Greater Manchester Clean Air Zone

Motorcaravans (also known as motorhomes or campervans) with Euro 6 or cleaner emission standards are compliant and will not be charged to drive in the Clean Air Zone

Just to clarify, the issue is if the vehicle is classed as an LGV (light goods vehicle category N)


From Manchester CAZ

Non-compliant vehicles classified as N1 or N2 – with a body type of ‘motorcaravan’ – will be charged to travel in the Clean Air Zone:

  • N1 (3.5t and under) with a tax class of LGV: If your motorcaravan has a Euro 5 or earlier diesel engine (typically registered before 2016) or a Euro 3 or earlier petrol engine (typically registered before 2005) it will automatically qualify for a temporary exemption until 1 June 2023, with a daily charge of £10 from that date.
  • Blank on V5C document: Daily charges will apply as above, depending on the tax class of your vehicle – LGV, private HGV or HGV.

Has anyone got a Euro5 California but classed as an “MPV” that could check against the Manchester CAZ to see if it exempt until June 2023 or exempt completely?

Only conversions of M1 classed Kombis, Shuttles or Caravelles (unlikely) with Euro 5 engines would appear to be exempt according to the above definition.

Again anyone watching with an M1 class euro5 camper conversion would be interested to see if it flags as temporary to June 2023 or fully exempt.
Mine is M1 Euro 5 but showing temporary exemption only.
 
Mine is M1 Euro 5 but showing temporary exemption only.
Interesting. I cannot see why an M1 class vehicle is included unless it is the motor caravan description on the v5 that triggers liability.

Just to highlight the following is the result for a 2008 Caravelle M1 class

Note (from gov site CAZ checker ) description CAR. Does your check show motor home, caravan or the like ?
It is probably this label in the database that triggers the exemption or just the temp one to 31/05/2023 if motorhome or caravan.

Doesn’t fit with the Manchester CAZ site showing N1 class and motor home or Camper van.
May be worth a challenge particularly if your daily driver vehicle

F5D28B78-6085-493C-957F-BB9AEAA052B0.jpeg



EBFD4687-7448-473D-AAF0-6989BA4C95F0.jpeg

Sorry for edit to answer my own post, it is the outcome of the proposal to include M1 class vehicles with the description motor caravan or motor home on the V5 that catches Drpps vehicle.

F7C52F64-270A-4B50-9E84-61656BBB7B85.jpeg
 
Last edited:
One possible solution through a Clean Vehicle Retrofit Accreditation Scheme (CVRAS).
Following article may help but cost is around £5200 + VAT with Manchester offering grants of up to £5000. But whole funding scheme paused (so shouldn’t the temp exemption be extended by the length of the pause?)
 
Starts May 2022 and temporary extension until May 2023 for certain classes.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I might be being thick here but I don't see how it can have a temporary extension for something that hasn't even started yet. Are you saying that when it starts in May then some vehicles which are currently shown as being exempt will change to being charged. If so, what is the point of the chart?
 
I might be being thick here but I don't see how it can have a temporary extension for something that hasn't even started yet. Are you saying that when it starts in May then some vehicles which are currently shown as being exempt will change to being charged. If so, what is the point of the chart?
The go live date is may 2022 for the whole project. Due to several factors they have extended to May 2023 for certain vehicles to allow businesses time to upgrade to compliant vehicles.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
 
I might be being thick here but I don't see how it can have a temporary extension for something that hasn't even started yet. Are you saying that when it starts in May then some vehicles which are currently shown as being exempt will change to being charged. If so, what is the point of the chart?
Hope this clarifies which vehicle types are subject to Manchester CAZ charges from 30/05/2022.

1.4 The proposed final GM CAP policy, which is summarised in this report, is attached at Appendix 1. In relation to the Clean Air Zone (CAZ), it covers the operation and management of the GM CAZ. The anticipated implementation date of the charging CAZ is Monday 30 May 2022 when the charges will apply to non-compliant buses, HGVs, and Hackney Carriages and Private Hire Vehicles licensed outside of Greater Manchester. Non-compliant LGVs, minibuses and coaches, and GM-licensed Hackney Carriages and Private Hire Vehicles would be subject to the charges from 1 June 2023 when a temporary exemption expires.

