The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

According to Fleet News a challenging used car market in 2019 has had a significant negative impact on the optimism of leasing companies for residual values (RVs) in 2020, the Fleet News FN50 survey suggests.

 

With prices achieved for ex-lease cars falling month-on-month for at least the first nine months of last year, leasing companies have seen disposal profits eroded across the board. For end-user fleets, the past 12 months have proved a wise time to have outsourced RV risk.

 

In several cases, defleeted cars have failed to achieve the residual value forecast for them back in 2015 and 2016, and the majority of FN50 leasing companies have little faith that the situation will change this year.

 

More than half (52%) think RVs will fall in 2020, and only 15% forecast a rise.

 

This outlook is significantly gloomier than forecasts made this time last year for 2019, when 36% predicted residual values would fall, but it is more positive than the 12-month outlooks in both 2016 and 2017, when leasing companies were gripped by a doomsday scenario for the UK’s EU exit.

 

Brexit continues to blight the automotive sector, with the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) attributing the decline in both new and used car sales in 2019 to consumer confidence being “undermined by political and economic uncertainty”. The result is a temporary loss of appetite for big ticket purchases, it says, with vehicle owners holding onto their cars for longer.

 

Under normal circumstances, a decline in new car sales and a steady rise in new car prices should prompt an uplift in used car sales as buyers switch to secondhand models. But this tipping point in the supply-demand balance of the used car market has failed to materialise.

 

Cap HPI reports that franchised dealer groups have focused on their new car sales to qualify for quarterly manufacturer bonuses, at the expense of the used cars on their forecourts, and any shortfall in stock from fewer part-exchanges has been more than offset by the availability of used stock returning to the market after the record new cars sales of 2015 and 2016.

 

The result is FN50 leasing companies anticipating an average decline of 2.2% in RVs over the next 12 months. Among the 52% of leasing companies who predict a decrease, the average drop is 5.6%, a greater reduction than the 4.4% forecast a year earlier.

 

Even the most optimistic leasing companies are less bullish than previous years, with those forecasting an increase average a rise of 4.9%, compared with 3.6% in 2018 and 3% in 2017.

 

However, pricing experts are less bearish about the next 12 months.

 

“Things are not going to be as bad as they appeared over the first half of this year,” said Andrew Mee, Cap HPI head of forecast. “It’s our view that the market correction is pretty much over now.”

 

The far steeper than normal month-on-month drops in used car values in the second quarter of 2019 have come to an end, adds Mee, who says the “market is now behaving much more normally. Values will not increase, but they are not falling like they did earlier this year”.

 

Moreover, ‘peak diesel’ may have already occurred, with the sharp falls in the sale of new diesel cars in 2017 and 2018 potentially leading to an undersupply of used vehicles in 2020 and 2021. “And that will be good news,” said Mee.

 

But uncertainty remains. As one leasing director asked, will the rapidly evaporating demand for new diesel cars, down 20.3% year-on-year in 2019, and 30% lower in 2018 than 2017, be mirrored in the used car market, or will lower supply create a shortage that drives up prices?

 

Similar uncertainty is starting to bedevil the forecasting of residual values for electric and hybrid company cars. Company car drivers keen to minimise their benefit-in-kind (BIK) tax bills are fuelling double, and even triple digit, growth in the sales of some alternative fuel vehicles, but will this demand be matched in the used car sector where the tax advantages are far more limited?

 

In the short term at least, Mee sees a windfall heading the way of leasing companies with electric and hybrid cars on their fleets. Electric cars are worth significantly more now than they were a year ago, he says.

 

“Leasing companies will have been cautious in their RV forecasts, so they are in for a nice surprise, especially for smaller battery electric models like the Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe and Citroën C-Zero,” said Mee. “Hybrid cars have not been such a strong story, but their values have not fallen in line with petrol and diesel prices because they are around in smaller volumes and are seen as green alternatives to petrol and diesel.”

 

The critical figures for leasing companies, of course, are not book values, but the differentials between the RV forecasts made at the start of leases and the disposal prices achieved at the end.

