The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

For those concerned about the environment, the new Worldwide harmonised Light vehicle Test Procedures (WLTP) were considered to be well overdue when you consider how easy it was to fiddle the emissions test under the old regime known as NEDC. It wasn’t just VW fitting equipment that could be switched over during the emissions tests to give a false reading.

Others fitted undersized wheels and stuck tape around doors, bonnets and boots in order to avoid any drag. So now we have the cars being properly tested we see emissions levels increasing. The cars are the same but the emissions levels have increased due to more accurate testing. Which is fine unless you happen to be a company car driver.

As an interim measure and so as not to sting company car drivers for driving the same car the revenue has applied a conversion equation to bring the CO2 emissions back to where they were under the old tests. However, the CO2 levels are still around 10% higher than previous thereby increasing the BIK tax on cars that drivers may have been driving for the past 2 years and the new cars are generally 20% higher so replacing a like for like car could increase your benefit in kind tax substantially.

Whilst the fleet industry has called on the Government to amend the BIK tax tables so as not to penalise drivers of company cars, as usual, they’ve done naff all. This has led to a move towards car allowances allowing drivers to select their own car, firstly to save the BIK tax but also allow them to potentially drive better cars. As I’ve reported before let’s say that a company negotiates preferential terms with a dealer to take 200 Ford Mondeos a year.

As a result, they receive 25%  discount on all cars that is fed into their contract hire rate. Normally the best a consumer would receive is a discount of 15% built into the contract hire rate but if a new model is coming out the dealer and the manufacturer may allow a discount and bonus of 35% to be built into the contract hire rates.

This means that a consumer could achieve a lower rate than some of the biggest fleets in the country. Or maybe a Vauxhall Insignia or Mazda 6 works out cheaper because for the same reasons the rates are incredibly low. So for employees, the time may have come when they hand back their company cars and take a car allowance then talk to me to get them into a low rate car. By Graham Hill

A couple of weeks ago I was asked to appear on ITV’s Tonight programme that went out last Thursday (6^th September). However, with just half an hour available and the main theme of the programme the decision that drivers face as to whether to choose a petrol, diesel, hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric car next they dropped what was to be a section on finance.

All had their merits, petrol – short around the town trips, diesel for high mileage drivers, hybrids in town but with no ability to plug the car in at home or at work, plug in’s if you have access to electricity and electric for those on low mileage in a city subject to congestion charges with easy access to chargers.

However, they sent a couple on a trip from their home in the north to a party in the south of England in an electric car. A trip that would normally take 4 hours but actually ended up taking over 6 hours, making them 2 hours late. The reason, finding somewhere to charge up the battery en-route. They found at service areas chargers that were broken as well as chargers that couldn’t fast charge. It seemed like a nightmare and got the couple very irritated and worried that they could end up stranded.

One gentleman with a plug-in hybrid found that he needed to charge his car for 6.5 hours at home using the domestic power supply in order to be able to cover something like 25 miles on just the electric motor, think he should change to Duracell Ultra batteries! The programme also questioned the environmental differences claiming, as many others have, that the manufacture of electric vehicles and their batteries come at an increased environmental cost and they still affect the environment as there are particulate emissions from tyres and brakes.

So whilst not all great news electric is the direction of travel and since BP bought out Chargemaster EV charging network we will see many more fast charge points with the next generation able to ‘fill up’ a car in just 5 minutes. Added to which there are already cars that can be used as electricity storage devices. Left plugged into the house electrics any stored electricity could be used when the cost of energy is high then charge the car overnight when energy is low.

Lots happening but I’m yet to be convinced. And the idea of charge points in lamp posts – as was shown on the programme is likely to end up with drivers in A&E as they come to blows as to who was at the lamp post first and whose needs are greater. By Graham Hill

When I first started to write my report on Personal Contract Purchase I did it as an aid for viewers of the Rip Off Britain programme that featured me as their expert dealing with cases involving members of the public who had been treated poorly by either dealerships or finance providers.

