The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

If you are a regular reader of my musings you will know that little brings my blood to the boil quicker than reading about the abuse of the law by dealers and even finance companies. The problem that many consumers have is that they don’t understand their rights. The 30-day rule, introduced as part of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, isn’t difficult to understand.

If the product, in this case, a car, is of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described you have the right to reject the goods. The confusion comes when you finance the car on HP or PCP.

Too often the customer turns to the dealer in order to reject the car when in fact, legally, the rejection should be made to the finance provider. The fact that you negotiated the deal with the dealer is irrelevant. The dealer invoiced the car to the finance company. They have then financed THEIR car under contract to you.

In this instance, Auto Express reported a case whereby Jennifer Taylor of Darlington, County Durham took delivery of a Nissan Juke, financed by Nissan Finance. When she took delivery she noticed that the front and rear bumpers were a completely different shade of blue to the rest of the car.

So bad was the difference, first noticed by her dad, she could see the difference in shade from a hundred yards away. Within a couple of days, given the fault, she decided to reject the car. But instead of serving the rejection on the finance company she served it on the dealer.

The dealer carried out a test on the paint (strange given that the difference was easily visible). As a result, the dealer suggested that the bumpers needed a re-spray, costing £954. But they weren’t clear as to who would pay for the respray. As a result, Jennifer sent photos to Nissan head office.

The dealer immediately offered to respray the bumpers free of charge. But technicians warned that they might not guarantee a perfect paint match. Besides that, as Jennifer said, ‘I paid for a brand new car, not a resprayed one.’ Jennifer finally contacted Nissan Finance, explaining that she wanted to reject the car.

After 8 weeks of investigation, Nissan Finance wrote to Jennifer explaining that they still hadn’t come to a decision. When Auto Express finally got involved Nissan Finance, who clearly had done nothing, said that they were in the process of having the vehicle inspected by one of their Field Technical Engineers. They said to Auto Express, ‘If they identify a manufacturing defect with the bodywork, we will work with the customer to ensure a satisfactory solution.’

Can you sense it? Blood is boiling. Firstly a rejection is a rejection. Not an offer to repair the fault. The supplier, in this case, Nissan Finance, has one opportunity to put the problem right – only if you agree to it. Jennifer has rejected the car so a quick inspection should have been carried out which would have obviously shown that there was a colour difference. Rejection accepted!

What has a ‘manufacturing defect’ got to do with anything? That’s for the manufacturer to identify and correct if they need to change their procedures, nothing to do with the car rejection. This whole situation is getting out of control.

When the rejection was rejected the customer should have immediately contacted her local trading standards office and the Financial Ombudsman and made a formal complaint. It’s an example of a dealer and their linked finance provider sticking two fingers up to your legal rights.

My advice to all is to take out legal cover when you take out your car insurance and make sure that you are covered for such circumstances. A couple of letters from lawyers will soon sort things out! By Graham Hill

A study into the use of mobile speed cameras has found that 20 forces across the UK are now using speed cameras for other purposes. They have found that the quality of the photos taken by the latest equipment is now so good that, even at speed, it can capture the driver and detect whether he or she has a seatbelt on or is holding a mobile phone.

Whilst this is a good move towards safer roads Sarah Sillars, chief executive of IAM RoadSmart, was reported by AutoExpress as saying, ‘What we need are clear and consistent guidelines on what the cameras are being used for.’

I agree that we should be aware that police and local authority cameras can be used to determine whether you are breaking the law. Knowing that local authority town centre cameras can be used to convict those causing criminal damage, or worse, acts as a deterrent. In the same way, knowing that police mobile cameras could be used to catch those not wearing seatbelts or using a mobile phone, would also act as a deterrent as well as provide evidence for prosecutions. The move has to be welcomed given the fact that there are so few police on our roads. By Graham Hill

Highways England have been trialling smart LED road studs at the Hindhead Tunnel in Surrey. The trial was successful and they are now being installed at the Switch Island junction near Liverpool where the M57 and M58 meet a trio of A roads. 90,000 cars use the junction every day with a crash occurring every 2 weeks. The smart LED road studs work in conjunction with the traffic lights guiding cars into the correct lanes.

