The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

What Car has carried out a survey into car faults, a subject on which I have incredibly strong views. They start their report by reminding us of the attitude expressed by our parents (or could have been just my dad) that the more you add to cars the more likely something will go wrong.

Logically that has to be true, the question is – what is an acceptable level of faults and more important is when things go wrong how well do those responsible fix the problem? And that’s my issue, far too often drivers experience faults that dealers and manufacturers fight tooth and nail not to fix whilst totally ignoring driver rights and flouting their legal obligations. And with so few people knowing their legal rights dealers get away with murder.

However, I cover this in detail in my PCP report so I’ll get back to the findings of What Car. They found that 12% of faulty cars were off the road for more than a week with the most common problem being engine related which affected 28% of the faulty cars. When checking the classes of cars they found that 35% of luxury SUV’s and 31% of luxury cars suffered from faults.

At the other end of the scale 21% of city cars and 18% of electric cars suffered with faults. Interestingly cars fitted with diesel engines suffered from more faults than their petrol equivalents. 39% of diesel luxury SUV’s suffered faults whilst only 23% of their petrol equivalents had faults. 33% of diesel family saloons had faults whilst just 24% of their petrol equivalents had faults.

Worst for faults was diesel MPV’s followed closely by luxury diesel SUV’s. Petrol engine MPV’s weren’t much better than the diesels. Whilst petrol luxury SUV’s have problems with fuel consumption they fare better than diesel cars so the advice is to take a petrol rather than a diesel.

The top 5 brands for faults, i.e. the least reported faults were Lexus (10.7%), Suzuki (16.2%), Dacia (18.6%), Toyota (18.9%) and Honda (20.6%). At the other end, the worst cars were Land Rover (44.1%), Jeep (41.2%), Citroen (39.9%), Smart (39.5%) and Nissan (38.4%).

Not in my opinion a happy state of affairs – far too many faults for my liking. By Graham Hill

According to a special report in Auto Express we find out that there was a 56% increase in vehicle theft last year over the previous year. This sounds dreadful and of course it is, especially if you were a victim. But improvements in technology has actually had a very positive effect on thefts when compared to the 90’s.

In 1992 600,000 cars were stolen. This dropped to 56,000 in 2016 but in 2017 the number increased to 89,000, according to the Office of National Statistics. The first reaction is to blame the serious drop in police numbers and of course that hasn’t helped. But experts suggest that this isn’t the real reason, they blame it on the upsurge in Keyless Entry.

I’ve reported on how the thieves manage to steal your car with the use of technology so I won’t cover it again. But the fact is that we can exist without it. A keyless device it is transmitting all the time so as soon as you approach your car the car’s receiver picks up the signal and unlocks the door.

Once inside you can start the car by pressing the start button. Far too easy and frankly, in my opinion, unnecessary. In order to unlock my car I have to push a button on my ‘key’, and it works. I also have a keyring with my door key and a couple of other keys hanging from it.

If I had a keyless key I would still need a keyring! So I really don’t get it, especially as so many cars are stolen as a result of having a keyless device. By Graham Hill

A solution would be to stop the car when it senses that the key isn’t within range but this raises all sorts of safety questions. So the industry is working on ways to make keyless entry less vulnerable but I find myself asking why? OK, you can buy boxes and wallets into which you can place the device whilst at home to prevent scammers from picking up and relaying the signal but it’s too much fannying about in my opinion. Bring back keys!!

It has been admitted that some Mercedes Euro 6 diesels have been fitted with ‘defeat devices’ in order to pass emissions tests. The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency has now given Mercedes a deadline to issue a recall over the emissions irregularities. Can you believe it?

I’m mystified that this hasn’t been headline news following the VW debacle. The view is that fewer vehicles have been affected although in Germany – Daimler, owners of Mercedes Benz, has ordered the recall of 238,000 cars. In the UK the cars reported to be affected are 90% of those fitted with Vito 1.6l diesel (OM622) and 2.2l diesel (OM 651).

Affected are C Class and GLC with 4 cylinder engines. Single digit percentages of the following are also affected, S Class, E Class Coupe, G Class, ML Class and GLE. These are exclusively those fitted with Euro 6b engines. The DVSA has given Mercedes till 22 June to respond to their call to issue a recall. Last week Germany’s transport ministry, the KBA, said that 744,000 Mercedes Euro 6 diesels across Europe contained ‘illegal switch off devices’ to pass emissions tests.