 

Grosvenor Contracts Leasing is one of the few FN50 members with a positive outlook for residual values in 2020, having returned better defleet figures this year than last. The company’s commitment to preparing vehicles to the highest standards prior to auction – “dealers don’t want to be buying work,” said Shaun Barritt, CEO, Grosvenor Group – has underpinned the prices it achieves and maintained high first-time conversion rates.

 

Above all, the company’s success lies in

envisaging ideal forecourts in three or four years’ time, says Barritt, ensuring a broad mix of cars.

 

“Problems arise when you are bulk buying and bulk supplying, but seldom do we have very high volumes of one make or model,” he said.

 

This issue is repeatedly raised by smaller leasing companies, who compare their broad model mix and ability to be nimble when remarketing with the lack of flexibility of the largest FN50 companies that have to remarket scores and even hundreds of similar vehicles into a soft used car market.

 

In Northern Ireland, Donnelly Fleet sells virtually all of its passenger cars via nine used car centres run by the Donnelly Group dealer network.

 

“We are not dealing with big scales, so we’re not going to flood our forecourts with 30 or 40 identical vehicles,” said Tony Magee, general manager, Donnelly Fleet.

 

“The market here is smaller and a sizeable deal could see six-to-15 vehicles coming back, so I can put one into each of our centres. With these volumes we can be more optimistic about RVs.”

 

Even so, Donnelly Fleet is putting in contingencies across all fuel types, rather than writing residual value forecasts at 100% of Cap Monitor, adopting a position shared by many FN50 firms.

 

The turbulence in the used car market, which saw book values tumble by about 15% between January and August, last year, has cost leasing companies about £800 per car at disposal.

 

“You would have to go back 15 years to find drops like that,” said Nick Hardy, sales and marketing director of Ogilvie Fleet.

 

He adds that after years of relative stability, the leasing industry had become accustomed to relatively low levels of depreciation, making the drop in values such a bombshell last year.

 

Previously, market falls of the magnitude experienced in the first nine months of 2019 would have seen leasing companies encourage their clients into contract extensions, but such protection appears to have been absent this year.

 

Figures provided for the FN50 show that the proportion of cars returned late has actually fallen by seven percentage points to 32% in 2019, compared with 2018. Interestingly, the two companies with the most bullish forecasts for 2020 have very few late returned cars.

 

“Nothing should stop us being optimistic. I am cautiously optimistic that the worst is over. People will still want to change their cars,” said Hardy. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

UK drivers are risking their licences by breaking the speed limit when overtaking, shocking government figures have shown.

 

According to official stats, in 2017 almost 8,000 vehicles were involved in collisions when overtaking – and over half (55%) of these were cars.

 

Safety chiefs are now urging motorists to watch their speed when overtaking to avoid putting themselves and other road users at risk – and avoid getting hit with heavy fines or even losing their licence.

 

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) is keen to set aside myths that speeding is acceptable when overtaking another vehicle.

 

“The common-sense message is do not overtake unless you are sure you can complete the manoeuvre safely and without causing risk or inconvenience to another road user,” warns an RoSPA spokesman.

 

“Although you should complete an overtaking manoeuvre quickly, never exceed the speed limit for the road.”

 

As rule 125 of the Highway Code states, the speed limit is the absolute maximum you should drive on any particular road. This does not exclude overtaking.

 

Exceeding the speed limit for any reason is dangerous as well as illegal and could see you hit with penalty points, a hefty fine, or even being banned from the roads entirely.

 

While overtaking is, of course, legal, there are strict rules about how and when it is safe to overtake – the most fundamental being that you should only overtake ‘when it is safe and legal to do so’.

 

If you’re caught speeding while overtaking, you could collect a fine up to £2,500 and six points on your licence, depending on your speed and the road you’re caught on.

 

Should you get 12 penalty points or more in any three-year period, you’ll have your licence revoked. By Graham Hill thanks to the RAC

Could a vegan steak bake change the car industry? It might sound tenuous, but the phenomenal success of the unlikely offering from Greggs, along with myriad other vegan products from national chains that have been rolled out for ‘Veganuary’ this month, demonstrate that catering to the growing demand for animal-free products is big business.

 

The growing interest in veganism is driven by animal welfare, health and environmental concerns. It’s not just about eating only plant-based food but entirely avoiding using animal-based products – such as leather upholstery in cars.