The project is likely to be the first of many tech upgrades that will be introduced by Highways England across the country to make roads safer. The first project in Liverpool will cost £3 million and consist of just 170 studs. Oxford-based Clearview Intelligence is undertaking the project using the smart studs. Highways England is looking to make our road network intelligent with smart studs being able to communicate with cars in the future.

Eventually, the smart studs should be able to provide information on road conditions, weather and traffic conditions helping to pave the way for autonomous cars. They will also be able to facilitate communication between autonomous cars and normal cars. Accidents will be detected and emergency services alerted. When in full production the developers estimate that the cost of installing the smart studs will be £10,000 per mile which is apparently a low cost.

The idea sounds very impressive, I can’t wait to see them in action.  By Graham Hill

The AA has carried out a survey amongst drivers and found that two-thirds felt that they could get away with careless driving due to a lack of traffic police. Researchers asked over 19,500 drivers a variety of questions about driving offences. In response to the questions, 65% said that they felt that they were unlikely to be caught or punished for tailgating or hogging the middle lane of a motorway. 55% said they felt they would get away with driving a car in a dangerous or defective condition.

49% felt that they would get away with not wearing a seatbelt and 44% felt that they would escape prosecution for jumping a red light. When asked about visibility of traffic police, 65% felt there was no visible presence on local roads compared to 43% suggesting no visible presence on motorways.

The drivers were next asked if they thought cameras alone could do the job of detecting careless driving instead of physical police. 71% believed that they couldn’t but only 45% believed that greater powers should be given to Highways England traffic officers when it comes to enforcement.

AA President Edmund King commented on their findings by expressing concern that a lack of officers on the roads meant that drivers felt they could get away with careless driving and other serious motoring offences.

Whilst using a mobile phone when driving is one of the most dangerous offences more than half felt they could get away with it without fear of being caught. This is causing concern to both the AA and the Government who are keen to stamp it out.

In summary, the report has revealed that drivers are taking less notice of the law as a result of fewer cops in cars patrolling our roads and motorways. Whilst everyone agrees that cameras can act as deterrents something more needs to be done to prevent accidents and serious or fatal injuries. The only solution – get more cops in cars. By Graham Hill

Of course, they are making the right noises but are they making the right noises for the wrong reasons? I rarely supply electric cars, even with all the publicity surrounding the benefits to the environment and low running costs.

The original argument was that they were too expensive and the range wasn’t sufficient. Whilst we have managed to supply some electric cars at heavily subsidised rates, in some cases at lower rates than their petrol and diesel equivalents, they were still not taken up in numbers, even when the potential customers rarely took their cars on long trips. Mainly driving them around their local town. Even then, they still refused to lease them.

Look below the surface and you can see that if all drivers reverted to electric cars the Treasury would lose an absolute fortune. On the other hand, thanks to mayor Khan and Chris Grayling, we have suddenly found diesels demonised as destroying the environment and an opportunity for the Chancellor to hit diesels hard with initial registration tax and initial road fund licence.

In addition, for years, the Government encouraged manufacturers to develop diesel engines capable of achieving close to 100 miles per gallon, resulting in businesses turning virtually 100% to diesel cars. As a result of the Government’s changed green policy towards diesel engine’d cars they have now hit innocent company car drivers with added benefit-in-kind tax because their companies have provided them with diesel cars, as was recommended by the Government. I believe that there’s a stitch up going on here.

Am I right? Am I being unfair on the Government? Well, one of the reasons why I have come to this conclusion is a report I read regarding the installation of EV charge points installed in 2017. Top of the list was France with 11,987, next was Germany with 7,937 followed by the UK at an abysmal 2,833. 4^th was Switzerland, just behind the UK at 2,716 with Norway 5^th at 2,116.