My note “non compliant LGV’s (N1 & N2 class) also appears to include M1 class vehicles described as “motorcaravans“ on the V5
See above posts #50 & #52
Full report here


My main concern is there appears to be no appeal process if you have a California as your only passenger vehicle with a euro 5 engine.

Anyone with an M1 vehicle type described as a “car” will be fully exempt from CAZ charges. If you don’t live in Greater Manchester you have a choice and can avoid paying if you stick to trunk/Motorway network.

I can find no rational case for including a few extra vehicles called Motorhomes in the CAZ scheme.

This is the response of Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) on behalf of the 10 GM local authorities.

 Charges should apply to M1 vehicles with a body type of ‘motorcaravan.’ Feedback from the consultation highlighted motorhomes can be classified in more than one way by the DVLA. Currently, non-compliant motorhomes classified as N1 or N2 would be charged in the GM CAZ scheme as a non-compliant LGV, with a £10 daily charge. However, a group of vehicles with a body type of ‘motorcaravan’ and a vehicle type approval of M1 (or M1 Special Purpose) that are non-compliant, would not be charged in the current GM CAZ scheme. Feedback from the consultation highlighted the lack of parity between this classification vehicles. It is recommended that a consultation is held on the inclusion of motorhomes classified as MSP1 in the GM Clean Air Zone.

page 27 of report and detailed in Appendix 4.

A consultation was agreed.

12. Approve a 6-week public consultation on the inclusion of motorhomes classified as MSP1 in the GM Clean Air Zone and on the inclusion of the A575 and A580 at Worsley commencing on 1 September 2021 and delegate authority to the Executive Member for Environment to approve the consultation materials;

The final decision on whether all motorhomes ( M1 or MSP1 ) are subject to charges has been delegated to

18. Delegate to the GM Charging Authorities Committee the authority to determine the outcome of the consultation on both the inclusion of motorhomes classified as MSP1 within the scope of Clean Air Zone charges and on the inclusion in the GM Clean Air Zone of the A575 and A580 at Worsley following the conclusion of that consultation;

Finally, the effect of the decision without an appeal process on any GM resident with a non compliant euro 5 camper as their only means of transport appears unreasonable and may need challenged (ultimately by Judicial review) if enough affected residents are willing to take this up.

Judging by the total of 4,000 responses to the whole consultation on the CAZ this appears unlikely.
 
One possible solution through a Clean Vehicle Retrofit Accreditation Scheme (CVRAS).
Following article may help but cost is around £5200 + VAT with Manchester offering grants of up to £5000. But whole funding scheme paused (so shouldn’t the temp exemption be extended by the length of the pause?)
I've been talking to the retro fit company in Chester. They are very helpful and responsive. It is possible to make a T5.1 complaint, but not a T5.
What / if any impact that has on performance and maintenance hasn't started to be discussed yet.
The question still remains why some 5.1s are fully exempt rather than temporarily exempt in Greater Manchester.
 
I've been talking to the retro fit company in Chester. They are very helpful and responsive. It is possible to make a T5.1 complaint, but not a T5.
What / if any impact that has on performance and maintenance hasn't started to be discussed yet.
The question still remains why some 5.1s are fully exempt rather than temporarily exempt in Greater Manchester.
As far as I can ascertain the most likely explanation is that the vehicle type approval is M1/MSP1 on the V5 but the descriptor of body type is not “Motorcaravan” as it is this descriptor that triggers inclusion of the vehicle for charging.in the Manchester CAZ

Interestingly, the decision to include M1/MSP 1 vehicles with body type descriptor “Motorcaravan” has not been finalised by the Great Manchester Charging Committee (the body charged on behalf of the 10 Manchester local authorities with deciding whether this class of vehicle is to be included).

At 21/01/2022
“The review will also consider whether some vehicles – such as motorhomes and horseboxes – that are not used for commercial reasons could be exempted from a Clean Air Zone”.

See

I have written to the Clean Air GM key officers and Cllr Andrew Western highlighting the lack of any appeal mechanism in the charging scheme for anyone disproportionately affected by CAZ charging, such as a GM resident who’s sole vehicle is a none compliant Motorcaravan used as a daily driver.

I have also sought confirmation that non compliant M1/MSP1 vehicles will be awarded some priority for Upgrade/new vehicle funding, as at the moment the schemes appear to favour business users.

