The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

According to Fleet News, fleets are being urged to consider drug testing their drivers, as some police forces report arrests for drug-driving have surpassed drink-driving for the first time.

 

Nationally, the number of drug-driving prosecutions almost doubled last year, with a record 10,215 cases in England and Wales, compared with 5,368 in 2017. Some 60,000 drivers failed roadside breath tests in 2016, according to the most recent Ministry of Justice data available.

 

However, more recent statistics released by some individual forces show a worrying trend, with cannabis and cocaine now more prevalent than alcohol in roadside tests.

 

The latest data released by Suffolk Police, for example, shows that the number of arrests for drug-driving surpassed the number of drink-drive arrests for the first time in the county.

 

The 672 drug-driving arrests in 2018/19 represented a 20% increase on the previous 12 months, while drink-driving increased by 11.3% to 652 arrests.

 

Assistant chief constable Simon Megicks said: “This year is the first time our drug-drive numbers are in excess of drink-drive ones.”

 

It was a similar story in Norfolk, where more drug-drivers were caught during its Christmas drink-drive campaign for the first time.

 

More than 600 people were arrested after failing a roadside drug test in the county last year, just four years earlier 37 were arrested on suspicion of drug-driving.

 

Meanwhile, early results from the annual drink- and drug-driving summer campaigns also show that, when used, roadside drug tests have a higher hit rate than breath tests for alcohol.

 

During Greater Manchester Police’s 14-day summer drink and drug campaign, it carried out 640 breath tests, with some 90 proving positive. That compared with 114 roadside drug tests, with 50 samples returning a positive reading for either cannabis or cocaine.

 

Figures from Cheshire Police, seen by Fleet News, show a huge increase in the detection of cannabis and cocaine after new legislation was introduced.

 

In 2014, before officers in Cheshire could perform roadside tests for cannabis or cocaine, there were 70 arrests. Four years later, in 2018, that had risen to 858.

 

It says cannabis and cocaine are the most prevalent drugs used by drug-drivers, with almost two-thirds (62%) testing positive for cannabis, 25% for cocaine and 13% testing positive for both substances.

 

More than half (62%) of positive tests were from drivers aged 30 years and below and an incredible 94% were male, much higher than the 78% for drink-driving.

 

The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) lead for roads policing, chief constable Anthony Bangham, said he was “concerned” to see the increase in the number of motorists testing positive for drugs.

 

He told Fleet News public perception of the issue needs to change.

 

“Drink-driving is considered socially unacceptable by the vast majority of the public, yet the emergence of drug-driving is perhaps not yet seen in the same way,” he said.

 

“Anyone driving under the influence of drink or drugs is a real danger to themselves and other road users.”

 

Four out of five respondents to a Fleet News poll appear to agree, believing drug-driving has become such a safety issue for fleets that they think employers should be routinely testing company car and van drivers.

 

The insurance industry is also taking note and urging fleets to ensure they have robust polices in place.

 

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) told Fleet News that, with the right information and the right policies, “fleet managers can help protect their drivers, other road users and their businesses”.

 

Laurenz Gerger, motor policy adviser at the ABI, explained: “All organisations can benefit from having formal drug and alcohol policies which clearly outline the consequences of alcohol or drug misuse at the workplace. Such a policy may include screening and testing.

 

“Commercial fleet insurers will work with their customers to develop solutions to reduce vulnerability and manage their road risk.”

 

Roadside drug testing

 

Higher detection rates have been attributed to the introduction of roadside drug testing and an overhaul of drug-driving laws.

 

Changes to the offence of drug-driving came into force in England and Wales from March 2015. New legislation made it illegal to drive with specified levels of certain drugs, including legal medication, in your system.

 

It had been a criminal offence, under section 4 Road Traffic Act 1988, to drive a motor vehicle while being unfit to do so as a result of drug consumption. However, the new rules meant a driver could be guilty of an offence of drug-driving even if their ability to drive is not impaired as a result of drug use.

 

Section 5A contained the new offence of driving with a concentration of a specified controlled drug above a specified limit, with Government taking a zero-tolerance approach to cannabis, for example.

 

The drugs specified in the regulations consisted of eight legal medications, including diazepam and morphine, and eight illegal drugs such as cannabis and cocaine.