As usual, it is my view that whilst the Government strongly supports a cleaner environment and a wholesale move to electric cars in public, it is secretly holding back the growth of electric cars in order to screw over drivers of petrol and diesel cars through increased taxation in the short term. By Graham Hill

Following complaints and serious concerns expressed by drivers on Smart Motorways the Highways Agency has had a rethink and decided to place refuge areas, wherever practical, at distances of 1 mile and not 1.5 miles as is the case at the moment.

They will also extend a system, currently in operation, that automatically detects broken down vehicles in live lanes. Highways England will also install more refuge areas in locations  ‘with the highest levels of potential live lane stops’ and paint them orange to increase driver confidence.’ That’ll work then, nothing like a lick of orange paint to increase confidence eh!

Clearly something had to be done following a survey carried out by the AA that found 80% of respondents saying that they felt that smart motorways are more dangerous than traditional motorways. The automated breakdown detection system will be rolled out to all smart motorways across the country following a successful trial on the M25.

Smart motorways are now being accepted more but Highways England have found motorists still using lanes that have been blocked off with a red X signal. Whilst they have not been charging motorists for breaking the rules to date, in future they will incur fines as well as penalty points, due to begin this year – you have been warned. By Graham Hill

On the 20^th May this year new rules come into play. Special attention is being paid to diesel cars and new defect categories will come into force. New categories will be Minor, Major and Dangerous. Major and Dangerous will cause the car to fail the test. Cars with Minor defects will be allowed to pass but the faults will be recorded on the MOT certificate and online MOT record in the same way as ‘advisories’ are at the moment.

The new tighter rules have been put in place to stop those driving older diesel cars with particulate filters from having the casing opened and the filter removed rather than replace it. In future, if a diesel car, fitted with a particulate filter (DPF) emits ‘visible smoke of any colour’, during the metered tests will be given a ‘Major Fault’ and will fail their MOT.

Testers will also need to check the DPF canisters more carefully and if there is evidence of them being opened and re-welded, removed completely or otherwise tampered with the tester must refuse to test the car unless the owner can prove that it was done for ‘legitimate reasons such as filter cleaning.’

The changes have been brought in by the EU with the categories Major, Minor and Dangerous being applied, in future, to all cars across the EU. The wording of MOT certificates will be altered to reflect the changes. Unlike the current scheme if faults are found that could show that the driver is driving a dangerous car or in breach of the Road Traffic Act he could be prosecuted. That should produce a few headlines!

Some believe that the new rules will create even more confusion. For example, if a steering box had a leak it would be regarded as a minor problem and the car would pass its MOT. However, if the leak from the box is enough to be dripping that would lead to the fault being regarded as a major fault and result in a failure – really!!

There are mixed views regarding the new categories. My view is that they are not workable as there will be no consistency between MOT centres as testers take a different view to each fault they find. What may be Minor to one could be dangerous to another. We will see. By Graham Hill

According to What Car these are the top ten reasons why drivers call out breakdown services (in 2016)

1. Battery (433,964)
2. Puncture (328,863)
3. Alternator (65,118)
4. Engine (63,870)
5. Clutch (57,153)
6. Starter Motor (48,910)
7. Engine Control Unit (34,756)
8. Ignition Coil (29,287)
9. Gearbox (20,789)
10. Contaminated Diesel (19,711)

Very few of the above can be fixed at the side of the road so you would need to make sure that the cover you have is sufficient. Most new car policies that come with the car for either the first year or sometimes 3 years plus will be quite a good cover but some may only recover you to the nearest garage if you breakdown so check that. On the other hand your car insurance may cover you for a hire car so no need to include it in the breakdown policy.

Check the policies to make sure that you are sufficiently covered. Some policies will cover you in any car in which you are travelling so make sure that you are aware in case a friend’s or relative’s car breaks down and they don’t have a membership of a breakdown service whilst you are in the car.

Oh and make sure you have the number of the breakdown service in your phone, you don’t want to be fumbling about for the number when you break down in the middle of the night. By Graham Hill

According to Cap HPI, one in 16 cars on our roads has been clocked, i.e. had their mileage adjusted. The number of instances of clocking has increased by 25% over the last 3 years with over 40% of dealers having bought a second-hand car that they later found to be clocked. Cap HPI have estimated that an average family car can increase in value between £2,000 and £4,000 after wiping off 60,000 miles from the mileage reading.