Given the delays on new Californias will the 31/05/2023 deadline be long enough to source a compliant vehicle ?

These are his comments in the press release above.
Councillor Andrew Western, Leader of Trafford Council and the city-region’s Clean Air Lead, said: “It’s not right that poor air quality – mostly brought about by polluting vehicles – contributes to 1,200 deaths every year in Greater Manchester alone.
We want to see this number drop and I am keen to stress that we remain resolutely committed to cleaning up our air without losing a job, a business or putting anyone into hardship” (my emphasis).

I urge anyone else who feels that including this class of vehicle with clearly intended dual use (passenger vehicle and leisure vehicle) is irrational, to do the same and contact the Clean air GM team


It should also be noted that N1 class vehicle type approval on the V5, irrespective of descriptor, I.e. all LGV VW van conversions with Euro 5 diesel or Euro 3 petrol engines will be charged after 31st May 2023.

Again, any converted N1 with clear use as the only passenger vehicle in a household should have access to an appeal process that would allow exemption on grounds of hardship in complying with CAZ requirements.

It is a real pity that a loved T5 May be the source of such increased running costs with no option to retrofit, this leading to a vehicle having to be replaced at greater environmental cost/impact.

Off soap box now.
 
Last edited:
As far as I can ascertain the most likely explanation is that the vehicle type approval is M1/MSP1 on the V5 but the descriptor of body type is not “Motorcaravan” as it is this descriptor that triggers inclusion of the vehicle for charging.in the Manchester CAZ

Interestingly, the decision to include M1/MSP 1 vehicles with body type descriptor “Motorcaravan” has not been finalised by the Great Manchester Charging Committee (the body charged on behalf of the 10 Manchester local authorities with deciding whether this class of vehicle is to be included).

At 21/01/2022
“The review will also consider whether some vehicles – such as motorhomes and horseboxes – that are not used for commercial reasons could be exempted from a Clean Air Zone”.

See

I have written to the Clean Air GM key officers and Cllr Andrew Western highlighting the lack of any appeal mechanism in the charging scheme for anyone disproportionately affected by CAZ charging, such as a GM resident who’s sole vehicle is a none compliant Motorcaravan used as a daily driver.

I have also sought confirmation that non compliant M1/MSP1 vehicles will be awarded some priority for Upgrade/new vehicle funding, as at the moment the schemes appear to favour business users.

Given the delays on new Californias will the 31/05/2023 deadline be long enough to source a compliant vehicle ?

These are his comments in the press release above.
Councillor Andrew Western, Leader of Trafford Council and the city-region’s Clean Air Lead, said: “It’s not right that poor air quality – mostly brought about by polluting vehicles – contributes to 1,200 deaths every year in Greater Manchester alone.
We want to see this number drop and I am keen to stress that we remain resolutely committed to cleaning up our air without losing a job, a business or putting anyone into hardship” (my emphasis).

I urge anyone else who feels that including this class of vehicle with clearly intended dual use (passenger vehicle and leisure vehicle) is irrational, to do the same and contact the Clean air GM team


It should also be noted that N1 class vehicle type approval on the V5, irrespective of descriptor, I.e. all LGV VW van conversions with Euro 5 diesel or Euro 3 petrol engines will be charged after 31st May 2023.

Again, any converted N1 with clear use as the only passenger vehicle in a household should have access to an appeal process that would allow exemption on grounds of hardship in complying with CAZ requirements.

It is a real pity that a loved T5 May be the source of such increased running costs with no option to retrofit, this leading to a vehicle having to be replaced at greater environmental cost/impact.

Off soap box now.
"Councillor Andrew Western, Leader of Trafford Council and the city-region’s Clean Air Lead, said: “It’s not right that poor air quality – mostly brought about by polluting vehicles – contributes to 1,200 deaths every year in Greater Manchester alone."
A statistical guess only, the science on this stuff is just farcical, as ever follow the money.
 
Breaking news. Burnham has bottled it and the Greater Manchester Zone is starting to be put to sleep. He's still trying to spin it as a Government problem, but the 83,000 who joined the Facebook page in a month, know that one Mr Andy Burham is entirely to blame.
Final details of his climbdown will take a while, but as far as this group's vehicles are concerned, it has gone.
 