 

Drivers convicted of an offence of drug-driving are automatically banned from driving for at least one year, and can face a fine of up to £5,000, up to six months in prison, or both.

 

Police forces have also had access to new drug-testing kits for use during roadside checks of suspected drivers.

 

D.Tec International provides police forces in England and Wales with its Drugwipe device, which uses saliva to test for cocaine and cannabis at the roadside.

 

The company also offers advice on corporate drug and alcohol policies and workplace testing on a range of drugs to mitigate a fleet’s exposure to risk.

 

Ean Lewin, managing director of D.Tec International, says drug-driving poses a “very significant” risk to fleet managers.

 

A recent sweep at a construction company returned a positive test for drugs for more than one-in-three drivers (38%) against an industry average of 15% and an average of 6% across all industries.

 

“It was a shocking result, but we’re catching drug-drivers on a daily basis,” said Lewin. “One of the forces told me that 50% of their drug-driving arrests were at-work drivers.”

 

Risk Management

 

There is no legal obligation for the fleet industry to adopt specific testing policies in the workplace, but companies do have a duty of care to maintain a safe working environment under the Health and Safety at Work Act.

 

Lewin advocates screening as part of the recruitment process, making an initial test part of a potential driver’s risk assessment and his company has been working with one of the country’s major insurers to help mitigate a fleet’s risk.

 

D.Tec International is a specialist partner of Aviva Risk Management Solutions (ARMS), with the insurer offering policyholders breathalysers, drug wipes, drug and alcohol awareness courses, as well as policy guidance.

 

Gill Milner, technical account manager for motor and liability at Aviva, explained: “These all contribute to creating and maintaining an environment with improved management of this risk.”

 

Aviva’s liability and motor risk consultants have been trained in drug and alcohol awareness, on how to recognise the general signs of drug use, and the affect that drugs and alcohol have on driving and work performance.

 

They are also trained in how to use breathalysers and drug wipes.

 

Milner said: “Improving the knowledge of our risk consultants and providing them with breathalysers and drug wipes enables a far more proactive discussion with customers, where we can illustrate the subject and share our knowledge with greater confidence.”

 

Introducing effective management of a robust drug and alcohol policy and screening, according to Milner, allows employers to “non-intrusively” check their safety-critical employees in a culture of openness and trust. This reduces the risk of any incident that may affect not only the organisation, but other employees, customers, suppliers and the wider public.

 

“By not addressing drug driving, there is a real risk that employers will fail in their legal duty of care for employees and others who may be affected by their activities,” she said.

 

Another large fleet insurer, Zurich, says impairment through drugs, whether prescribed or illegal, needs to be part of the consideration of the overall work-related road risk strategy.

 

“The risk needs to be assessed, appropriate interventions should be deployed and a monitor and review process should be introduced,” said Louise Kerrigan, casualty and motor team leader for risk engineering at Zurich.

 

“We would recommend introducing policies and procedures which include the provision of drug and alcohol testing for pre-employment, random, with cause and/or as a condition for access of employees or contractors to a site.

 

“Policies and processes should be risk-based and organisations typically find it beneficial to define a ‘safety critical employee’, which would include anyone who drives a vehicle for work.”

 

‘Growing fleet interest’

Milner reports growing interest from its fleet customers and is currently active in sectors including transport and distribution, construction, retail and leisure services.

 

“Discussing drugs and alcohol in the workplace with policyholders means we can assist in providing advice, listen to their concerns and offer a mix of solutions to tackle any issues they have identified,” she said.

 

“A number have already implemented drug and alcohol policies and screening. For some, the drug wipes offering was welcomed, as it is less intrusive than other screening methods and the drug and alcohol awareness training greatly increased their managers’ awareness to positively and proactively manage this subject.”

 

The road safety charity Brake had long argued for new drug driving laws before they were finally introduced in 2015.

 

It says organisations should have a comprehensive drug testing and reporting policy in place. This should require them to test all drivers for drugs at the pre-employment stage, at random thereafter, when there is a probable cause, post incident and as a condition for access of employees or contractors to a site.

 

“We’re appealing to all employers with staff who drive for work to treat this with the seriousness that it deserves and have the necessary driving policies and practices in place to ensure their drivers are always fit to drive,” said a spokesman.