 

Leather has long been used as a luxury material for car interiors – and it remains a popular choice among many. But the past few years have seen a major push by premium car firms to develop vegan leather alternatives, with some firms in the process of phasing out leather options entirely.

 

There are growing public calls for car firms to offer vegan options: six-time Formula 1 world champion Lewis Hamilton, for example, recently asked his employer Mercedes-Benz to phase out leather entirely.

 

Non-animal-based leather alternatives aren’t a new concept: for example, Mercedes has offered a synthetic material called Artico since 2003, Toyota uses a material called Softex and Ferrari offers Mycro Prestige as a vegan leather option on some models.

 

Yvonne Taylor, the director of corporate projects for animal rights organisation People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), told Autocar that, compared to industries such as fast food, fashion, aviation and hospitality, the car industry “has been slower to capitalise on the demand for vegan products”, adding: “this is ironic, given that many of the biggest companies has been using vegan leather for its high quality and durability for years.”

 

Taylor wants car firms to offer entirely vegan interior options for every model, saying that leather isn’t a byproduct of the meat industry, as many people think, but a “global, $100 billion-a-year industry that slaughters more than one billion cows, sheep, goats and pigs [annually].”

 

According to Taylor, a PETA investigation into cattle ranchers in Brazil who supply leather producers that sell producs to car firms, found evidence of factory farming, extreme crowding and animal cruelty.

 

For the car firms, it’s been a question of market demand: Mercedes says that leather remains the most popular choice for upholstery in its cars, although it is developing new vegan leather alternatives. And other premium firms are reacting to the change in consumer demand, too.

 

Land Rover has been one of the leaders in this area, working with partners on a range of non-leather fabrics: the Evoque and Velar are offered with a premium wool-polyester blend from Kvadrat, a synthetic suede by Miko and a eucalyptus fibre textile. In a recent interview, Land Rover’s chief colours and materials designer Amy Fascella said: “Premium car customers still love luxury, but they’re also dialling back the consumerism and doing some good if they can.”

 

Tesla has phased out the use of leather entirely from its upholstery options, in part because of pressure brought by PETA after it bought shares in the California-based EV maker. And Volvo’s new sister brand Polestar will offer only leather-free interiors, using a water-based PVC material called Weavetech that was developed in-house. Polestar boss Thomas Ingenlath says it demonstrates that “our care for the environment goes beyond the electric drivetrain”, with the aim to “promote and accelerate the shift of the car industry towards leather-free interiors.”

 

The drive by the car industry towards reducing carbon emissions is also prompting a move away from leather – and that’s partly why the forthcoming Volkswagen ID 3 and Ford Mustang Mach-E EVs will use only animal-free materials.

 

Taylor says the production of animal-derived materials such as leather is “as toxic to the Earth as it is cruel to animals.” Indeed, the UN estimates animal agriculture – including the leather and wool industries – creates 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

 

Taylor refers to cattle and sheep as “the Humvees of the animal kingdom”, due to the volume of methane they produce, and adds that turning animal skin into leather involves using environmentally harmful toxic materials.

 

The leather industry believes its product has a strong and necessary future, however.

 

The director of Leather UK, Dr Kerry Senior, said: “The reality is that more than 90% of the world’s population eat meat, and that consumption is rising. While this is the case, more than seven million tonnes of hides and skins will be produced every year, which will need to be dealt with. The most efficient and elegant solution to that problem is the production of leather. Leather is unarguably a byproduct of the meat industry.”

 

He also pointed out that vegan alternatives to leather all use synthetic chemicals themselves in their production.

 

The challenge for car firms is finding premium materials that they can produce in volume and that feel similar to and can be as durable as leather over potentially a decade or more of hard use in a car. To test its Weavetech fabric, Polestar artificially aged it for 6000 hours, including submerging it in a ‘boiling water-like environment’ for four weeks.

 

New production processes are creating new options, too, with new materials often shown on new concept cars.

 

With demand for leather remaining strong, the car industry is unlikely to stop offering such interiors in the immediate future – just as Greggs still sells real steak bakes. But as demand for vegan and similar ethical products grows, car firms will be keen to stake a claim on that business.

