The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

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.

Having been diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes earlier this year I checked to see if I should report the condition to the DVLA or my insurance company. I’m pleased to say that thanks to a change in diet, sadly the removal(ish) of chocolate, increased exercise and medication I’m now nearly back to the safe level. However, if you have type 2 diabetes it is a reportable condition. Certainly, if you are taking Insulin.

According to the DVLA website you need to take advice from your GP as other medication is questionable. If it affects your driving then it should be reported. Remember if you have any medical condition that could affect your driving it should be reported to the DVLA as well as your insurer. If you don’t do it you can be fined up to £1,000 by not reporting to the DVLA and if you don’t report to the condition to your Insurer and make a claim they could refuse to pay out.

Here is a list of conditions that are reportable:

Notifiable conditions are anything that could affect your ability to drive safely. They can include:

diabetes or taking insulin

syncope (fainting)

heart conditions (including atrial fibrillation and pacemakers)

sleep apnoea

epilepsy

strokes

glaucoma

If you are unsure about a particular condition take advice from your GP. If you feel that you have a reportable condition you can complete a form online for submission. Go to:

https://www.gov.uk/driving-medical-conditions

By Graham Hill

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

Every year for the last 20 years Auto Express carry out tests on various car care products and award the best with their Product Award. They take account of price, ease of use, performance etc. I thought it would be handy to list their top award winners so far this year. For more details, you can search for Auto Express Best Products. In the meantime here are the best products:

Car Washes: Halfords Car Wash & Wax, cost £2 for 1 litre. Whilst this was the cheapest tested it wasn’t this that caused it to win. You use a little more than other brands but it is much cheaper.

Clay Bars: Bilt-Hamber Auto Clay Regular, cost £9.95 for 200g Clay bars cut through contaminants that bond to the painted surface of a car. This was one of the best priced and the best performer.

Polishes: Angelwax Perfect Polish, cost £9.95 for 500ml. This one saw off some of the more popular brands such as Simoniz, Autoglym an Autobrite. There was little to choose between Autobrite and Angelwax so in the end it was down to price with Angelwax edging it.

Waterless Cleaners: Meguiar’s Waterless Wash And Wax Anywhere, cost £16 for 768ml. Strangely liked for its smell as well as its performance simply spray, wipe then buff and admire the shine. The shine was also the longest lasting.

Waxes and Sealants: Bilt-Hamber Double Speed-Wax, £14.95 for 250ml. Apparently, you can pay up to £50 for a carnauba paste(which is what this is) so great value for money. 24 were tested over 9 weeks with this one coming out on top.

Wheel Cleaners: Bilt-Hamber Auto-Wheel, cost £12.99 for 1litre. In this case the smell was horrendous – eggy in nature. However, the cost and the efficiency of the product made it to the top of the list of 19 tested.

Wheel Wax & Sealants: Wonder Wheels Wheel Sealant, cost £6.50 for 300ml. Best performance and best price this product takes time because you need to properly clean the alloys before applying and it takes time for the product to cure – but well worth the wait apparently.

Tyre Shine: CarPlan TyreSlik, £4.10 for 500ml. This is uniquely the only product tested by Auto Express that has remained in the number 1 position since testing began 20 years ago. Well done!

Upholstery Cleaner: Simoniz Upholstery & Carpet Cleaner, cost £3.18 for 500ml. This was one of the only foam cleaners with a brush fitted to the can. Most others were trigger applicators but none performed as well as this cleaner and low cost.

Screenwashes: Prestone Extreme Performance Screen Wash, cost £3.50 for 2litres. This wash, ready made up was great value for money, cleaned the screen well and won in both categories, winter and summer with the summer version cheaper than the competition.

Headlamp Bulbs: Philips Racing Vision, cost £25.99 for a pair. By far the best bulbs out of 20 tested, brightest and topped all but one of the various tests.

Sat Navs: Tom Tom Go, cost One Year’s Subscription £14.99. In this category they tested both sat-nav units and mobile phone apps with this app being the winner. They’ve stuffed many of the features of their top navs into the app.

Dash Cams: Nextbase 612 GW, cost £249.99. The cam has a radius of 150 degrees and records in 4K Ultra HD. The camera picked up pedestrians in the dark and could read number plates from afar. A polarised filter sits on top of the lens making the colours sharper. Given the quality it offers very good value for money.

Tyres: Continental Premium Contact 6, cost £93.20. Wet or dry this car came out on top, sharing the top spot with Michelin in the dry but by far the best in the wet with no other car coming close. All round a very good tyre.

Winter Tyres: Continental Winter Contact TS860, cost £117.22. Not the best in the snow but in the wet that dominates British winters it was streets above the competition. Changing tyres between summer and winter is still not popular but for those that need to change tyres they refer to this tyre as a Truly Remarkable Tyre.

All Season Tyres: Continental All Season Contact, cost £120.64. Out of all the tyres tested this tyre came either first or second in every test making it by far the best all season tyre even after Continental had said that you either changed tyres between summer and winter or put up with a compromise. This is their first attempt at an all season tyre.

Many thanks to Auto Express – By Graham Hill

Poor Car Condition: 73,500 drivers were taken to court in England and Wales for keeping a car in a condition that invalidates their insurance. The message here is that having a car insured comes with conditions. If your car hasn’t been properly serviced and maintained you could have an insurance claim thrown out.