A spokeswoman for Mercedes said ‘Open legal questions will be clarified in the objection proceedings. We will update the DVSA with information specific to the UK as soon as we can’. I find it totally disgraceful that any manufacturer should openly fiddle the emissions tests and seemingly get away with a recall. Incredible.  By Graham Hill

We were all led to believe that when we left the EU we would take back all controls into the UK. But it now seems clear that this won’t be the case. In my PCP report I advise that the added protection we have with the EU 2 year guarantee won’t find its way into UK law.

What does this mean? Well, if you have a fault on a car within 2 years of taking delivery, especially in the case of a used car, even after it can be shown that the fault existed when you bought the car (something you have to prove after 6 months of delivery – before then the dealer has to prove that it didn’t exist) you may be asked to contribute towards the cost of repair or replacement. Especially in the case of replacement – known as ‘betterment’.

Let’s say your gearbox needs to be replaced but the car has travelled 50,000 miles. The dealer agrees to replace the gearbox but as your car now has a brand new or re-conditioned gearbox you are asked to pay towards the cost as the car is now worth more than it was before the new gearbox was fitted. However, the EU 2 year Consumer Guarantee makes no allowance for ‘betterment’ so you are not expected to contribute.

I agree with this. Why should you be expected to pay towards the cost of replacement when you believed that you were buying a car with no major faults, so you should have expected a couple of years at least of trouble free motoring. To have to stump up another unexpected amount of several hundreds of pounds is simply unfair.

It gets worse as David Ward, Secretary General of Global NCAP, has warned. In the past, due to our high volume of new car purchases, we have been a major voice at the table when setting safety and emissions standards. These standards are set by the UN Economic Commission For Europe with all 28 EU members block voting and more or less having the major say.

In future, David Ward has warned that whilst the EU will continue with their block vote we will be a single voice in the wilderness with virtually no clout. Is this what taking back sovereignty means? It isn’t what Mr Ward was expecting and has pressed Mrs May to negotiate a deal with Europe to enable us to have a stronger say. By Graham Hill

Most new diesel cars manufactured over the last couple of years have had a special liquid incorporated into the car in order to reduce the NOx gasses and conform to Euro 6 emissions. Euro 6 reduced NOx emissions by 67% from the previous standard, Euro 5.

Here’s the technical stuff in case you’re interested: Some manufacturers have found that the best way for them to meet the emissions levels is by Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR). This system uses an exhaust fluid such as AdBlue. It breaks down the NOx gasses in the exhaust gasses into harmless elements before it’s expelled from the car.

Someone told me when the systems was launched that AdBlue was made up of urine! I thought it was a joke but it turned out to be true. It is made of Urea and de-ionised water. It is stored in a separate tank with small amounts being squirted into the exhaust gas when the engine is running turning the NOX into Nitrogen and Water.

Not all diesel cars are fitted with the AdBlue system so you will need to check the handbook and the dealer to see if it has the Adblue system. Some cars have ‘Blue’ in their name or SCR to indicate the addition of Adblue.

Tank sizes and usage varies. Most manufacturers have attempted to incorporate a tank that holds enough fluid to last between services so on low mileage you probably didn’t even know your car had it fitted. There is a warning light that warns you that the Adblue is running low. If the light comes on you should top up the fluid as soon as possible although you should still have about 3 litres or 1,200 miles still left.

It would be wise to find out where the filler is located. Some are by the diesel filler, some are in the boot or in the spare wheel well. Some fuel stations have AdBlue as part of their pump or you can buy it in containers either in the filling station or in an accessory shop or even online. In a container, it should cost about £1.50 per litre or at the pump about 60p per litre.

Adblue is non-toxic but is corrosive so can cause skin irritation and affect your lungs and eyes. Always wash your hands after handling and wear gloves provided in fuel stations. Whilst most cars let you continue to drive the car when the AdBlue tank is empty, when you stop the car it won’t restart until the tank has been topped up.

The AA reported 20,000 call outs last year to AdBlue related incidents. The recommendation is to top up the AdBlue whilst the engine is running if you run out. If you put AdBlue in the diesel tank or diesel in the AdBlue tank don’t start the engine and call out your breakdown service or misfuelling service provider immediately or risk expensive damage.

I hope that helps. By Graham Hill

Over the last few years we’ve seen changes in the law that have prevented children from sitting unstrapped in the back of cars, with very specific rules relating to baby seats and booster seats. Children over 12 years old or 135cm tall must use a seat belt.