It was to be two pages of bullet points at most. 10 months of investigation and re-writing later and we now have a 200-page report stored under the heading of Rip Off Britain Crib Notes – it’s more like War and Peace. But the one main message that comes through is the lack of clarity, probably because of a lack of education on the part of those selling the product as well as those taking out PCP contracts.

The second seems to be the need to be dishonest. If you download the report by visiting www.grahamhilltraining.com you’ll see what I mean. You’ll also have one over on the dealers as you will probably end up knowing more than them. I don’t know what it is, whether it is considered to be good marketing or simply meant to confuse customers in order to make the sale.

Take my latest battle over the extension cost of my Mercedes with MB Finance who rather foolishly have decided to take me on. I won’t go into detail yet, it will get reported in the press when I get a result, but in order to prevent the case going to the Financial Ombudsman Service they offered a sum of money as a ‘Gesture Of Good Will’. Instead of admitting that what they were doing was illegal and simply come to an arrangement they offer a ‘Gesture Of Good Will’.

The fact is that I never ever accept a ‘Gesture Of Good Will’, because I’m either right or wrong. If I’m right – and it is normally over a legal matter – I expect an apology and a full payout. If I’m wrong I will stick my hands up and admit to being wrong and pay any penalty but offering a ‘Gesture Of Good Will’ will only get my back up!

What really got me started on this subject was an announcement in Business Car in which 2^nd biggest Contract Hire company in the UK, LeasePlan, announced that they were to start remarketing used ex-lease cars online under the name of carnext.com. Nothing wrong with that I was a director of Carsite that eventually was re-branded Tesco Cars that did exactly that but 10 years ago.

What annoyed me was that they say in the piece:- that every car comes with a 14-day money back guarantee as though they are offering some special benefit. As the cars are bought online and delivered to you the cars are automatically covered by the Consumer Contracts regulations, formally known as the Distance Selling regulations which means you have a legal right to return any goods you don’t want for any reason within 14 days. Not an exceptional added benefit. Just be honest.

They then go on to say that every car comes with a 1-year warranty. No, they don’t sunshine each car has a 2 year EU Guarantee attached to it. Whilst we are in the EU the 2-year guarantee is still in force which means any trader selling any product, new or used, must come with the EU 2 year guarantee. So not only have they turned a legal obligation into an added benefit but understated it! Grrr – winds me up! By Graham Hill

Latest casualty figures released by the Department for Transport are for 2016. They show a year on year increase of 7% over 2015. The figures include those either injured or killed in incidents involving drivers over the drink-drive alcohol limits.

The figures showed a total of 9,040 deaths or injuries and has led to calls by road safety charity, Brake for the Government to reduce the legal limit from 80mg/100ml of blood to lower than the 50mg/100ml limit imposed on drivers in Scotland since 2014.

The DfT revealed that approximately 230 people died in drink-related incidents compared to 200 in 2015. Surprisingly the DfT described the higher figure as ‘Not statistically significant’. Going on to say that the data ‘continues a period of stability since 2010’.

Joshua Harris, the director of campaigns at Brake hit out by saying, ‘Today’s figures show that drink-driving is an increasing blight on British roads, and yet the Government sits on its hands and refuses to address the issue.’

Something needs to happen, reducing the limit is only a deterrent if we have enough police testing drivers. If drivers think that they can get away with exceeding the drink-drive limit, wherever it’s set they will continue to drink and drive. By Graham Hill

OK, I have this great new way of charging you for the electricity that you use. In future, you will be assessed by the amount of hot water you use per annum. The more hot water you use the more you will pay for your electricity. As a result, the Government will expect you to use less water and less electricity to heat the water. Makes sense?

Probably a bit of a silly example but the point is that linking the two items doesn’t seem like an obvious way for you to pay for your electricity. You pay for electricity as you use it – seems like a bloody obvious thing to do! So what’s this got to do with cars?

Well, a lot of what we spend on roads and the roads infrastructure is collected in various taxes. First Registration, Road Fund Licence and Fuel Excise Duties being the three main ones that come to mind (congestion charging, scaled parking charges are others). So how do we work out the charge? We charge based on CO2 emissions! No allowance for other emissions just CO2.