 

“Employers using vehicles to do their business, no matter the size of their business, or the type of vehicle they use or who owns those vehicles, have a responsibility to manage the associated risks, for any related legal reason but also moral reasons to protect people from death and injury.”

 

By Graham Hill – thanks to Fleet News

With the new number plate about to be launched on the 1^st September, what do the numbers and letters mean? Thanks to AOL online we have the following explanation:

 

If you’ve ever looked at a car, you will know what a licence plate is. They exist for each individual car on the road to have a unique identity, allowing information on the car to be pulled up for a huge number of reasons.

 

To the untrained eye, a licence plate may seem like nothing more than a random combination of characters — but there is in fact logic and reasoning to its format. Looking to learn what the meaning behind a UK plate is? Read on…

 

Here, we’ll be focusing on the licence plate format introduced in 2001. Made up of seven characters split into two sections (except for NI), the UK licence plate is pretty simple. Two letters start the registration, immediately followed by two numbers with a space separating this sequence from the final three characters.

 

Though the two letters at the start of the licence plate may seem a bit like gibberish, there’s actually a method to them. These indicate where in the UK a car is first registered. The very first letter indicates the region — for example, Y represents Yorkshire, L represents London and S represents Scotland. Following that, the second letter indicates which DVLA office within the region the registration is made.

 

Up next, the numbers on a licence plate indicate when a car is first registered — with this identifier changing every six months.

 

Cars registered between March and August use the last two digits of the year itself. For example, a 17 plate car will have first come onto UK roads in that period in 2017. When it comes to new cars registered between September and February, 50 is added to that value preceding it — meaning a car coming onto the roads in that period for 2017/18 would be designated with a 67 plate.

 

So we’ve established the first four characters on a licence plate are more than just gibberish, but what about the final three? Well, those are in fact random.

 

This is to distinguish cars from those registered in the same time period at the same DVLA office and can be any combination of letters from 24 of the alphabet’s 26 — with I and Q excluded. Some combinations are also manually prevented from circulation in order to prevent any that may appear as offensive.

 

So there you have it. But if you are looking to impress your neighbours with a new car on your drive or outside your front door better take the car in August rather than September. I reported a few years ago that British Car Auctions found that a car registered on say a 19 plate, as it would be this month, can fetch an extra £400 in auction than a car registered a year later on a 69 (snigger) plate.

 

The reason they gave for this was that car dealers prefer to have cars with number plates that mean something. i.e. the year plate such as 19 than a plate that many potential buyers wouldn’t understand when driving past. So if you want to be seen to be driving an obviously brand new car, go for the year number plate from 1^st March to 31^st August. By Graham Hill

In another report on the increased acceptance of electric vehicles, BP Chargemaster has announced that it has opened its first 150kW ultra-fast electric vehicle (EV) chargers on a BP retail site.

 

The new 150kW chargers are able to provide ultra-fast charging to the latest and next generation of EVs, convenience that BP sees as essential to support the continued growth of the UK’s EV market.

 

It announced plans to roll out a new network of fast chargers just over a year ago following its £120 million acquisition of Chargemaster.

 

Two of these new chargers are now installed at BP’s retail site at Cranford near Heathrow airport, west of London and begin operating this week.

 

They are the first in a planned rollout of 400 ultra-fast chargers at BP sites across the UK by the end of 2021, with the network continuing to grow in line with new vehicle models arriving on the market that will be capable of ultra-fast charging.

 

David Newton, chief operating officer of BP Chargemaster, said: “We believe our establishment of a nationwide ultra-fast charging network will be transformative for the electric vehicle market in the UK.

 

“Working closely with global vehicle manufacturers, we are developing the solutions that electric vehicle drivers need to enable them to charge confidently and conveniently, wherever they are in the country.

 

“BP’s forecourts are ideal locations for this technology, which will provide an expected dwell time of 10-12 minutes, not dissimilar from the average of around seven minutes spent by drivers of petrol and diesel cars on a forecourt today.”

 

Formed in 2008, Chargemaster was acquired by BP in 2018 and renamed BP Chargemaster. It has continued to rapidly grow and expand its offers as the UK’s EV market has grown and evolved.