There are weight and height restrictions that relate to different types of baby seats and booster seats, etc etc. The fact is that it is impossible to police. It’s illegal to smoke in a car with a child under 18 as a passenger and eating a sandwich, bar of chocolate or swigging a drink whilst driving can land you a fine of £100 if considered to be ‘dangerous driving’ by a policeman.

Again, unless part of an investigation following an accident, it is very unlikely you will ever be prosecuted so it makes you wonder about the effectiveness of setting down laws unless we have enough police to enforce them. Maybe by setting down the laws, there is an assumption that the rules will prick the conscience of drivers and stop them from breaking them. I would suggest that those with a conscience wouldn’t break the law in the first place.

I therefore question the benefit of setting down new laws to attempt to cut down on the number of young people if the laws are simply unenforceable due to the lack of policemen patrolling the roads. Theresa May has asked The Department for Transport to consider graduated driving licences. Changes could include a minimum supervised learning period and a restriction on the number of passengers.

Figures show that one in four young drivers are involved in  an accident within 2 years of passing their driving tests. Road safety charity Brake has called for a minimum of 10 hours of professional tuition before taking driving tests with restrictions in place for the following 2 years.

A similar system introduced in New Zealand dropped car crash injuries by 23% in 16 – 19-year-olds. What they don’t mention is the number of police patrolling the roads that might act as a deterrent amongst young drivers. I’m all for prevention but surely this sort of awareness should be taught at school along with other life skills. Introducing new laws with no police to enforce them is pointless. By Graham Hill

The technical expression is semi-autonomous when a car is fitted with safety equipment which allows drivers to do other things whilst driving. Many experts are starting to throw doubt on the accuracy of figures that suggest that accident rates will fall along with road deaths as a result of safety equipment being fitted.

There is no hard proof behind the statistics which are estimates that take account of lane markings, speed restrictions, proximity of other traffic etc. However, if drivers become more reliant on the safety systems and concentrate less, this increases the possibility of having an accident again. So they are now assessing the true benefits of these safety systems.

In the meantime, the European Commission last month announced that it wants 11 advanced safety features fitted as standard features on all new cars and vans launched from 2020 and all new cars and vans sold 2 years later. I mentioned in a recent report that it can take several seconds for the driver to take back control from autonomous systems that could result in an accident.

I would suggest that much more research is required before making some of the safety systems obligatory. By Graham Hill

Since the tightening up of personal data stored about us on various sites the question has been asked about car telematics, the data that is collected and stored about us when driving our car, especially our company car. Clearly companies do it to make sure that their cars and commercials are being driven efficiently and not abused.

They can also check driving style to see if you are driving the vehicle in an economical way. Are you taking the best route in order to minimise fuel consumption and time? All of these things can generally be justified and included in your terms and conditions of employment.

But what about when you are using the vehicle for your own personal use? Some would argue that as the car is owned or leased by your employer he has a right to know where his vehicles are, where they travel to etc. However, most people believe that this is a breach of data protection.

It has nothing to do with the employer what you do and where you go in the company car when it is being used for pleasure as part of your contract of employment. If you are an employer and agree with this then you should consider Geotab as your next Telematics provider.

They have developed a new system that has incorporated a privacy mode for personal use. So when an employee is using his company car personally he can switch off the tracking. It is controlled via the MyGeotab App that comes with the tracking system.

There are mixed views from employers but it is certain that drivers would prefer to be able to control their privacy. What may not be appreciated is that many new cars have Telematics systems built into them to assist manufacturers to improve their car design and features. We currently have no say over the use of data collected by manufacturers. That will have to change. By Graham Hill

What a surprise, the crooked fuel suppliers, having seen that people are massively switching from diesel to petrol, have seen fit to increase the pump cost to its highest for 18 years. OK, you can’t help it if oil prices increase and the reasons given for the highest increase, according to the RAC, since their records began in 2000, is that crude has increased as a result of the weakening pound and the drop in production from Iran.

That might seem quite reasonable. However, I heard that the fuel providers have increased the cost at the pumps because they were hedging against the cost of oil going up further in the future as a result of  Trump ditching the Iran Nuclear Deal. So we’re paying for an increase that may or may not happen!

Immediately following the trashing of the Nuclear Deal crude rose as Iran decreased production but, according to experts, the pump prices have increased by more than that dictated by the increased crude price. You can draw your own conclusions, especially as Saudi Arabia has agreed to fill any production gaps left by Iran.