 

Some of the ideas being developed:

 

Volkswagen ID Roomzz – apple skin leather:  This electric large SUV concept features a leather-style fabric made by mixing polyurethane with apple skin left over from juice production.

 

Bentley EXP 100GT – grape leather: Red wine and upholstery don’t usually mix well, but Bentley’s 100th anniversary concept used a material made from grape skins that are a waste product from wine production.

 

Mercedes-Benz Vision AVTR – recycled bottles: The futuristic Vision AVTR features Dinamica microfibre, a material made from old clothing, plastic bottles and flags. Similar fabrics are already in use in some production cars, including a number of Volvos and the new Renault Zoe.  By Graham Hill thanks to Autocar

Mitsubishi has come under investigation in Germany amid reports that some of its models are fitted with an emissions cheating device.

 

German police raided 10 sites in several locations including Frankfurt, Hanover and Regensburg as part of the investigation. Among the companies being investigated is parts supplier Denso, producer of diesel injectors and pumps for Mitsubishi models, which is said to be co-operating with investigators.

 

Three properties searched belong to manufacturing group Continental AG, which is reported to be listed as a witness in the case.

 

An official statement from German prosecutors said: “There is a suspicion that the engines are equipped with a so-called shutdown device.” A similar component identified on 11 million Volkswagen Group models in 2014 sparked the notorious Dieselgate scandal.

 

A Mitsubishi spokesman in Germany confirmed to motoring magazine Automobilwoche that the company was under investigation but emphasised that Mitsubishi Europe, as an importer, isn’t involved in development or production of new cars.

 

An official statement said: “Mitsubishi Motors will of course collaborate and contribute to this investigation.”

 

The engines in question are 1.6-litre and 2.2-litre four-cylinder diesel units that were sold as conforming to Euro 5 and Euro 6 emissions requirements. German police have asked anyone who has acquired a car with either motor since 2014 to contact them. By Graham Hill thanks to Autocar

Drivers should book an eyesight test in 2020, says GEM Motoring Assist.

 

This, according to the road safety organisation, would help in reducing collisions and injuries on the UK’s roads.

 

GEM road safety officer Neil Worth, said: “What better time than the year 2020 to get your vision checked properly and ensure the risks you face as a driver or rider are as low as possible?

 

“You should only drive when you’re sure you can see properly.

 

“After all, poor eyesight is linked to more than 3,000 fatal and serious injury collisions every year.

 

“We continue to be concerned that there are too many people driving whose eyesight has deteriorated to a dangerous level.

 

“This puts their own safety at risk, as well as the safety of others sharing the same road space.”

 

The eyesight test was introduced to the driving test in 1937 and has only been changed in minor ways over the years to reflect changing number plate sizes.

 

It is the only eyesight test drivers are required to take until they reach the age of 70.

 

Opticians should examine a driver’s field of view, as is done in America, to check whether motorists can see and react to what’s happening around them, according to GEM.

 

Worth added: “So this year we are encouraging drivers to ensure their eyesight goes beyond 20/20.

 

“After all, 20/20 is only an expression of normal visual acuity, but the requirements for safe driving go beyond clarity of central vision.

 

“A detailed professional eye examination will mean any problems can be identified and – in the vast majority of cases – corrected, meaning the risks are reduced considerably.

 

“So many people are staying behind the wheel into their eighties and beyond.

 

“This, coupled with the greater volume of traffic and an increase in distractions, both inside and outside the vehicle, points to the clear need for more regular and detailed eyesight testing.”

 

“Asking someone to read a number plate at 20.5 metres (67 feet) cannot on its own be a measure of their fitness to continue driving.

 

“A proper eye test will also measure peripheral awareness, eye coordination, depth perception, ability to focus and colour vision.”

 

GEM has called for drivers to have an eye test every two years, ensuring there are no safety concerns about their vision and to deal with any issues at an early stage.

 

The organisation is also calling for every new driver to produce evidence of a recent eye test when first applying for a licence, and to obtain a mandatory vision test every 10 years in line with licence renewal. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

More than half of all drivers have either hit or had a near miss with an animal on UK roads, new research from GoCompare Car Insurance suggests.

 

Two-thirds (68%) of respondents, meanwhile, said they would not know what to do if they hit a larger animal, such as a deer or a badger while driving.