 

Today it operates Polar, with more than 7,000 public charge points, and provides a range of home, workplace and public charging solutions.

 

BP recently entered into an agreement with DiDi, the world’s leading mobile transportation platform, to develop EV charging infrastructure across China.

 

BP also continues to make venturing investments into innovative new companies in this space such as advanced battery technology firm StoreDot and PowerShare, the online platform for EV charging in China.

 

Tufan Erginbilgic, chief executive of BP’s Downstream business, said: “As the world of mobility evolves, BP is determined to be the fuel provider of choice whether drivers need electric charging or liquid fuels.

 

“BP Chargemaster continues to develop and is leading the way for our understanding of how we can best support and succeed in this fast-growing new market.”

 

He concluded: “Convenient and reliable ultra-fast charging will be critical in driving the wider adoption of electric vehicles in the UK.

 

“The combination of BP Chargemaster’s EV charging expertise, experience and customer base with BP’s retail sites across the UK is now allowing us to develop the UK’s first nationwide network of ultra-fast chargers.”  By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

A report released earlier this year resulted in the recall of a number of Jaguar and Landrover models after it was found that they emitted more CO2 than was recorded in the official certification.

 

At a time when the group is struggling financially the recall, whilst expensive, was nothing like the costs and fines that were imposed on the VW Group. Did someone play down the findings to give Jaguar a chance to instigate the recall?

 

Here’s the report from the BBC:

 

Jaguar Land Rover is recalling 44,000 cars in the UK over carbon dioxide emissions, the car maker has said.

 

Regulators found 10 models were emitting more of the greenhouse gas than they had been certified to emit.

 

The car maker will contact owners to arrange repairs, a JLR spokeswoman said.

 

JLR is facing a number of challenges at the moment, including a slump in demand for diesel cars and a sales slowdown in China.

 

The firm said it was a voluntary recall of certain 2016-2019 MY Jaguar and Land Rover vehicles fitted with two litre diesel or petrol engines.

 

The affected models are:

 

Some two-litre 2016 to 2018 Land Rover Discovery and Discovery Sport cars

Certain two litre Range Rover Evoque, Sport, and Velar cars

Jaguar E-Pace, F-Pace, F-Type, XE and XF cars.

Most models are petrol, while some are diesel.

 

Some of the models will need physical repairs in a dealership, while some will need software updates, the spokeswoman said.

 

“The modifications made to affected vehicles will be made free of charge and every effort will be made to minimise inconvenience to the customer during the short time required for the work to be carried out,” the firm added.

 

In January the firm confirmed it is cutting 4,500 jobs, with the substantial majority coming from its 40,000 strong UK workforce.

 

The firm has complained about uncertainty caused by Brexit.

 

Emissions have come under more scrutiny since Volkswagen’s diesel scandal.

 

Investors are pursuing the German car giant for about €9.2bn (£8.2bn) in damages, claiming the company should have come clean sooner about falsifying emissions data. By Graham Hill

Up until Boris took possession of the keys to number 10, I like many believed that it would be impossible for us to leave the EU without a deal.

 

However, I’m now starting to believe that this is a serious option and might be out of our hands anyway because if we don’t negotiate a deal we leave without a deal whether we like it or not. It’s the law.

 

Even with a deal we will still be outside the EU so can’t take advantage of the free trade deals already in place between the EU and various countries around the world.

 

Let’s take South Korea where Kias and Hyundais are built. As part of the EU we are able to import their cars duty free but the minute we come out of the EU (unless we have a deal with a transition deal that includes current free trade agreements) we will have to pay 10% duty on top of the cost of the cars.

 

Whilst Kia and Hyundai are a South Korean group what about other manufacturers who build their cars in non-European countries? For example Mercedes build cars in Mexico with whom the EU has an agreement.

 

As import duty is applicable from the last country that touched the goods, even with a deal that includes Germany, as the cars may come from Mexico their cars will be 10% more expensive. In fact, Ford, GM, Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, Honda and VW all have manufacturing plants in Mexico.

 

Of course, we may be able to negotiate quick deals with all the countries with which we have free trade deals as part of the EU but the consensus is that this won’t happen. So at this point in time with so many unknowns my advice is don’t wait till after the end of October if you are toying with the idea of taking out a new lease.