The RAC agreed with the Cap HPI findings saying, ‘Our vehicle check data shows that discrepancies with MOT recorded mileages are on the increase for vehicles more than 3 years old.’ The cost of clocking to buyers has been estimated to be £800 million with an estimated 5 million cars showing incorrect mileages.

Years ago someone would climb underneath the car, attach a drill bit to the speedo cable and run the mileage forward till the desired mileage was reached after starting again from zero. Or someone would remove the speedo and with a screwdriver fiddle about with the counters but that often left telltale scratches on the dial and the counters. Not that I ever did anything like that.

It was as wrong then as it is now. But not illegal as long as you told the new owner that the mileage has been adjusted – yeah right. The trouble is these days mileages can be adjusted with a laptop and connector within a few minutes. There are companies out there who will ‘adjust your mileage’ for £100. Frankly, it’s a disgrace.

As always the press has turned on those taking out PCP agreements who realise how much the excess mileage bill will be at the end of the agreement and decide that it would be cheaper to adjust the speedo reading. As a result, it has been suggested by the press, that 3-year-old car are being returned to the leasing companies with an adjusted mileage. Of course years ago the only reason why cars were clocked was to increase value. These days it is suggested that it’s because drivers are trying to avoid excess mileage charges.

The fact is that years ago we had no warning lights in the cockpit. We either had the car serviced whenever we reached the service mileage or at the end of the year, whichever came sooner. Or, as was the case with this struggling accountant, we waited till we heard a crunching noise from the brakes, clutch, suspension etc. and got them replaced. So whilst we were being conned out our hard earned money by the clockers they weren’t putting lives at quite so much risk as those clocking these days.

As I’ve mentioned before, many of the safety systems in modern cars are triggered by the mileage on the car when repairs or replacements are necessary. So if a driver has had the mileage changed on a modern car he or she could be putting theirs and other’s lives at risk by throwing out all the safety alert systems that rely on mileage.

So if you are considering clocking – don’t! And if you are buying a used car check the service history for dates and mileages, look carefully at the condition, worn carpets on a low mileage car is always a giveaway. Test drive the car and ask the seller questions if you have concerns. Don’t get caught out by a dealer who puts a caveat into his sales agreement that states that the mileage isn’t verified.

Another trick of the trade is to show one mileage on the car when you test drive then adjust it back to the original true mileage when you collect it so that they can’t be prosecuted for selling you a car showing an incorrect mileage.

The crazy situation is that clocking can put lives at risk. I, like others feel that the Government should make the selling of the equipment that they use to adjust mileages online illegal and the clocking of cars by anyone other than a registered garage, who only does so after a fault is repaired, to be made completely illegal. As usual our laws are not fit for purpose. By Graham Hill

I reported last year that companies in particular, as well as many private drivers, were being tempted into Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) as a result of MPG’s being advertised of 130 – 150. One company in particular, under pressure from employees because PHEV’s come with low benefit-in-kind tax, switched much, if not all of their fleet to Mitsubishi Outlanders.

However, many of the drivers had no access to charge points so drove their cars as a normal hybrid but ended up driving the car mainly on the petrol engine. The result meant that the cars that should have achieved over 130 MPG ended up returning just 25 MPG. At the time of writing the company was haemorrhaging money, pouring it into the tanks of its cars.

The point is that as pressure increases on companies and consumers to take more fuel efficient cars you should understand that PHEV’s are only efficient if they are run on the electric motor which must be charged from a charge point, not the trickle charge from the petrol engine. Make sure that if you are going down this route you understand all the implications.

There are grants for charge points to be installed at work and at home but if you don’t have access to your own or a street charge point your car could end up costing a fortune in petrol costs and the increased emissions do more damage than if you’d taken a petrol car in the first place. By Graham Hill