 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
Jayx1
Prime Minister of TOTA
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: The Socialist People's Republic Of Canada
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by 2famous4u
407ETR in MARCH changed their policy... one transponder per plate..bc they noticed in the past when customers moved transponders between vehicles they were charged the VIDEO TOLL CHARGE of 3.50 bc the plate wasnt registered to the transponder they got it for... if the customer has one car.. and one transponder on separate accts they need to consolidate their vehicles into ONE SIMPLE BILL... so everything is together (associated) and then lease an additional transponder for an extra 1.00 per month or 10.50 for the year.. one transponder is 2.15+gst+pst per month, or 21.00+gst+pst for the year.. another factor for VIDEO TOLL CHARGES.. is a METALLIZED WINDHSHIELD.. or a REPLACED WINDSHIELD.. in that case... a customer can provide their VIN # on the back of their ownership and place a VIDEO TOLL CHARGE SUPPRESSION on their plate.. end of story... that is how to solve this problem.. if you consolidate your vehicles.. and have a transponder.. then you can use that trans in the one vehicle.. tell them to state that on the acct.. a consolidation takes 1-2 billing cycles to go through.. and you can lease an additional trans on the website i hope this helps...
ps. Jayx1-- a customer service rep will never hang up on the customer.. they arent allowed to.. if they do that is automatic dissmisal.. id like to know who did that though.. lol |
had the people on the phone been this helpful this post wouldnt exist! Thanks!
However you do realize that by disallowing people to swap transponders you will be losing a tonne of business. How many times have i said to my friends "dont worry ill cover the toll" when i brought along the transponder in their car. Those people NEVER take the 407. Or in rental cars or for business.
Its a very bad policy
___________________
| quote: | Originally posted by jester
Everything in this country is illegal. |
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery…" Winston Churchill
"If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law" - Winston Churchill
|
|
Nov-17-2006 08:09
|
|
|
 |
 |
mute79
..:culture vulture:..
Registered: Feb 2001
Location: in transit
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
I think paying to use a road is pointless. Isn't that what taxes are for in the first place?
I'd rather sit on the 401 then pay to drive on a highway...I just can't understand paying... |
what? why should someone who doesn't drive a car have to pay for others that do?
drivers are supposed to pay, always! be it through tolls or taxes on gas...
|
|
Nov-17-2006 14:20
|
|
|
 |
 |
mute79
..:culture vulture:..
Registered: Feb 2001
Location: in transit
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Do you honestly believe that because one does not drive a car they derive no benefit from the existance of public highways? |
there is benefit for goods transportation, etc, not for daily commuters who choose to live in the suburbs and drive to the city, which is what he was talking about in terms of tolled highways being stupid... if someone chooses to get rid of a car altogether and take public transport, reducing pollution, congestion, etc, then it's not fair that one person has to pay taxes so others continue to drive their cars
|
|
Nov-17-2006 15:24
|
|
|
 |
 |
Moral Hazard
Oppressing the 99%

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: with the 1%
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by mute79
there is benefit for goods transportation, etc, not for daily commuters who choose to live in the suburbs and drive to the city, which is what he was talking about in terms of tolled highways being stupid... if someone chooses to get rid of a car altogether and take public transport, reducing pollution, congestion, etc, then it's not fair that one person has to pay taxes so others continue to drive their cars |
Continuing with your argument.... is it fair that I (as someone who does not utilize public transit) subsidise your use of public transit. You are aware that your fares cover only a fraction of the cost to get you from point A to B right? I pay for your bus, your streetcar, your subway, and the roads and tracks that they run on. So I'll tell you what... when transit users volunteer to pay the full cost of transit then we can consider charging commuters for using the highways.... fair?
FYI, the ammenities you enjoy by living in the city are made possible by those that commute as without that additional work force the economy of this city would grind to a halt. Please don't think for one second that businesses, especially the big ones in toronto like finance and insurance wouldn't go with smaller offices in more locations if they had trouble attracting workers downtown. Also, you should realize that if barriers to commuting were made you'd have people looking for work closer to home rather then looking for homes closer to work.
___________________
| quote: | Originally posted by RickyM
you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about. |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down 
|
|
|
Nov-17-2006 15:34
|
|
|
 |
 |
mute79
..:culture vulture:..
Registered: Feb 2001
Location: in transit
|
|
|
perhaps if more people used public trasport, the money generated by that entity would help to pay for costs of road maintenance (which would be far less due to less vehicles on roads), etc.. the fact is that the traffic generated by public transport is a tiny fraction of that generated by drivers, so yes, it's very fair that drivers pay for maintenance through gas taxes and tolls, etc.. unless the habits that exist in the north american society about driving 1st and public transport 2nd change, the drivers ultimately should bare the costs of such choice... i can't help but draw comparisons to any european city where the choice is reversed
not sure what barriers you are referring to, i thought we were discussing who should be paying for costs of road maintenance, but the whole point is to have a lively, tightly integrated community, which would eliminate traffic congestion, which ultimately stems from idiotic city planning behind the ideoligy that people are to work in the city and live in the suburbs...
Last edited by mute79 on Nov-17-2006 at 16:13
|
|
Nov-17-2006 16:03
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:56.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|