 

The animals most likely to be involved in an incident with a car are:

 

• Bird e.g. pigeon (27%)
• Cat (23%)
• Large game bird e.g. pheasant (20%)
• Deer (18%)
• Dog (17%)
• Rabbit (17%)

 

 

When asked what kind of road the accident happened on, two-thirds (68%) of drivers said they had been on a country road, followed by one in four (24%) on a town or city road.

 

While the animal running out into the road was the biggest reason for the incident (66%), driving at night was blamed by 22% of drivers. Driving too fast or being distracted contributed to 8% of the incidents.

 

The research also showed that animal-related accidents can happen at any time of day with broad daylight (32%) being the most common of the driving conditions, followed by evening/dusk (29%).

 

When asked what action they took, 39% of drivers admitted to driving on after hitting an animal, with those living in Scotland (47%) being the least likely to stop.

 

What is clear from the research, however, is the impact that hitting an animal or having a near-miss can have on the driver and the car.

 

When asked how they felt after hitting or nearly hitting an animal, only 16% of the drivers involved said they weren’t affected by the incident at all.

 

Men were nearly three times more likely to feel unaffected (21%) than women (8%). More than half (55%) admitted they were shaken by the incident, while 28% said they have slowed their driving down as a result. Fewer than one in ten (8%) said the incident had affected their confidence when driving.

 

In terms of vehicle damage, 18% of drivers who hit an animal sustained damage to their vehicle, with 10% resulting in an insurance claim.

 

Comparing genders, men were twice as likely to badly damage their car after hitting an animal compared to women.

 

Animal involved with car incident	Percentage of drivers reporting
Bird	27.5%
Cat	22.7%
Gamebird	20.0%
Deer	17.8%
Rabbit	17.1%
Dog	16.9%
Squirrel	16.0%
Fox	15.7%
Hedgehog	11.9%
Sheep	10.3%
Badger	8.9%
Cattle	6.6%
Horse	6.6%
Other or unidentified	5.8%

 

 

Lee Griffin, founder and CEO of GoCompare said: “Sadly, as our research shows, accidents and near misses with animals on our roads are something most drivers have experienced.

 

“While some encounters may not be dangerous, a close call with an animal on the road can happen anywhere and at any time. They can leave drivers badly shaken or worse, lead to accidents and expensive repair bills.

 

“Animals are unpredictable and as a result, these incidents are unexpected but are increasingly common, as we all spend more time in our cars.

 

“Often the type of animal isn’t the issue. The action taken by a driver to avoid a bird can be just as dangerous as hitting a large mammal.

 

“Drivers on country roads need to take particular care, especially when driving at dusk or in the dark at this time of year when daylight time is shorter.

 

“But the reality is that we all need to be more aware of the likelihood of meeting an animal of some kind on the road.

 

“Being mindful of our speed and the distractions around us will help reduce the risk of a serious accident if the worst does happen.”

 

What is clear is that many drivers wouldn’t know what to do in the event of an accident involving an animal, but GoCompare has spoken to Adam Grogan, head of wildlife at the RSPCA.

 

He said: “Each year the RSPCA receives and attends several thousand calls regarding road traffic accidents involving deer. As a result of this, we always urge people to be cautious when driving in an area with known wildlife nearby and pay heed to warning signs indicating that wild animals may be around.

 

“If you do hit an animal while driving, we would advise people to stop and check (if it’s safe to do so), as the animal may be more seriously injured than they appear.

 

“If you find an injured wild animal, contact the RSPCA’s 24-hour emergency line on 0300 1234 999 for further advice on what to do.

 

“Always report any deer-vehicle collisions to the police and try to remember to record any deer-vehicle incidents at Deer Aware.

 

“Animals can scratch and bite when frightened, particularly if they are injured, so be cautious and apply common sense.

 

“Please do not try to handle or transport any injured deer, foxes, badgers, otters, swans, geese or birds of prey; keep a safe distance from them and call our emergency line for assistance.

 

“Always wear gloves when handling all other animals and please take them to a vet for treatment where possible.

 

“We also urge people to take care in dangerous locations, like a busy road, and ask people to always report any animal obstructing a highway to the police and call for help if you can’t reach the animal safely.”