 

As always – if you see a deal that you like don’t wait for a better deal as they may be gone forever after the end of October. By Graham Hill

Failure to wear a seatbelt could result in penalty points as well as a fine, under new road safety plans being considered by the Government.

 

The Government is considering issuing penalty points to drivers who fail to wear a seatbelt as part of a new road safety action plan aimed at reducing the number of deaths on the UK’s roads.

 

Despite the fact that, in 2017, 27 per cent of car deaths involved people who were not wearing a seatbelt, the punishment for committing the offence in England, Scotland and Wales is just a fine of £100, which can be increased to a maximum of £500 if the case goes to court.

 

Now, the Department for Transport (DfT) is considering introducing penalty points for such an offence, as part of a package of 74 potential actions to improve road safety in the UK. This follows a report from the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS) calling for Great Britain to adopt the same rules as Northern Ireland, where drivers who don’t wear a seatbelt are handed three penalty points.

 

Another key area of focus in the DfT’s plan is rural roads, for which an advisory panel will be set up to look at how rural road safety can be boosted via the improvement of roads and traffic signs, as well as by tackling issues around speed limits and enforcement.

 

The DfT has broken down some of its other plans by which age groups they will affect. For children, a £225,000 grant has been given to Good Egg Safety to deliver a safety training programme for retailers to help parents correctly fit baby and child seats.

 

Research will also be commissioned into whether mobile phone use among young pedestrians leads to an increased risk of road collisions, as well as how children aged seven to 18 with special educational needs and cognitive disabilities can be taught to understand the dangers near roads.

 

For young adults, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency is developing a behavioural change campaign designed to encourage learner drivers to broaden their experience by using more rural roads and driving at night before taking their test.

 

One in four people killed on road not wearing a seatbelt

 

There will also be research into the benefits of Graduated Driving Licences, while THINK! will continue campaigning against drink-driving, mobile phone use while driving, speedin and passenger distraction.

 

With adults in mind, the DfT will be looking at the feasibility of alcolocks, while a greater focus on roads policing will be spearheaded by a two-year project with the Home Office and National Police Chiefs’ Council to identify best practice and gaps in services to see how policing can be improved.

 

Finally, for older drivers, RoadSafe has been given £50,000 to deliver a digital platform to share best practice to reduce road safety risks for elderly road users.

 

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said: “Today’s action plan is a key milestone in our road safety work and sets out the important steps we are taking to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on our roads.”

 

Steve Barrett, head of car insurance for Direct Line, commented: “Through better enforcement and greater public awareness, we can hopefully increase seat belt wearing rates and reduce deaths and serious injuries on our roads.”

 

David Davies, executive director of PACTS, added that it was “unusual to find a road safety measure with so much benefit and no downsides”.By Graham Hill thanks to Auto Express

Drivers in the UK have spent more than £3m buying International Driving Permits since February in preparation for a no deal Brexit.

 

UK motorists have bought 584,000 International Driving Permits (IDPs) since February 2019 in order to still be able to drive in Europe following a no deal Brexit.

 

This means drivers have spent in excess of £3.2 million on them in the last six months, according to figures revealed by transport minister Michael Ellis in response to a written Parliamentary question.

 

Previously, IDPs were available from 89 Post Office branches, as well as from the RAC and AA. Around 100,000 were issued each year to British motorists looking to drive outside Europe. In February, though, the rules were changed so that IDPs were only available from 2,500 Post Office branches and nowhere else.

 

The Government issued advice to drivers saying UK driving licences may no longer be valid in EU and EEA countries following a no-deal Brexit, which could have occurred on 29th March or 12th April 2019, before the deadline was moved to 31st October

 

This led to a spike in demand for IDPs, with 282,000 applications in March and 163,000 in April. A number of Post Offices saw long queues, prompting a House of Lords report to call for IDPs to be available online.

 

Nicholas Lyes, head of roads policy at the RAC, commented: “It’s truly astonishing that more than half a million International Driving Permits have been issued since the Government took the service in-house. In one month alone, the number of IDPs issued was almost three times higher than the amount normally issued in an entire year.