So supply should remain the same. In May the average cost of petrol increased from 123.43p to 129.41p. Diesel increased by more but that was still less than the highest increase that occurred in 2008. Simon Williams of the RAC said that crude oil has flattened off and that there is an OPEC meeting on the 22^nd June when they are expected to step up production so we could see a small drop in the cost of petrol and diesel. By Graham Hill

The headlines from car data company CAP HPI, said ‘Vehicle Finance Fraud On The Up’. Auto Express reported the same release from CAP HPI with the headline: ‘Third Of Used Cars Sold With Finance Still Owing’. Great headlines but fake news and something that makes me seriously angry!

Until I heard the expression ‘Fake News’, constantly being used by Donald Trump, I pretty much believed most of what I read but closer investigation of the release, put out by CAP HPI, has shown that the information released by them and reported on by Auto Express and others was simply a marketing ploy by CAP HPI.

Are a third of used cars sold with finance on them? Of course not, it’s a load of crap! Let’s look at the statistics. They first reported that 6 million cars were flagged as having finance on them in 2017. What does this mean? It means that out of all the searches that took place on HPI 6 million had finance on them.

They go on to say that in the first 4 months of 2018 2,437,025 searched vehicles had finance on them. So in pro-rata terms, the figure is up. Those figures actually mean absolutely nothing! The report doesn’t explain, as I suspect, that the figures could include multiple searches on the same car.

If you take your old car into a car dealer with outstanding finance on it the dealer will want a settlement cost from the funder and to do that, with permission from the customer, he will first, as a matter of course, carry out an HPI check.

In no way is that the customer trying to sell a car illegally it’s just normal process. And even then, having checked the car once on HPI, they will probably check again, just before parting with their cash to the lender, in the event that the customer has refinanced the car or taken out a further loan secured against it.

Not to mention the fact that the customer could have spoken to several dealers about a part exchange with each carrying out their own HPI check. They say themselves in the report: Fraudulent activity only takes place if the vendor tries to sell the vehicle with existing finance still owed, without letting the buyer know.

So to be clear the buyer does nothing illegal if he innocently buys a car with finance on, it’s the seller. And there is nothing in law that insists that buyers of used cars should check HPI as there is also nothing in law that insists that lenders list all finance agreements on HPI.

The only legal requirement on the buyer, for title to pass (for him to own the vehicle) is for him to ask the seller if he has the car on finance. If he says no you are entitled to keep the car. But this is what appears in the press release:

Commenting on the increase in used cars being identified as already on finance, Fernando Garcia, head of consumer at HPI said: “Buying a car with outstanding finance can land the unwitting buyer in trouble as most finance agreements or loans will grant the lender ownership of the vehicle until the debt has been paid. The debt stays with the vehicle not the borrower. Even if a buyer bought the vehicle in good faith, if the finance hasn’t been settled then the lender could repossess the vehicle, meaning you could lose the car and the money you paid.”

This disgraceful comment is legally incorrect and may cause me to raise an official complaint with Trading Standards. Why did they make this statement? Read what Mr Garcia said next:

Fernando Garcia added: “The first thing any used car buyer must do is ascertain whether the potential purchase is actually paid for. It’s impossible to tell if a vehicle has outstanding finance just by looking at it, which makes a vehicle history check an even more vital form of protection for buyers. An HPI Check can help protect consumers from buying a vehicle with something to hide, saving them cash as well as keeping them safe.

“Comprehensive, accurate and up-to-date car check data with a £30,000 data guarantee, the HPI Check gives protection from buying a vehicle with outstanding debt such as logbook loans and car finance plus is the first line of defence against car scams and motor fraud, including stolen, cloned and clocked cars.

This is clearly an attempt to get more naïve car buyers to use their HPI checking service and increase their income. Putting the frighteners on like this is wrong. Certainly, draw drivers’ attention to the benefits of checking a car’s history before buying but don’t twist statistics to mean something they don’t and certainly don’t suggest that lenders can repossess the car when the new owner is an ‘innocent buyer’ and therefore legally owns the car.

An innocent buyer could voluntarily hand over the car keys, in which case he can’t get the car back. Let me explain something, if you buy your car from a car dealer, trader or company you are protected because they can only sell you a car if they have clear title. If they sell you a car that is on finance, that is their problem not yours.

The only risk is if you buy from a private individual and again title passes if the seller says that he has no outstanding finance. The exception is a car that is on rental, could be a daily rental owned car or a car on contract hire. In which case the seller won’t have a V5C (log Book) with his name in it as the owner/keeper of the car.

This type of fake news could cause innocent buyers of cars to lose their cars when in fact they have good title, it’s a disgrace. By Graham Hill