It just doesn’t make sense and even with the CO2 emissions, it’s simply assessed on how much comes out of the exhaust pipe over a kilometre. I might be travelling just 5,000 miles a year in a relatively high CO2 emitting vehicle but still pay more in RFL than someone travelling 40,000 miles a year in a car with CO2 emissions that are slightly lower. Again – makes no sense! What does make sense is charging per mile for the use of our roads – a bit like using electricity!

And that is what will have to be considered if we move over to either very low emission hybrids or zero-emission electric cars. To leave things as they are will mean drivers will pay nothing towards the upkeep of our roads infrastructure. So the first out of the blocks is the Republic of Ireland, working on a scheme whereby drivers pay to use roads by the mile in order to fill what could potentially be a fairly large black hole in the finances.

Our government is keeping an eye on what the Irish are proposing, to see if theirs is a model we should copy.  Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, announced earlier this year that whilst he acknowledged that many people felt that pay per mile was the way forward he had no immediate plans to change from the current method of funding our roads.

Unfortunately rather short sighted! Having said that I’m not sure how we would go about collecting the data and making the charges on motorists. By Graham Hill

As you know, if you read my newsletters, you will know that phase 1 of the exercise has been underway for nearly 12 months. Worldwide harmonised Light vehicles Test Procedures (WLTP) were introduced last September. After the 1^st September this year the same Euro 6 rules will apply to all vehicles but only vehicles that have been tested under the new WLTP rules and meet the Euro6 requirements can be sold.

This means that some cars that have only been tested under the old NEDC test procedures can no longer be registered. This meant that we expected a massive surge in the pre-registration and sale of the old model tested cars – it hasn’t happened. The manufacturers and dealers have been canny enough to make sure they weren’t carrying lots of old tested cars and vans meaning that they haven’t been applying massive bonuses as some expected them to do – me included!

Now bear with me because it gets a little confusing. The easy bit concerns the brand new model cars, let’s call them 2019 model cars. They have been re-designed to receive the approval so the CO2 and mpg figures are now more accurate and as a company car driver you will pay benefit in kind tax per the latest CO2 readings.

If you are driving a pre WLTP car they will still be tested and the new CO2 figures declared which, in most cases, are higher than the old NEDC figures. So to avoid sudden increases in BIK tax the revenue came up with a formula to apply to the new figures that will take the readings back to roughly where the old NEDC figures stood, known as the NEDC correlated figures. This will last till 2020.

The complication gets worse when the Real Driving Emissions test (RDE) is introduced from 1^st September. This involves equipment attached to new cars to measure emissions and mpg in real world driving conditions as opposed to the WLTP tests which are carried out in laboratory conditions. At the moment the Government has neglected to explain how the RDE tests fit in with the WLTP tests when it comes to all areas of vehicle-related taxation between now and 2020. In fact they haven’t released details relating to taxation post 2020 so anyone looking to take out a lease for a business car could be in for a shock when they receive their tax bill. It’s a disgrace! By Graham Hill

If someone had said to you just 5 years ago that technology will have progressed to the point where you could get out of your car, in front of your garage or beside a parking space, press a park button and the car would park itself – you’d have thought they’d overdosed on something dodgy!

Apparently, the technology has been about for years but the law has prevented car manufacturers from fitting it to new cars because in order to drive or park a car you must be behind the wheel. Some manufacturers have an app that you can use on your mobile device to park the car so even though you could still be sitting in the car it’s still illegal to use a mobile device whilst in control of a vehicle.

After representations from motor manufacturers, insurers and haulage companies the Government held a consultation on changes to the Highway Code and relevant regulations earlier this year. As a result, changes have been introduced that allow drivers to use a remote control parking device if they are within 6 meters of their vehicle.

Whilst still not 100% clear it would seem that you could use the remote parking on your mobile device if sitting in the car because you have passed control of the car over to the car itself. This will be great for larger cars, having to negotiate tight parking spaces as well as parking your car in a garage that isn’t wide enough to park the car and open the driver’s door.

