The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

The number of people killed in road accidents where the driver was over the drink drive limit has not dropped since 2010.

 

Provisional figures released by the Department for Transport (DfT) estimate there were 240 such deaths in 2018, exactly the same rate of fatalities ten years ago.

 

The total number of casualties caused by drink driving increased to 8,700 in 2018, up 1% from 2017.

 

The number of accidents where a driver was over the alcohol limit rose by 4% to 5,900 in 2018, compared with the previous year.

 

Road safety charity IAM RoadSmart is calling for the government to introduce a ‘smarter’ package of measures to tackle this important issue.

 

Measures being advocated by IAM RoadSmart include a further lowering of the drink-drive limit in England and Wales to match Scotland, wider use of drink-drive rehabilitation courses and also following the example of Scotland by seizing the vehicles of repeat offenders.

 

Neil Greig, director of policy and research at IAM RoadSmart, said: “Once again progress on reducing the toll of death and injuries from drink-driving has stalled.

 

“There is no one simple answer to reducing these figures, but IAM RoadSmart believe we now need a much smarter package of measures from the government including a lower drink-drive limit to reinforce good behaviour, fast-track of evidential roadside testing machines to release police resources and tailored approaches to help drivers with alcohol problems.

 

“Rehabilitation courses work and we think all those convicted of drink-driving should be sent on one automatically rather than having to opt in.

 

“More use of alcohol interlocks and extra penalties such as vehicle forfeiture, as used in Scotland, could all be part of a more joined-up approach to the problem.”

 

Hunter Abbott, managing director of breathalyser firm AlcoSense, says that nly 42% of drivers involved in an accident in 2018 were breath-tested by police.

 

“This has declined steadily since 2008, when 55% of motorists were breathalysed after a collision,” he said. “Of those who actually were tested following an accident, more than 3,800 were over the limit – at 4.4%, that’s the highest failure rate for 10 years”.

 

The overall number of breath tests is also the lowest on record.

 

Just 320,988 drivers were tested by police at the roadside in 2018, according to Home Office figures – less than half the 670,023 breathalysed in 2009.

 

“Casualties will not reduce until better enforcement is in place, combined with stricter limits and drink driving awareness campaigns”, continued Abbott.

 

“England and Wales have the highest drink drive limit in the developed world, far above the ‘point of intoxication’ when the cognitive effects of alcohol on a person are measurable.

 

“At the English/Welsh limit, despite not contravening the law, research shows you are 13 times more likely to be involved in a fatal accident than when sober.

 

“We call on the Government to increase the number of road traffic officers, in order to restore roadside breath testing to the levels of a decade ago.

 

“The Home Office should also stop ignoring robust scientific evidence and the advice of road safety experts – the drink drive limit should be reduced from its current dangerously high level.”

 

Abbott is the founder of AlcoSense and a member of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS).

 

Greig concluded: “Drink-drivers are simply not getting the message, and these figures will not improve until policy changes.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Flett News

The latest emission figures are measured by attaching equipment to cars and physically driving cars on public roads to simulate real-world driving conditions. This is fine for standard cars but the manufacturers should also assess the emissions when fitted with options and extras.

 

For example if a car has bigger wheels fitted the emissions can increase. But without that information drivers could be exposed to higher Benefit In Kind tax and Road Tax could increase.

 

Businesses should therefore consider reviewing their fleet policies due to a lack of WLTP CO2 data for some cars, says the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association.

 

The WLTP CO2 value, derived from the new emissions test, will be used for tax purposes from April, but a shortage of reliable data threatens to disrupt the move to a new VED and company car tax regime, it says.

 

VED and company car tax for newly registered vehicles will use CO2 figures based on the more accurate WLTP standard from April 1 and 6 respectively.

 

However, many vehicle manufacturers are struggling to provide WLTP data for their cars, with the result that BVRLA members currently only have accurate CO2, electric mileage range or RDE2 compliance (latest NOx emissions standard) information for around 80% of base (pre-option) models.

 

With average lead times for cars at around 9-12 weeks from ordering, this data gap is hindering the leasing sector’s ability to provide accurate quotes on many different vehicles and their various configurations and options.

 

“The introduction of WLTP-based motoring taxes is adding yet another layer of complexity and confusion to a fleet sector that is already having to cope with a deluge of new automotive technology and local authority air quality measures,” said BVRLA chief executive, Gerry Keaney.

 

“The BVRLA and its members are working with OEMs and third-party data providers to bridge this gap, but in the meantime, we would recommend customers consult with their lease providers to assess the impact on their fleet policies and procurement.”