The ability / willingness of the BBC to avoid seeing the truth is enough to make me feel very smug at not having had a TV licence (legally) for 3 years. Burnham was asked to fix a few trouble spots, came up with the biggest zone in Europe covering every sq m of his kingdom, then spent months basking in the glory of having his scheme passed into law. Then we found out how stupid he'd been and he spent the last month saying the Government was to blame (as it was now law). The BBC can't / won't see that.
edit - didn't mean to shout... Its just been a stressy month!
 
I think you might find that the CAZ are Central Government requirements.




All 10 areas in GM failed the required standard for NO2 levels and compliance is required by the Secretary of State by 2024

On a day when there is much talk on levelling up and when we should reflect on the shocking levels of health inequality that exist in the UK you might also like to consider the positive health impact of improving air quality for those who inhale the worst quality of air - no prizes for guessing the relationship between poverty and inhaled air quality.


Hopefully NOX levels will fall back as more cars are replaced with less polluting ones and charging schemes can be reconsidered at some future point.

The problem we currently face is the transition timing is problematic because post pandemic finances are weak for many on limited income and there will be soaring inflation in the coming year which may not hit Cali owners too hard but which will hit the poorest hard.

Added to which the government funded grants are too low and there is a shortage of new vans (chip shortages) etc for tradesmen to buy anyway.

A delayed transition date requires central government consent hence the Mayoral trips to London.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think you might find that the CAZ are Central Government requirements.




All 10 areas in GM failed the required standard for NO2 levels and compliance is required by the Secretary of State by 2024

On a day when there is much talk on levelling up and when we should reflect on the shocking levels of health inequality that exist in the UK you might also like to consider the positive health impact of improving air quality for those who inhale the worst quality of air - no prizes for guessing the relationship between poverty and inhaled air quality.


Hopefully NOX levels will fall back as more cars are replaced with less polluting ones and charging schemes can be reconsidered at some future point.

The problem we currently face is the transition timing is problematic because post pandemic finances are weak for many on limited income and there will be soaring inflation in the coming year which may not hit Cali owners too hard but which will hit the poorest hard.

Added to which the government funded grants are too low and there is a shortage of new vans (chip shortages) etc for tradesmen to buy anyway.

A delayed transition date requires central government consent hence the Mayoral trips to London.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh dear, I'm going to have to do this again am I? We have a Burnham fan who's fallen for his spin.
7 of the 10 councils that form Greater Manchester were in breech in 2017/18.
They (not Burnham) were told to fix the offending junctions.
They didn't know what to do, so handed it to Burnham who was trying to justify his role.
He convinced all 10 areas in his Greater Manchester kingdom to act together, even though 3 of them had no breeches.
He decided the best way forward was to ask for a Cat C Zone throughout every sq m of his kingdom. Several tiny localised schemes were modelled as being successful but 'too complex'.
All this was agreed by zoom during Covid and passed by local cabinets in local government. No scrutiny was allowed.
Burnham banded his proposals around and told the Government he'd need £200 million to compensate those effected and help them buy newer vehicles.
The government gave him the money and passed the necessary legislation (you need laws to charge people to leave their homes).
Burnham boasted what a leader Gt Manchester was under his leadership with Europe's largest clean air zone.
As word spread as the signs started to go up, there was massive opposition. A Facebook group formed just before Xmas and now has 84,000 members.
That group has studied the history. There are twice as many Labour voters there than Tories, yet 99% blame Burnham not Borris (both from polls I ran on there).
The penny dropped and Burnham pooped his pants.
Obviously he won't admit his political judgement was floored, so he initially asked for more money....half hoping he'd get it (because he believes in the magic money tree) and half hoping they'd say no, so would share the pain.
The opposition still grew, and he then said 'only the government can stop this'. This is technically true because they needed to undo a law that he asked for.
You my friend have only seen this last bit, happily aided by a hopeless lazy press, and have come here with your snippets from Burnham's press releases.
 
For what it’s worth, I’ve just heard Andy Burnham on Radio 4 this morning (08:45) saying that the scheme will not go ahead to its original timing, and it needs a big rethink as replacement vehicles are not available.

Maybe organisations such as this and Camping/Caravan Clubs can use this delay to lobby on behalf of their members??
 