 

“This shows that people who were planning to take their vehicles abroad most definitely heeded warnings about being ready to drive in the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit. During the Spring, this led to long queues and even shortages of IDPs at some Post Offices.

 

“As we head towards the next Brexit deadline of 31st October 2019, it is vital that Post Offices are set up to cope with a sudden surge in IDP requests so that drivers are not confronted with frustrating pre-holiday delays. However, much of this will be dependent on the terms of the UK’s departure from the EU.” By Graham Hill Thanks To Auto Express

New tyres come with grading that show their performance in the wet, noise levels and fuel efficiency. However, new cars with maximum tread are only in that condition for a limited time, the question is – how do the tyres perform once they are worn and in particular when the tread drops to the legal limit of 1.6mm.

 

With this in mind Michelin has stepped up its campaign for mandatory tests of tyres at the legal tread depth limit in a bid to reduce waste, cut CO2 and lower costs for customers.

It has backed an EU resolution by France, which, if adopted, could see tyre performance rated when worn as well as when new. The new procedure could be adopted this autumn, and a working group has been set up at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) to define the procedures for these tests, the reference tyres and regulatory thresholds.

Michelin says that although many tyres perform well when new, there are huge variations in performance at the 1.6mm legal minimum. It also claims that manufacturers can engineer tyres to perform well when worn but choose not to because there is no testing.

Michelin has campaigned for several years against the best practice theory of changing tyres at 3mm, suggesting it is too wasteful and quoting a study by Ernst & Young that predicted that running tyres to 1.6mm rather than 3mm would mean a reduction in tyre production of 128 million units in Europe alone, along with a CO2 saving of 6.6 million tonnes, and cost savings of more than £6 billion.

Some of that saving would be felt by fleet operators, many of whom adopt the best practice of changing tyres at 3mm. Having the confidence to run tyres until 1.6mm thanks to official testing would also allow employers to meet health and safety requirements.

Pierre Robert, vice-president of the ambition test programme at Michelin, said: “Dry grip improves by up to 10% on a worn tyre, and 70% of road accidents occur on dry roads. Fuel consumption is also better on a worn tyre, with up to a 20% improvement.

“But wet grip decreases, and currently it is difficult to predict performance. Tyre ratings when new are not necessarily a good indicator of performance at 3mm or when worn.”

Michelin also claims that as vehicles are increasingly equipped with new safety technology, it becomes more important that the tyres perform well to ensure the car’s features work properly.

Robert insisted that good performance when worn is a choice by the tyre manufacturer, as water dispersion ability at the legal minimum can be designed into the tread.

Tyres are currently tested and graded for fuel efficiency, wet weather performance and noise when new, giving consumers a clear indicator of performance in these areas.

Michelin says it supports the implementation of a minimum threshold for wet braking when worn to ensure consumers a minimum performance for all tyres on the market, which could see some manufacturers withdrawing tyres from the market if they fail the test.

Michelin also believes rolling resistance and noise should continue to be tested when new, as these improve with wear, although it does not want to change the labelling structure from the new tests.

Testing worn tyres
Michelin provided two circuit tests – one for handling and one for braking – to compare the performance of worn Michelin tyres with identical cars fitted with worn tyres from another premium brand.

 

For the braking test, we were asked to apply maximum braking force on a very wet road surface from 50mph to measure the stopping distance (calculated by GPS), while for the handling test we drove on a short lap with a mixture of wet and dry corners, gaining an impression of how the two sets of worn tyres performed.

 

Our braking test, taken twice on the same tyres – first for the Michelin, then for the other brand – showed a difference of more than 15m between the two, the other brand taking almost four car lengths more to stop.

 

The handling test showed the electronic stability control activating sooner and for longer in the rival brand tyre compared with the Michelin.

 

It is possible that other brands’ tyres perform better than Michelin when worn, but until mandatory tyre tests come into force, we won’t know before we make the choice. Michelin appears confident enough to face the challenge. By Graham Hill with thanks to Business Car.

In last night’s edition of Rip-Off Britain, we followed a police team as they stopped cars without insurance. A number recognition camera mounted in the back of a police van identified vehicles without insurance and when found would alert a policeman down the road who would pull over the driver.

 

Without insurance, drivers were issued a ticket with a fixed penalty along with 6 points on their licence. Then to add to the pain the car was immediately uplifted and taken to the police compound resulting in additional charges.