 

WLTP CO2 data is available for the entire BMW range at www.bmw.co.uk. Rob East, general manager of Corporate Sales at BMW UK, said: “With the BIK tax liability a key consideration for many company car drivers when choosing a new vehicle, it’s imperative that we provide our customers with this information.

 

“This transparency allows them quickly to make an informed decision as to whether their favoured BMW works for them from a tax point of view. Without WLTP details, they simply have no way of knowing.”

 

He added: “Ensuring the easy availability of these details underlines our drive to make it as straightforward as possible for business customers to purchase a new BMW.

 

“It also reflects the increased level of interest that there is in our key corporate models such as the new 1 Series and new 3 Series.”

 

The BVRLA has contacted the SMMT, which represents vehicle manufacturers, to offer its support in addressing the WLTP data shortage. It is also working with HMRC on its forthcoming WLTP communications plan. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

The future of the plug-in car and van grant is expected to be revealed by the new Chancellor in the Budget in March.

 

The electric car and van subsidy was cut in 2018 by £1,000 and fleets were told it would no longer apply to hybrid cars with a range of less than 70 zero emission miles.

 

The Government said the reduction in funding – from £4,500 to £3,500 – for the cleanest cars, and withdrawing the grant completely for the likes of the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV and the Toyota Prius Plug-in, was a sign of its success.

 

Talking to delegates at the ICFM’s annual conference last summer, deputy head of the Office for Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV), Phil Killingley, acknowledged that incentives will be of continued importance beyond 2020, but stressed the detail was still being “talked through”.

 

Meanwhile, the Treasury told the Telegraph that “consumers incentives will continue to play a role beyond 2020”.

 

A Whitehall source said: “We have always said we would phase out the subsidies gradually, but there are other ways we can help people to go electric.”

 

BVRLA chief executive, Gerry Keaney, says that the Budget on March 11 will be an opportunity to set the tone for a new decade in which the transition to decarbonised road transport will be won or lost.

 

“Fleets are being asked to invest billions of pounds in new electric vehicle technology and infrastructure, which comes at a hefty price premium to its petrol and diesel alternatives,” he said.

 

“To achieve these goals the Government must provide a clear support package through to at least 2025. It must preserve the Plug in Car and Van Grants, maintain a strong set of tax incentives and tackle the huge and often arbitrary costs associated with fleet charging infrastructure.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

I know that you like to read legal stories that make no sense whatsoever – so here is one that makes no sense whatsoever. It shows that you can be held responsible for the health and safety of anyone who breaks into your property! Totally ridiculous.

 

The article revolves around the following incident. Click on the link before reading further

 

https://garagewire.co.uk/news/thief-crushed-to-death-while-stealing-catalytic-converter/

 

The question was asked – what liability could there be on the garage where someone breaks in and ends up getting injured or getting killed when they are there unlawfully?

 

Some people think that if you have broken into someone else’s property with ill intent then you deserve anything and everything you get.  This is not so in the eyes of the law – as Norfolk farmer Tony Martin found when he shot burglars encroaching into his home in 1999 killing one of them – as he was sent to prison initially for murder but downgraded to manslaughter due to diminished responsibility.

 

It is the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 which imposes a duty of care on landowners (occupiers) to take reasonable care for the safety of trespassers in respect of any risk of their suffering by reason of any danger due to the state of the premises – or to things done or omitted to be done on them.

 

The threshold test is set out in Section 1 (3) of the Act which provides that a duty is owed to trespassers in respect of any such risk if

 

(a)        The occupier is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe that it exists;

 

(b)        The occupier knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that the trespasser is in the vicinity of the danger or that he may come into the vicinity of the danger; and

 

(c)        The risk is one against which, in all the circumstances of the case, the occupier may reasonably be expected to offer the trespasser some protection.

 

As you can imagine, cases turn on their specific facts such as several years ago when the High Court in Buckett v Staffordshire County Council dismissed a claim brought against them by a Claimant after he fell through a skylight whilst trespassing on the roof a school when he was aged 16.  The court decided that even though his presence on the roof near the skylight ought reasonably to have been foreseen, the council did not owe a duty of care under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 as the skylight’s structure, makeup and location on the roof did not constitute a danger.

 

Even though children trespassing on the roof and proximity to the skylight was foreseeable, the claimant’s injuries were caused by his own action of jumping onto the skylight.  And because the skylight was not faulty or inherently dangerous, the council was not liable.