 

Find out more about what to do if you find an injured wild animal on the RSPCA’s website.

 

Richard Leonard, head of road safety at Highways England, added: “We urge drivers to look out for animal warning signs which let you know that animals are known to be about in the area, or likely to be roaming across the road.

 

“You may be well-travelled and on a known route where you’ve never seen an animal before – but there may one in nearby foliage or woodlands.

 

“We want everyone to reach their destination safely – so my top tip is if you see an animal warning signs slow down, remain vigilant and keep your distance.”

 

Key points

 

• By law, you are required to tell the police if you’ve hit a dog, horse, cattle, sheep, pig or goat.
• If you hit any animal, it’s best to report it to the police, particularly if it could be a pet, so that the owner can be informed.
• If you see a dead animal by the roadside, you can contact the local council

 

By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News and GoCompare

UK drivers have revealed that ‘not indicating’ is the most annoying driving habit.

 

In a survey compiled by Click4Reg, drivers outlined the top 10 things that regularly irritate them on the road.

 

Not indicating was voted as the worst driving habit by 55% of respondents.

 

More than half (52%) also felt that ‘leaving full beams on’ was annoying, placing it second. The study shows that women find this habit more annoying than men (55% of women stated it annoyed them, compared to only 49% of men).

 

Driving 10 mph below the speed limit seems to infuriate many UK drivers, with 39% finding it frustrating.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of those that voted in the survey, 87% also admitted doing at least one of the annoying habits.

 

Looking at the difference between genders, 39% of females stated that their worst driving habit was bad parking while nearly half of men (43%) admitting their worst habit was speeding.

 

The study also asked its participants which drivers they found most annoying on the roads. Elderly drivers were picked as the most irritating, despite young drivers being much more likely to cause a crash.

 

Young male drivers were rated the second most annoying and lorry drivers appeared in third, with 26% finding them irritating.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By Graham Hill with thanks to Fleet News and Click4Reg.

The RAC saw a 20% upturn in pothole-related breakdowns in the last quarter of 2019, compared to the same period the year before.

 

It attended more than 2,000 breakdowns in the three months to the end of 2019 believed to be as a result of potholes – 300 more than during the same period in 2018.

 

The breakdown data, released to coincide with National Pothole Day, also showed that of all the breakdowns experienced by RAC members in 2019, just short of 9,200 were for pothole-related faults such as distorted wheels, broken suspensions springs and damaged shock absorbers.

 

While this was down from 13,000 in 2018, a year which saw a dramatic increase in potholes following the so-called ‘Beast from the East’, it still represented 1.1% of all breakdowns attended.

 

Between October and December 2019, 0.9% of all breakdowns were for pothole-related faults, up from 0.8% in the previous three months (July to September 2019) and up from 0.8% in the fourth quarter of 2018.

 

RAC head of roads policy Nicholas Lyes said: “We might so far be experiencing a milder but wetter winter than in the last couple of years, but our figures clearly show the problem of potholes has not gone away.

 

“Our patrols are still attending on average around one pothole-related breakdown every hour of the day.”

 

The RAC’s Pothole Index, which is an accurate long-term indicator of the health of the UK’s roads, suggests the widespread problem of potholes and poor-quality roads remains as the Index currently stands at 1.7, down from 1.8 in the third quarter of 2019.

 

This means drivers are 1.7 times more likely to break down as a result of pothole-related damage than they were back in 2006 when the RAC first started collecting data.

 

Lyes continued: “We anticipate the Government will pledge further funds to help cash-strapped councils mend potholes in the March Budget, but such pledges are only chipping away at the problem, and they’re unfortunately not addressing the root cause of why so much of the UK is still characterised by crumbling road surfaces.

 

“What we need is for central Government to think differently about how councils are funded to maintain the roads under their control.

 

“Short-term commitments of cash, while welcome, are not enough on their own – councils need the security of long-term funding so they can plan proper preventative road maintenance.”

 

Lyes believes a solution to the UK’s long-term pothole problem is possible. “From this year, the money raised from vehicle excise duty in England will be ring-fenced to help fund motorways and major A-roads over successive five-year periods,” he said. “But as yet, there is no similar model for local roads where the vast majority of drivers begin and end their journeys.

