Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Is there anything that can be done about vehicles which sit for ages churning out fumes?


I was sitting in my front bedroom and became aware of fumes filling the room, even though my windows were closed. I looked out of the window and there was a guy sitting right outside my house in a large van, on the phone with his engine running.


I went and asked him to turn it off and he wouldn't. I said the fumes were making me feel ill inside my house, and he told me that was my problem.


It was a Vauxhall Vivaro CDTI and I have the registration number. I presume he is working somewhere in this road or nearby.


Is there anything I can do about this? Is there any way of reporting it somewhere?


The pollution in this area is a real problem, and I have asthma. I hate to think what it is doing to all the small children round here whose lungs are still developing.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/168684-polluting-vehicles/
Share on other sites

It's a legal requirement to turn off the engine. Highway code rule 123

"You MUST NOT ... leave a vehicle engine running unnecessarily while that vehicle is stationary on a public road. Generally, if the vehicle is stationary and is likely to remain so for more than a couple of minutes, you should apply the parking brake and switch off the engine to reduce emissions and noise pollution."


Not sure how you can enforce it though.

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The only thing you can do is tackle it head-on,

> with a smile and an overabundance of politeness

> (and caution). If it is a firm, ring the head

> office if the driver doesn't do as you ask.



The van was unmarked, and the driver wouldn't tell me who he worked for.


And I'm afraid I was neither smiling nor cautious.


In fact when he wouldn't turn the engine off (and no, it wasn't a refrigerated van) and told me it was my problem if I was feeling ill from the fumes, I shouted at him :(


ETA: I'm not proud of this.


ETA: Thanks for that info Mark, I shall look it up, print it out, and keep copies about my person to hand to these polluting drivers in future. They shall all know The Wrath of Sue :))

EPB Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is it true that refrigerated vehicles have to keep

> their engines running in order to maintain the

> cooling system?


Not now. Quite a few run with just the ignition key turned on. Lots of trailers are self-contained units (not that an artic is likely to be in the side streets of ED!!).

I was in the playground of our local park (mayow park) recently with my 4 year old son.

An ice-cream van was parked there in the center of the park and less than 30 meters away from the gates of the playground.


The exhaust fumes of that antiquated diesel engine were VERY noticeable and unpleasant. (The noise too actually, but at least that is not detrimental to the health of my child)


I assume it stayed there, engine running for most of the day.


I will find a channel to complain about that to the council or whoever is in charge of authorizing it.


There is enough you can't do when it comes to reducing children's exposure to air pollution.





On a side note, I also have problems with the notion of tempting children with sugar and calories in places where they should exercise and be active.

Mark Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's a legal requirement to turn off the engine.

> Highway code rule 123

> "You MUST NOT ... leave a vehicle engine running

> unnecessarily while that vehicle is stationary on

> a public road. Generally, if the vehicle is

> stationary and is likely to remain so for more

> than a couple of minutes, you should apply the

> parking brake and switch off the engine to reduce

> emissions and noise pollution."


This is another example of where the Highway Code is not an accurate exposition of the law.


The relevant law can be found at Regulations 98 and 107 of The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986.

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mark Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's a legal requirement to turn off the

> engine.

> > Highway code rule 123

> > "You MUST NOT ... leave a vehicle engine

> running

> > unnecessarily while that vehicle is stationary

> on

> > a public road. Generally, if the vehicle is

> > stationary and is likely to remain so for more

> > than a couple of minutes, you should apply the

> > parking brake and switch off the engine to

> reduce

> > emissions and noise pollution."

>

> This is another example of where the Highway Code

> is not an accurate exposition of the law.

>

> The relevant law can be found at Regulations 98

> and 107 of The Road Vehicles (Construction and

> Use) Regulations 1986.


I'm reminded of this every time I walk past the two Southwark camera spy cars parked on Lordship Lane every day, with their engines running, to make profit for APCOA.

Looking at Southwark's website they are interested in people reporting engine idling 'hotspots' to them, nothing about one-offs. Would help address engine idling around schools at least, if people report it.


http://www.southwark.gov.uk/air-quality/reporting-air-quality-complaints

This might also be of interest, for anyone wanting to actively try to tackle it - they run action events in 15 boroughs including Southwark in partnership with local council - provide training and then pair people up to approach car drivers idling to try and encourage them to change their behaviour.


https://idlingaction.london/

New vehicles automatically cut out the engine when stationary and restart it when the brake comes off. In the future, all vehicles will do this. The law does not seem to be clear from Edhistory's post but it is always a good idea to count to ten when frustrated, and then be calm when asking for something. It tends to bring the helpful side out of a person more often than not. At least we are no longer burning coal fires and having to battle with smog every other day. The technology to get rid of vehicle pollution is already there. It will just take time for it to work through new vehicle sales.

nunhead_man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "At least we are no longer burning coal fires and

> having to battle with smog every other day"

>

> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/2

> 9/wood-burning-stove-ban-will-not-be-enforced-agai

> nst-householders


Khan could easily make an impact here, by banning garages and stores from selling poor quality soft wood logs. Along with illegal bituminous house coal.

If you have the right wood burning appliance and kiln dried wood at sub 20% then the emmissions are within the confines of the law. I understand DEFFRA are to issue a 'ready to burn' standard for wood.


I'm often gobsmacked at the sight of that coal stuff for sale in winter. It's illegal to burn, why they don't clamp down on it I don't know.

It's not exactly hidden from view.

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I'm often gobsmacked at the sight of that coal

> stuff for sale in winter. It's illegal to burn,

> why they don't clamp down on it I don't know.

> It's not exactly hidden from view.



It isn't coal, is it?


It's smokeless fuel.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seabag Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > I'm often gobsmacked at the sight of that coal

> > stuff for sale in winter. It's illegal to burn,

> > why they don't clamp down on it I don't know.

> > It's not exactly hidden from view.

>

>

> It isn't coal, is it?

>

> It's smokeless fuel.


Yes REAL coal often. So often I'm gobsmacked to say.


Along with smokeless fuel.

If you want to moan about polluting vehicles and Khans mission to clean the air then why not also ask TFL to get bus drivers to switch off their engines (or switch to electric mode for the hybrids) when buses "wait for a short time to regulate the service"


Madness that they sit there for up to five minutes pumping out fumes when this happens

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Seabag Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > >

> > > I'm often gobsmacked at the sight of that

> coal

> > > stuff for sale in winter. It's illegal to

> burn,

> > > why they don't clamp down on it I don't know.

>

> > > It's not exactly hidden from view.

> >

> >

> > It isn't coal, is it?

> >

> > It's smokeless fuel.

>

> Yes REAL coal often. So often I'm gobsmacked to

> say.

>

> Along with smokeless fuel.



Who is selling coal round here?

bels123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This might also be of interest, for anyone wanting

> to actively try to tackle it - they run action

> events in 15 boroughs including Southwark in

> partnership with local council - provide training

> and then pair people up to approach car drivers

> idling to try and encourage them to change their

> behaviour.

>

> https://idlingaction.london/


Good idea to pair people up..

I had a cab outside mine with the engine running while he ate his lunch and read the paper. There should be a reporting system for cabs

This is not new

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/crime-court/drivers-who-leave-motor-running-in-islington-will-be-fined-in-first-idling-campaign-in-the-country-1-3707742

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...