 

This followed a principle set by the House of Lords in Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council in 2004 where a 12 year old was injured falling on a fire escape when trespassing.  As the fire escape was not defective, in need of repair or otherwise dangerous, the council had no liability. You see what I mean – totally dopey! By Graham Hill

This crime is on the increase as joyriders and thieves get smart and stick on cloned number plates to avoid detection. With more number plate recognition cameras aimed at drivers the crooks were getting caught far too quickly for their liking so they have reverted to making up number plates that they’ve seen on cars in adverts or on the road and sticking them over the original plates.

 

But what if your number is cloned and you receive a speeding ticket, parking ticket or other penalty? According to a firm of solicitors far too many people ignore the tickets on the basis that they are charged for parking in a car park in an area miles away that they’ve never visited or caught speeding at a time when they were tucked up in bed. But you mustn’t ignore the ticket.

 

As one lawyer points out: Cloned vehicles can cause havoc, especially when drivers  fail to respond to the notices, sometimes in the belief that if it is not their car, no ruling can be made against them. However, once the process is up and running, drivers need to make sure they respond to any notice and quickly.

 

In the case of cloned vehicles, you will need a police reference number and photographs of your vehicle to evidence that the vehicle carrying your plates is not the real vehicle.

 

Even if you respond quickly, chances are that the authority will reject your case which means you will need to go to appeal. Miss the deadlines and you are very likely to lose any chance to appeal and you will find yourself with fines, charges and penalties plus costs to pay and this can ultimately end in a bailiff visit with even more costs to pay.

 

In short, these cases are a pain and it can be difficult to get the fine discharged on first attempt but if you stick to the deadlines, you will get a chance of an appeal and it is at this appeal stage, that these cases are usually won. So if you receive a parking or icket that you know doesn’t apply to to, don’t just ignore them, act immediately and inform the police that you suspect that your number has been cloned. By Graham Hill

There has been an increase of late in extensions and customers taking out 4 year PCP, PCH and contract hire agreements. This is done mainly to save money on the monthly rental but after allowing for the various costs that come into play after 3 years you may find that it’s a false saving.

 

When I looked to extend the lease on my Mercedes E Class I checked with my local dealer and was quoted nearly £900 for a 1 year extension to the Mercedes warranty. Had I leased my car over 4 years the lease cost would have been just £18 + VAT less per month when compared to the 3 year rate.

 

Then there are other subscriptions such as the Sat Nav which generally come with free updates for 3 years but you have to pay the subscription thereafter. Roadside assistance is also generally included for a minimum of 3 years with all new cars so there’s another extra to pay for. It all adds up.

 

On top of that, there is service and maintenance and possibly another pair of tyres. Obviously, as the car gets older it requires more wear and tear parts to ne replaced, brake discs, suspension dampers, filters etc.

 

So this raises the question as to whether it’s worth taking a car over 4 years given the fact that you will need to take out an extended warranty that could represent around half of the down payment on the next car, which of course comes with a new car warranty.

 

There are of course cars that come with 5 and even 7 year warranties but on closer inspection, you will find that a large number of components drop off cover after 3 years as a result of normal wear and tear. So things are not always as they seem. You could, of course, Google the market for a lower-priced warranty than the manufacturer’s own. However, whilst they love to take your money there are some that hate paying it back out.

 

Beware of betterment! As cars get older the warranty companies will try it on. Let’s say in the 4^th year you have a problem with the gearbox. The manufacturer or the warranty company agrees to replace it under the warranty but as the car is, say three and a half years old they have a betterment clause in their warranty that says, if the replacement part puts the car in a better condition than it was before the part went faulty that you should contribute to the replacement.

 

So the replacement gearbox could cost you 2 or even £3,000 towards the cost of the replacement gearbox. It’s a scandal. So if you are going to take out a 4-year contract or extend a 3 year contract, check the true cost of that last year and if you extend the warranty check the betterment clause. Also check out Warranty Direct. They may be a little more expensive than some other 3^rd party warranties but the have some of the best terms and conditions and no betterment charges. By Graham Hill

The ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans will be brought forward to 2035 and will now include hybrids.

 

The Government had previously announced they would end the sale of new fossil fuel vehicles from 2040 but would still allow the sale of hybrid vehicles that had a zero-emission capability.

 

However, speaking at the Conservative party conference last October, transport secretary Grant Shapps hinted at bringing the date forward.

 

Launching the next UN climate conference COP26 today (Tuesday February 4), the Prime Minister Boris Johnson will confirm the much tougher, stricter timetable.

 

Shapps said: “This Government’s £1.5 billion strategy to make owning an electric vehicle as easy as possible is working – last year alone, a fully electric car was sold every 15 minutes.

 

“We want to go further than ever before. That’s why we are bringing forward our already ambitious target to end the sale of new petrol and diesel cars to tackle climate change and reduce emissions.”