EV Fast Charging: 100 miles of range can be added to an electric car in just 10 minutes when charging using BP’s new 150kW Rapid Chargers. What they don’t tell you is the cost

Car Maintenance: 61% of drivers don’t check their tyre pressures or oil at least once a month. Low tyre pressures can increase fuel consumption and tyre wear as well as make the car dangerous. Not checking the oil could lead to engine damage.

Cars Stolen: There were 307 cars stolen every single day in the UK during the 2017/18 financial year. More still needs to be done to protect drivers from car thieves. Make sure you are properly protected if you have keyless entry.

By Graham Hill

It’s obscene the way that some law firms advise dealers on what to do to deprive consumers of their legal rights. If you are a regular reader of my news items you will have read how dealers are advised to repair faulty cars during the rejection period of 14 days ‘under warranty’.

This is because if you reserve your right to reject the car but allow the dealer to fix the problem he only has one chance to fix it. But if he repairs the car ‘under warranty’ that does not count as his one chance so in law if the car hasn’t been fixed he can have another attempt.

So what are they now saying to dealers to deprive customers of their rights? Again it is to do with faulty cars just after ‘purchase’. I say purchase but what I mean is financed on a PCP or Hire Purchase agreement. They are telling dealers to forcefully explain that if there is a problem with the car it is their responsibility and to bring it back for them to sort out.

The reason for saying this is that if you have a rejectionable complaint you should take it up with the finance company and not the dealer as it is the finance company that owns the car and is responsible for the quality of ‘the goods’. But if you complain to the finance company according to the lawyers they are more likely to roll over and agree to a rejection or a repair than the dealer would.

If a consumer doesn’t get satisfaction from the finance company they can refer the case to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) which will determine the case not on the law but whatever he deems to be ‘reasonable’.

Finance companies don’t like dealing with the FOS as it costs them money so better to accept the rejection then go for the dealer who is then over a barrel as most dealers wouldn’t have the resources to fight the legal team of a lender.

The agreements between the dealers and the finance providers are generally heavily stacked against the dealer so the lenders are less likely to fight the consumer if they know they can pursue the dealer for the costs.

So the point I’m making is if you have a complaint about a car that you bought on a PCP or HP agreement take it up with the finance provider NOT the dealer, you ar more likely to get a result. By Graham Hill

A must read report whether you are an employer or you drive your own car on company business, even if it is only to drop off the post at a local post box or post office!

According to this report in Fleet News one in six at-work drivers says they have been involved in an accident when taking a call from a colleague, new research suggests.

The study, commissioned by Driving for Better Business (DfBB), also revealed a worrying lack of checks for employees driving their own car for work, the so-called grey fleet.

It showed that half of business leaders polled (49%) expect their employees to answer their phone at any time, including while driving for work.

Almost half of employees (45%) said they experience stress when they receive a call from their boss while driving for work. One in six employees who drive for work (17%) said they have been involved in an incident when driving for work due to a phone call from a colleague.

Despite it being illegal, one in 20 executive directors and one in eight employees thought the hard shoulder was a safe place to take a phone call.

Meanwhile, six in 10 (61%) employees admitted they do not always, or only sometimes, find a safe place to make or receive a work call when driving for work with just over one in eight (13%) thinking it safe to take a phone call while parked on the hard shoulder of a motorway.

The findings also showed that despite three quarters (75%) of executive directors claiming to ensure employees are aware of their legal obligations in relation to driving for work, nearly half (45%) of employees surveyed who drive their personal car for work said they have not been given a copy of their employer’s driving for work policy.

It found that managers were not performing checks on grey fleet drivers and 60% of respondents said they were unsure if any or how many employees use their own car to drive for work purposes.

Furthermore, nearly a half of employees who use their personal car for work purposes (45%) said they have not been given a copy of their employer’s driving for work policy.

The survey reveals that 90% of drivers used their personal cars for work journeys, 75% doing so at least once a week, yet a third of these drivers (33%) were not insured to do so – saying they do not have cover for business use on their vehicle insurance. Only a third (34%) said their employer had checked their driving licence.

The survey also found a poor approach to vehicle checks and maintenance by employees. Nearly three quarters of employees who drive for work (74%) said when they check their tyres they simply take a quick glance to see that tyres look ‘OK’.

Simon Turner, campaign manager for Driving for Better Business said: “The report shows a disparity between what employers and employees are saying when driving for work.”

He says senior managers are failing to communicate and implement a robust driving for work policy to keep those who drive for work safe, particularly for the grey fleet.

“Leaders are failing to carry out basic due diligence checks such as ensuring that all employees have a driving licence or vehicle insurance,” he said.

“At the same time, the study highlights employees are putting themselves at risk while driving for work, not checking that vehicles are roadworthy and exhibit reckless behaviours when using their mobile phone.”

He continued: “Leaders must implement a driving for work policy that enforces legal and ethical obligations on all employees that drive on work-related journeys.

“Regular checks need to be put in place to ensure that employees have read and understood the guidelines laid out in the driving for work policy. In doing so, the associated risk to road users and pedestrians is reduced.”

Driving for Better Business promotes a free seven-step programme of action to reduce occupational road risk. Organisations that introduce the DfBB programme have experienced significant operational, financial and employee benefits.

Turner concluded: “A good practice driving for work policy ensures that at a minimum, organisations are compliant with all relevant legislation and guidelines.

Once implemented, these policies complement more general employee safety and wellness programmes as well as introduce efficiencies that reduce costs associated with employees that drive for work purposes.”

DfBB surveyed 1,006 employees and 255 executive directors from the UK. The survey was conducted by Censuswide. By Graham Hill with thanks to Fleet News.