Andy Burnham’s statement


This is of interest .
“Second, that all private-use leisure vehicles - such as motorhomes, camper-vans and horseboxes, as well as cars, motorbikes and mopeds - are permanently exempted from the CAZ.”

Over to the Secretary of State and Client Earth for round x?
 
Last edited:
Dear 2 into1
I did not ask for insults or false accusations regarding my political leanings but it see that this is your slant on addressing the Clean Air Zone issue.

A grown up mature debate is likely to be more productive rather than throwing brickbats

Thank you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dear 2 into1
I did not ask for insults or false accusations regarding my political leanings but it see that this is your slant on addressing the Clean Air Zone issue.

A grown up mature debate is likely to be more productive rather than throwing brickbats

Thank you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well if you are going to jump in and try and correct my assertions then you risk the chance of being shown to be wrong.
 
I think it is indisputable that the requirement for action on NO2 is a Central Government requirement.

2to1 seems to take issue with my statement that all 10 councils failed the standard

He has replied by referring to 2017 - though there was no reference.

Perhaps some explanation will help

That was how the compliance data existed back in 2017 and NO2 data was limited as it was based on the national PCM model which uses a limited sampling methodology with GIS extrapolation.

Here is the big technical document on the methodology used back then.


This now outdated and limited methodology reported that 7 areas in GM failed the NO2 standard and thus these 7 areas formed the basis for the original Government Directive.

However, given the accepted limitations of the National PCM model, further local testing and modelling was required and so this was then undertaken.

Oldham was then found to breach limits in 2018 and so it was also served with a Ministerial Directive from Central Government.

Thus by 2018 we had 8 breech areas.

Subsequently, when more comprehensive detailed local surveying was undertaken the remaining 2 councils were also found to breach the standard required, although the breaches were quite limited in these 2 remaining areas and Rochdale and Wigan Councils were not compelled to act on these through a ministerial Direction, but were asked to address their breaches in the the Target Determination exercise.

The Target Determination exercise revealed 250 points of exceedance across 152 road links across all ten districts in2020/21

Thus in summary you seem to be citing out of date data that was found on subsequent detailed testing to be too optimistic.

I was using the up to date data on much more robust methodology.

It is worth noting that currently exceedance is measured against the standard of 40 microgram/ M3 rather than the more recent recommended WHO standard which is a far more stringent 10. The WHO standard for NO2 is due for further consideration by Central Government later this year. Hopefully they will stick with the current standard!

You can see information and data here:


Back in 2017 the Government served a Direction on seven Greater Manchester local authorities requiring them to produce a feasibility study, in accordance with the HM Treasury’s Green Book, in which they must identify the option which will deliver compliance with legal limits for nitrogen dioxide in the area for which the authority is responsible in the “shortest possible time”

Here is the supporting document:

An outline plan and outline business case is then drawn up locally and has then to be passed back to Government for approval to ensure that it will meet the NO2 standards required. Following approval a detailed business case is prepared.

Note that Government documentation is clear that in many urban areas especially ones as badly polluted as GM that a CAZ is the only one that will deliver the required degree of NO2 improvement.

The Government stipulation that compliance is required in the shortest possible time - in the Manchester case by 2024 is the root of the problem as it gives too little notice or time for change and too little notice for a substantial proportion of vehicles affected to be already compliant especially as Manchester has a relatively high proportion of older vehicles.

In reality as cleaner vehicles are built and old ones replaced the overall trend line for NO2 levels has been downward for some time so a more relaxed timetable would have been better.

Belatedly, there has been recognition that the timetable of working to a 2024 deadline is simply unworkable because this timescale is too compressed and the ability of people to adapt has not been adequately considered.

In addition, the pandemic has substantially added to the problem since it has created a situation where new vehicles are simply not available due to supply chain issues.

Finally, the relatively measly financial package especially for an urban area beset by significant levels of deprivation is a problem that needs to be addressed.

Hopefully, a solution can be found in the coming days.

That’s me “over and out” on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That’s me “over and out” on this one.
Good.
With that diversion over, we can then get back to the thread's goal of helping inform Cali owners if they are going to be charged £10 to move their Cali off their drive, or to visit glorious Greater Manchester!

Because of the pressure exerted by the RETHINK group on Facebook, Burnham has faced the fact that his scheme design and timetable is practically and politically unworkable.