 

I had no sympathy for those with no insurance but they found drivers who had purchased insurance online only to find that even though they could show that they had a certificate and proof of payment out of their bank account they had their cars impounded and ended up in court. One driver who had been scammed received a fine and points on his licence for not having a licence even though he was paying monthly, hade a certificate and policy, both of which looked fine but were fakes.

 

The police warned about the scams. In it’s most simple form the scammers advertised on Social Media offering insurance at 75% off (that would never happen) and only a mobile phone number as a contact point. You would receive a policy and certificate – all fake. The scammer will normally want the whole premium upfront although the man in the programme was paying £120 monthly.

 

The next scam was an actual broker providing a genuine policy and certificate but with all your details changed. It would show a different address, age, no claims bonus etc. When all added up it would cause the rate to drop substantially with the scammer pocketing the difference in premium. The scammer will normally expect all the premium upfront.

 

The last scam would result in you receiving your policy and certificate from a broker but the broker then cancels the policy without the knowledge of the driver and receives the refund of the insurance premium. Again the broker will ask for the whole of the premium upfront.

 

If you want to check to see if your car is insured click on the link and enter your registration number: https://ownvehicle.askmid.com/#  By Graham Hill

As anyone who is looking to change their cars can tell you, like for like cars are rising in car and lease cost. Normal inflation, raw material increases, poor exchange rates, removal of discounts by European manufacturers, lack of stock, poor used car values and emission rule changes resulting in upgrades to engine and exhaust systems have all contributed to the increases.

 

So whilst you can offset some of the increases by changing to another vehicle altogether with some extra discount attached the EU is set to impose some new regulations that come into force in 2020 that will increase ALL cars. As we are set to retain these rules with or without a deal we won’t be able to avoid the increased costs.

 

New rules regarding safety features are set to be imposed on all new models launched from 2020 and all new vehicles sold 2 years later. This means that new cars that haven’t been fitted with the new safety features can be sold up to 2022, after which they must all be fitted with them.

 

A total of 11 standard safety features will be introduced at a total cost to the manufacturer of over £1,000, in some executive models substantially more. For most mid or top end cars this isn’t a great deal of money compared to the cost of the car but for entry models it will have a substantial effect.

 

The main changes proposed are as follows:

 

Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB): This is now fitted as standard to many mid and upper range cars whilst others include it as part of a safety package. The system senses an obstacle in front and applies the brakes for you. Considered to be a life saver this will have general support. AEB is now part of the NCAP safety test where fitted but whilst it is available on 51% of all cars sold in the UK, according to the SMMT only 30% of cars have it fitted as standard. Cost of fitting: £200 – £1,300.

 

Alcohol Interlock: Also known as built-in breathalysers these sensors will pick up if the driver is intoxicated and does not allow the car to start. Cost of fitting: £500 – £1,200.

 

Lane-Keep Assist: Fitted to many cars as standard this warns the driver if he’s drifting out of lane. Cost of fitting: £300 – £700

 

Accident Data Recorder: Best described as the accident black box in an aircraft. It will provide information to insurance providers in the event of an accident as well as vital information to those looking at ways to prevent accidents going forward. Cost of fitting: £300 – £500

 

Intelligent Speed Assist: This uses GPS mapping and speed sign recognition to warn drivers when they exceed the speed limit. Cost of fitting: £160 – £220

 

Parking Sensors: Most people are aware of them and their use. It looks as though rear sensors will be mandatory, not front. Cost of fitting: £100 – £250.

 

Driver Drowsiness and Distraction Monitors: As the name suggests the system picks up erratic driving behaviour as well as drifting out of lane. Cost of fitting: £150 – £400

 

These are the main additions aimed at reducing deaths and serious injuries across Europe. The aim is to eliminate road deaths by 2050 although it looks as though we aren’t on target as road deaths in the UK alone has flattened out. In 2017 there were 1,720 compared to 1,792 in 2016 which was the highest since 2011. So there you have it, the reason why rates are set to increase from 2020.

 

However, in the long term these changes will help to bring down the cost of autonomous cars as these will be essential developments when autonomous cars are designed made cheaper if the technology is already available. By Graham Hill