 

The Government says it will continue to work with all sectors of industry to accelerate the rollout of zero emission vehicles.

 

But, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), which represents car and van makers in the UK, says the Government has set the new target without a plan showing how it intends to get there.

 

Mike Hawes, SMMT chief executive, said: “Manufacturers are fully invested in a zero emissions future, with some 60 plug-in models now on the market and 34 more coming in 2020. However, with current demand for this still expensive technology still just a fraction of sales, it’s clear that accelerating an already very challenging ambition will take more than industry investment.

 

“This is about market transformation, yet we still don’t have clarity on the future of the plug-in car grant – the most significant driver of EV uptake – which ends in just 60 days’ time, while the UK’s charging network is still woefully inadequate.

 

“If the UK is to lead the global zero emissions agenda, we need a competitive marketplace and a competitive business environment to encourage manufacturers to sell and build here.

 

“A date without a plan will merely destroy value today. So we therefore need to hear how government plans to fulfil its ambitions in a sustainable way, one that safeguards industry and jobs, allows people from all income groups and regions to adapt and benefit, and, crucially, does not undermine sales of today’s low emission technologies, including popular hybrids, all of which are essential to deliver air quality and climate change goals now.”

 

Helen Clarkson, CEO of the international non-profit The Climate Group, welcomed the “more ambitious” target from the Government.

 

However, she said: “We believe that this could still be sooner – and that to be a global leader, especially post-Brexit, a 2030 phase-out commitment is required; without this, we risk being out of step with our international peers.

 

“Our business campaign for the 100% adoption of electric vehicles by 2030, EV100, has 62 corporate members, many of which are British, including AstraZeneca, BT, Centrica, Foxtons, Mitie, RBS, SSE and Unilever. Businesses are showing what is possible and The Climate Group would love to see this level of ambition matched.”

 

Through EV100, the UK has the second highest number of corporate fleet vehicles committed to switching to electric, after Germany.

 

Government policy must be strong and consistent to accelerate this transition, and to help the UK become a world leader on electric vehicles, it says.

 

So far, eight countries have already committed to more ambitious phase-out dates than the UK, while Scotland has had a 2032 phase-out date for new petrol and diesel vehicles in place since 2017.

 

The RAC was not surprised by the Government’s plan to bring forward the date to ban the sale of petrol and diesel vehicles.

 

RAC head of policy Nicholas Lyes said: “A more ambitious target should be the catalyst for faster change, but there are clearly many hurdles to cross.

 

“Manufacturers face a great challenge in switching their production from conventional powertrains to cleaner electric technology.

 

“More electric vehicles (EVs) will also require a great deal of investment in charging infrastructure – particularly for those who rely on on-street parking outside their homes.”

 

Lyes also believes that we should not overlook the role plug-in hybrid vehicles could play in bridging the gap to going completely electric.

 

“In the meantime we urge the Government to extend the plug-in car grant for at least another three years to help those that want to go electric, but who are put off by the high initial costs,” he said.

 

“At a local level, authorities should also incentivise their use with cheaper parking rates and lower residents’ parking permit fees.” By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

For years I’ve been complaining about the weaknesses of recalls when cars have safety recalls that put drivers’ lives at risk. There are still hundreds of thousands of vehicles on the road that haven’t had safety recall repairs carried out. So I find it ridiculous that the Government is introducing legislation for environmental reasons.

 

The Government is seeking new powers in the Environment Bill to compel vehicle manufacturers to recall vehicles when they do not meet the relevant environmental standards.

 

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) introduced the Bill to Parliament on January 30th.

 

It will create new powers to stop the export of plastic waste to developing countries and will enshrine environmental principles in law, while introducing measures to improve air and water quality, and restore habitats so plants and wildlife can thrive.

 

The new vehicle recall powers are included in an effort to help improve air quality in urban areas.

 

Environment secretary Theresa Villiers said: “We have set out our pitch to be a world leader on the environment as we leave the EU and the Environment Bill is a crucial part of achieving this aim.

 

“It sets a gold standard for improving air quality, protecting nature, increasing recycling and cutting down on plastic waste.”

 

As well as the measures outlined, the legislation will also create legally-binding environmental improvement targets.

 

A new independent Office for Environmental Protection will be established to scrutinise environmental policy and law, investigate complaints and take enforcement action against public authorities, if necessary, to uphold environmental standards.

 

The office’s powers will cover all climate change legislation and hold the government to account on its commitment to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

 

The Environment Bill was introduced into parliament in October 2019 and has been re-introduced to parliament following the general election. I agree that this is important but not as important as safety recalls that could kill drivers, passengers and other road users. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

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