Thankfully the first recommendation of his climbdown is that leisure use vehicles (such as campervans) are to be excluded from the categories of vehicles to be charged, if the scheme is ever introduced. (The decision to include them in the first place was another entirely local decision).
So on a selfish level at least, it looks like Cali owners can relax.
 
Earlier in this thread (#38) you'll see I was questioning why my T6 204PS EU6 was being charged for some CAZ's. There appeared to be some T5's and T6's that were not being charged, and I believed EU6 should be OK under the current rules. I opened a formal query to the CAZ team, and this morning I got a reply - they updated my record and my CAZ issues are now resolved... no charges apply to my vehicle now my record has been updated.

Dear Mr *"Cobocali'
Thank you for your enquiry received on 25/01/2022. Your case reference number is 000XXXX.
Based on the information available on your vehicle's DVLA record,
I can confirm that your vehicle is compliant with the minimum emissions standards for Clean Air Zones, and your vehicle is not subject to Clean Air Zone charges. I have requested for your record to be updated to reflect this.
This will be updated within 2 working days.
N BlaXXXX - Escalation Unit


my record has already been updated in the system, see below... no charges apply:
Screenshot 2022-02-04 at 11.44.13.png
 
Earlier in this thread (#38) you'll see I was questioning why my T6 204PS EU6 was being charged for some CAZ's. There appeared to be some T5's and T6's that were not being charged, and I believed EU6 should be OK under the current rules. I opened a formal query to the CAZ team, and this morning I got a reply - they updated my record and my CAZ issues are now resolved... no charges apply to my vehicle now my record has been updated.

Dear Mr *"Cobocali'
Thank you for your enquiry received on 25/01/2022. Your case reference number is 000XXXX.
Based on the information available on your vehicle's DVLA record,
I can confirm that your vehicle is compliant with the minimum emissions standards for Clean Air Zones, and your vehicle is not subject to Clean Air Zone charges. I have requested for your record to be updated to reflect this.
This will be updated within 2 working days.
N BlaXXXX - Escalation Unit


my record has already been updated in the system, see below... no charges apply:
View attachment 88856
Good result

For anyone else who checks their vehicle and gets an unexpected result, the following is the National exemption criteria from CAZ charging. (For now!!!)


9391300E-EBAA-425F-A56A-F53E861EE2EC.png

Basically, a Euro 6 compliant diesel or a Euro 4 Petrol engined Car or Van (which should include M1, MSP1 California’s or N1 VW van conversions) as you have found and had corrected.

If you want to check look at your V5
Section V Exhaust emissions
V3 NOx ( g/Km or g/KWh)

Standard for Euro 6 is
less than 80 mg/Km = 0.080 g/Km

For Petrol Euro 4 is the same as above for NOx i.e. 0.080g/Km

My Cali Ocean 2018 V3 NOx

D05C34C7-AEBF-4E4B-9B36-B9769F6940CD.jpeg

Full breakdown of Euro standards 1 to 6 and 6d here.

Out of interest did you take a screen grab of the Gov site description of your vehicle when CAZ checking before this was updated/corrected ?
 
Good result
Out of interest did you take a screen grab of the Gov site description of your vehicle when CAZ checking before this was updated/corrected ?
my before and after screen grabs are in #38 and #72 in this thread if that's what you are referring to? but screen grabs from pre and post my formal query are re-produced below for ease:
(ps if anyone else needs to raise a formal query for their vehicle the link is here: https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/caz )
Screenshot 2022-02-04 at 16.08.57.png
 
my before and after screen grabs are in #38 and #72 in this thread if that's what you are referring to? but screen grabs from pre and post my formal query are re-produced below for ease:
(ps if anyone else needs to raise a formal query for their vehicle the link is here: https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/caz )
View attachment 88878
Sorry it was the screen before this one on the Gov CAZ checker Which shows the vehicle “type” for CAZ purposes.

You have to confirm the details are correct before moving to the CAZ charging table that you screen grabbed.

The below is an example of a Euro 5 T5 Caravelle that is exempt in all current CAZ’s !!! Except Birmingham’s CAT D CAZ which includes vehicles classed as Cars that do not meet Euro 6 emissions
0E8C8EE4-6297-4F5C-B0C3-5832B2B61305.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top