey tournament.
“My car was in the garage, not being used. It wouldn’t even have made it that far. We only use it as a run-around,” she said.
Although she was not sure how her number plate had been cloned, Helen said the vehicle had been stolen in Durban North two years before and found the next day, abandoned near Phoenix.
It remained at the police pound for about a month while documentation was obtained for her to have it released.
Zurika Louw, the chief executive of the SA Number Plates Association, said it was possible that it was during this time that the vehicle’s details were used to clone another plate. However, she said it would have been just as easy to have cloned it at another time.
“To copy a plastic number plate is very easy.”
“People buy white Perspex and cut out letters and numbers from blue vinyl tape. You can’t see the difference on camera, although the cloned plate is not reflective.”
False plates were also made by unscrupulous number plate makers, she said.
Louw said the problem was “extremely rife”, and more vehicles were expected to have cloned plates with the introduction of the e-toll system, as drivers sought to avoid paying tolls.
Clever “cloners” also used false plates on the same type and colour of vehicle as the original.
She said the only way to distinguish vehicles was by things such as dents, scratches and bumper stickers.
Vusi Mona, a spokesman for the SA National Roads Agency, said there had been a few cases of “suspect” vehicles, but that procedures were in place to establish whether vehicles were genuinely registered.
“If we are satisfied that a vehicle charged for the e-toll is not the certified vehicle then the owner does not have to pick up the bill.”
Motorists who dispute their e-toll invoices should phone 080 072 6725.
http://www.iol.co.za/motoring/industry-news/e-toll-shock-for-durban-driver-1.1632164#.UteFMhC1ZLg
A Berea mother and son who have never driven their silver Honda Civic outside Durban were informed this week that they owed R460 in Johannesburg e-tolls.
Helen and Mark Ziegler also received a R750 speeding fine in 2013 – the photographed vehicle on the fine being a replica of their car.
However, on the date in question, Helen - a teacher - was at a school conference in Durban, using her vehicle to get there and back, while Mark - a hockey coach - was in Johannnesburg, but had flown there.
Helen said on Wednesday: “I was a bit concerned, and got the school to write a letter confirming where I was.
“I sent it to the traffic department and just thought of it as an error, as I never received a response to my e-mail or heard anything of the fine again.”
But when she opened her post on Tuesday, Helen found two e-toll invoices, each for R230.
At the time of the alleged e-toll charges, Helen had been in Johannesburg, but had flown there, while Mark had been in Cape Town for a hockey tournament.
“My car was in the garage, not being used. It wouldn’t even have made it that far. We only use it as a run-around,” she said.
Although she was not sure how her number plate had been cloned, Helen said the vehicle had been stolen in Durban North two years before and found the next day, abandoned near Phoenix.
It remained at the police pound for about a month while documentation was obtained for her to have it released.
Zurika Louw, the chief executive of the SA Number Plates Association, said it was possible that it was during this time that the vehicle’s details were used to clone another plate. However, she said it would have been just as easy to have cloned it at another time.
“To copy a plastic number plate is very easy.”
“People buy white Perspex and cut out letters and numbers from blue vinyl tape. You can’t see the difference on camera, although the cloned plate is not reflective.”
False plates were also made by unscrupulous number plate makers, she said.
Louw said the problem was “extremely rife”, and more vehicles were expected to have cloned plates with the introduction of the e-toll system, as drivers sought to avoid paying tolls.
Clever “cloners” also used false plates on the same type and colour of vehicle as the original.
She said the only way to distinguish vehicles was by things such as dents, scratches and bumper stickers.
Vusi Mona, a spokesman for the SA National Roads Agency, said there had been a few cases of “suspect” vehicles, but that procedures were in place to establish whether vehicles were genuinely registered.
“If we are satisfied that a vehicle charged for the e-toll is not the certified vehicle then the owner does not have to pick up the bill.”
Motorists who dispute their e-toll invoices should phone 080 072 6725.
http://www.iol.co.za/motoring/industry-news/e-toll-shock-for-durban-driver-1.1632164#.UteFMhC1ZLg
- Status