 

“We believe this could easily be changed by ring-fencing 2p a litre from existing fuel duty revenue to generate £4.7bn of additional funding over five years.

 

“Pothole-free roads shouldn’t be a ‘nice to have’ in 2020, drivers should surely be able to expect the vast majority of roads they drive on to be of a good standard, especially given they pay around £40bn in motoring-related tax every year.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Researchers from car leasing giants LeaseCar.uk have revealed the English councils that received the highest number of compensation requests from vehicle owners due to pothole damage over 2018-2019.

 

They have also revealed the amounts paid out to motorists, with Surrey topping both lists.

 

A total of 37,578 relevant claims were made across England during the period in question, with poorly maintained roads meaning councils compensated motorists to the tune of £3.5 million.

 

Surrey County Council received by far the most claims for pothole damage – 3,533 – and paid out the most in compensation – £323,222.

 

Hampshire (2,665), Hertfordshire, Kent and Northamptonshire County Councils also faced over 2,000 claims each throughout 2018-2019, with counties such as Essex (1,841) and West Sussex among those comfortably topping 1,000.

 

Other local authorities paying out substantial amounts of compensation include Bury Metropolitan Borough (£217,992.15) in Greater Manchester.

 

Cumbria, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Northamptonshire (£214,804.22), Warwickshire, Suffolk and Devon also paid out six figure sums.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The only councils that didn’t have to use a single penny of taxpayers’ money to compensate motorists were the Greater London Boroughs of Islington and Sutton.

 

Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, Sefton Borough Council on Merseyside and St Helens Council were among others to keep compensation for pothole damage to a minimum.

 

They paid out just £353, £582.60 and £594 respectively, with the local authorities in Harrow, Hounslow, Redbridge and Waltham Forest also received bills of less than £1,000.

 

Only two claims were issued, meanwhile, against Richmond upon Thames Borough Council – 21 less than any other area in England.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A spokesperson for LeaseCar.uk said: “Taking greater steps to repair and prevent potholes would improve safety for road users and be popular among the voters across the country that councillors are accountable to.

 

“It could also ultimately reduce councils’ costs by bringing down the number of successful compensation claims by long suffering vehicle owners.

 

“We’d advise any driver who drives over a significant pothole, or is worried their vehicle may have been damaged, to urgently check their tyres and suspension.”

 

The data was obtained by Freedom of Information request and covers the period January 1 2018 to October 17 2019.

 

The full breakdown of English councils and their claims for compensation is available here.

 

To report a pothole, or to find out if you suffer from damage from one and wonder if you can claim for compensation, visit the RAC’s pothole online guide.

 

By Graham Hill with thanks to Fleet News

The last thing you want to do is have to key in your car registration  number when you are nipping down the shops.

 

What is worse is when you key in the registration and get a character or number wrong resulting in a fine for not having paid the fee. You then have a fight on your hands but that is about to change.

 

Car park operators have been told by the British Parking Association not to penalise motorists who make a mistake when typing vehicle details.

 

It has published a revised code of practice for parking on private land, which includes guidance on grace periods, self-ticketing as well as motorist keying errors.

 

The enhancements, it says, will ensure Approved Operator Scheme (AOS) members are delivering a high standard of service for motorists.

 

A minor keying in error is categorised as one letter or number incorrect or letters and numbers in the wrong order.

 

A major keying in error is one that has multiple number and letter keying errors, the first three digits only have been recorded or a completely incorrect registration number is used.

 

Steve Clark, BPA head of business operations, said: “Following consultation with key stakeholders, including consumer groups and Government, we are delighted to release the latest version of our leading AOS Code of Practice.

 

“We recognise that genuine mistakes can occur, which may result in a parking charge being issued even when a motorist can demonstrate they paid for their parking. In recognition of this we have further clarified the situation for all parties.”

 

He added: “Motorists will still need to appeal, but we expect our members to deal with them appropriately at the first appeal stage.”

 

The BPA continues to work closely with Government on The Parking (Code of Practice) Act. The Act, it says, supports its call for a standard setting body, a single code of practice, and a single independent appeals service.

 

John Gallagher, lead adjudicator at Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA), welcomed the publication of the revised code.