This is now law and some manufacturers already have these devices available such as Mercedes, Peugeot and Jaguar. Many have applauded the new technology believing that it opens up more parking spaces that may appear too tight but with the aids fitted could shoe-horn your car into the space available. Personally, I feel people should learn to park and as my dad used to say – ‘just something else that can go wrong’. By Graham Hill

Mercedes announced earlier this year that their Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) E and C Class cars would be diesel-electric as opposed to the majority of PHEV’s which are petrol-electric. As most people know, diesel cars already emit less CO2 than their petrol equivalents so by adding the diesel engine to a 90KW electric motor the CO2 emissions reduce even further.

So whilst some manufacturers reacted far too quickly (in my opinion) to the adverse reporting on diesel engine emissions by removing diesels from all future development some are embracing the combined benefits of diesel-electric compared to petrol-electric. But as with normal diesels the picture is far from clear. No thanks to the Government.

For example, Peugeot had a diesel-electric plugin but due to poor sales announced in 2016 that it would be dropping it. In 2012 Volvo had a diesel-electric plug-in but dropped it in favour of petrol-electric followed by recent announcements to go all-electric next year (2019) with every car they sell having an electric motor.

Audi and Landrover favour a diesel-electric in the larger 4WD models although the new Land Rover models will be produced with petrol-electric combinations. Then there is Kia who announced earlier this year that they would be jumping on the diesel-electric boat with the launch of a Sportage and Ceed with diesel-electric power in 2018.

Confused? Yeah – me too! By Graham Hill

New insurer ‘By Miles’ is set to shake up the car insurance industry. The first pay-per-mile insurance policy is believed to save motorists hundreds of pounds each year. Drivers pay a flat rate annual fee to cover the car against damage and theft when the car is parked. Thereafter the driver is charged per mile whenever he uses his car.

The policy is aimed at those travelling less than 7,000 miles per annum which is around 50% of all UK drivers. The distances are recorded by a telematics device that the owners plug into their cars On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) port. Each journey can be tracked and recorded on a dedicated smartphone app then the driver billed monthly based on the distance travelled.

Motorists taking out a policy will be charged a minimum of £150 per annum and 3.0 pence per mile although the per mile charges stop after 150 miles in a single day or 10,000 miles per annum. James Blackham, co-founder of By Miles said car finance has ‘barely changed in 30 years. Every extra mile you drive adds to the risk of having an accident. We think it’s high time that is reflected in the price infrequent drivers pay’.

Matt Cullen of  The Association of British Insurers approved of the new way to insure cars. Motoring habits are changing as are consumer needs so it makes sense to adapt things like insurance policies. The AA also admitted that it was investigating real-time insurance cover. I think that it’s a great idea and should take off. By Graham Hill

How many times have you driven along a massive stretch of roadworks with a speed limit of 50 miles per hour only to get to the end without so much as a sniff of a worker? Annoying isn’t it? Well, following complaints Highways England is now looking at the situation with a view to possibly increase the speed limit from 50mph to 60mph when it isn’t putting workers at risk.

The counter argument has been put forward in the past that when long-term motorway roadworks are being carried out the lanes are reduced, a good reason why the limit should be brought down as it reduces the danger to drivers also. But without workers in danger, it is felt that the limit could still be increased to 60mph to improve traffic flow.

As an example, they mention weekends when the limit could be increased to 60mph on Sundays then reduced back to 50mph ready for Monday. They are also looking at the possibility of retaining the 50mph limit when commuting to work but return home with a limit of 60mph and in places where the workers are some way away from the traffic lanes. Jim O’Sullivan, Highways England Chief Executive, said that whilst motorists appreciate the need for road works they also find them frustrating.

They have already carried out pilots with permanent limits of 55mph and 60mph but this is the first time they have considered switching limits – no doubt using latest technology. If they introduce this new scheme it should improve traffic flow. The sooner the better as far as I’m concerned. By Graham Hill