 

He said: “The revised code will bring greater clarity for motorists and parking operators alike on issues such as simple keying errors and grace periods.

 

“The introduction of a section on keying errors, requiring parking operators to cancel Parking Charge Notices in certain circumstances and reduce the amount to only administration costs in others, is particularly welcome.

 

“This addition to the code means that, for the first time, POPLA will be able to make decisions on keying errors without referral back to the operator.

 

“We would like to thank the BPA for listening to our feedback on this and other issues – and involving us in ongoing discussions on the best way to ensure a fair system that protects motorists.” By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

This is an interesting case forwarded by a lawyer friend of mine. Buy a faulty car and the law is on your side. Your rights were strengthened by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Within the first 30 days you can return a faulty car and demand your money back but we all know that life isn’t that simple with dealers pretty much refusing point-blank to take back the car.

 

This can lead to a lot of distress which isn’t covered by the act but is the point of this case. Here is what was said by the defending lawyer, defending the car dealer:

 

The driver took the dealer to court claiming that the car he bought was faulty. An element of the claim contained words to the effect that they demanded in the region of £2,000 in compensation for the distress caused – resulting in a deterioration in the buyer’s mental health.

 

Part of the defence was that if any part of a claim was for damages (compensation) for personal injury (physical, mental or psychological) then the whole claim was subject to compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol on Personal Injury.

 

And that as the amount sought was over £1,000 the case had to be allocated to fast track not to small claims. £1.000 is the threshold for personal injury claims to be held in the “small claims” track of the county court.  The lawyers invited the court to dismiss the whole of the claim because none of the claimant’s actions prior to issuing the claim had followed the mandatory Pre-Action protocol.

 

The court held a preliminary hearing and convinced the claimant not to pursue the mental health aspect of the claim.  According to the lawyers, they suspected that the Judge was generally unimpressed by the claimant and encouraged the parties to come to a settlement out of court purely on the issue of the value of the car alone – and nothing else.

 

The parties agreed to such a settlement there and then, which was endorsed by the court – but not giving the claimant anything towards the substantial issue fee that the claimant had paid to issue the claim in the first place.

 

Whilst the lawyers were obviously pleased with the outcome this is a real problem. I hear all the time about problems faced by drivers with dealers, both new car and used car dealers, who provide a dreadful service and cause a great deal of unnecessary grief which is never compensated for. Something needs to be done to stop disputes getting to these ridiculous level where consumers are affected mentally. By Graham Hill

 

 

A Dealer Scam Costing Them A Fortune

I don’t usually have a lot of sympathy for dealers but when I read about this scam going round catching dealers out I had to feel sorry as they’ve done nothing wrong. It involves taking payment for cars by Debit Card. Here’s the scam as revealed by a lawyer with a warning to car dealers:

 

The scenario is this. Customer purchases a vehicle. They pay with one, maybe two debit cards. They collect the car (but more usually ask to have it delivered) and are very happy. They are so happy in fact that they later look to purchase a second car.

 

 

The previous sale went without issues, there have been no complaints and so you sell the second car. They may come back for a third or more. All is well. Then, out of the blue 3 months later, your bank take all the money for those cars out of your account and so you have no cars, no cash.

 

The buyer has done a bunk and you are left with a fight on your hands to a) track down the vehicle and b) try and make a civil case that title never passed to your original buyer (the fraudster) and so you can have the car back.

 

These cases are never straightforward as you, as a car dealer, can imagine as you could find yourself in the position of the dealer who has been the victim of the chargeback or you might be the dealer who purchased the car further down the line in good faith. Who wins? Well, that is for the court to decide as the police will generally consider it a civil matter and each case can be determined on its merits as all these cases will have different facts despite being the similar bigger picture.

 

Going forward, be aware that chargebacks can typically be made by a cardholder up to 4 months after a sale. Bank transfer is a much better option. If someone is buying multiple cars with debit cards, then ensure it raises a red flag, even when you have all the information needed for the bank to process the transaction and especially, if they ask to have the car delivered.

 

So it’s not all one-sided with dealers always coming out on top. This scam is costing dealers a great deal of money. OK, sympathy for dealers over! By Graham Hill