The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

We all like to save money on insurance and many of us make sure that we move companies annually in order to keep our premiums down but there are still many drivers who simply can’t be arsed and allow themselves to be ripped off. In a chat to an insurance ‘insider’ recently he explained that your existing insurer will generally auto renew your policy the first time with a very modest 5% – 10% increase in premium.

This teaser leads you by the nose into a false sense of security. You think they are a fair and honest company looking after their existing customers. In fact the next time your insurance is up for renewal is when they will load the premium because experience shows that you won’t check the rate so carefully on the second renewal and just accept the increase.

My premium jumped from £400 per annum to over £700 in exactly these circumstances. However, I searched the marketplace and ended up with a much better policy for less than £300 per annum. Case proven. Other revelations from my insider was don’t go direct to the insurer, go via a comparison site as the insurance companies will offer a better deal when they are in competition with others.

I have often suggested that you put a parent, husband, wife, partner or friend onto your policy as a named driver if they have a clean licence as in many cases your premium will reduce as a result. I have only suggested that you add just one name to your policy, even though they may never drive your car, but my insider suggested several named drivers to reduce your premium even further.

It is also annoying when you see that you could obtain a lower rate as a new customer than what you are being quoted as an existing customer by the same insurance company. He suggested that you could wait till midnight when your current policy expires then a few minutes later, rather than renew, you apply for a new policy through the old insurance company claiming the new customer discount.

Another piece of advice was not to simply apply for third party cover thinking you can save money on the premium as it is now becoming common knowledge that an insurer will quote a cheaper rate for fully comp than third party, fire and theft insurance.

When questioned he explained that rather than this being a rip-off there is a solid reason. It would seem that most people taking out fully comp insurance will tend to be older, safer, experienced drivers whereas those taking out 3^rd party insurance tend to be younger, inexperienced, less safe drivers. Hence the higher premium.

Finally, and this is one of my suggestions, if you park your car in the street at night as opposed to in your garage, don’t lie about it as the premium can often be lower if your car is parked in a well lit street as opposed to your garage in which a thief could take his time to steal your car once he has broken into the garage. As with many things in the motor trade they are often not as they seem! By Graham Hill

There is no industry that I know that surrounds itself more with mystery and ‘smoke and mirrors’ than the motor and associated finance industry. Emissions, fuel consumption, APR, PCP, warranty the list goes on. These are all provided by manufacturers, dealers and funders in ways to totally mislead you.

We are now being fed a pile rubbish as we see the growth in plug in hybrid cars. We are told that they are great for the environment and you get a zillion miles to the gallon, as a result the Government gives you a chunk of money off the new car cost as they ‘apparently’ create less carbon dioxides than diesel and petrol engine cars.

We are told that the Government applies a grant of £2,500 if the electric part of the drive unit can achieve a range of up to 70 miles. More than 70 miles and you can have a grant of £4,500 but you have to bear in mind that the hybrid car is much more expensive than its petrol or diesel equivalent in the first place, certainly much more than the grant provided as an incentive.

Plug in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) look very impressive, low fuel cost and tax incentives are grabbing the attention of fleets as well as consumers but the problem is that not all drivers are driving these cars as they should be. The most common omission is the recharging of the car on a regular basis. This in itself can increase the whole life cost by 15% according to Wayne Millward, Fleet Consultant at contract hire company Arval.

For fleets the low benefit in kind tax is very attractive to employees but equally the employees aren’t that interested in efficiency. Even more so if fuel is provided as part of their employment package so they don’t ever plug in their cars to an electric charger. There are of course others who don’t have regular access to charging points, either at home or in the street where they park, making it virtually impossible to charge the batteries using the plug in option.

Either way, when the car moves over from the electric motor to the petrol engine, fuel efficiency plummets and CO2 emissions increase. So unless you or your company drivers use the cars as intended you could be vastly out of pocket. From a running cost point of view if a PHEV is not used as was intended the costs soar and the atmosphere suffers. You would be better off driving a normal diesel or petrol.

So why don’t the car manufacturers do anything to address this issue? I’ll tell you why, because the more hybrid cars they sell the lower the declared average CO2 emissions of all the cars they provide across Europe. In 2015 they had to get the average emissions down to 130g/km which most did.

However, this was based on the manufacturer’s claimed CO2 emissions for PHEV’s being included in the mix, assuming that the cars were regularly plugged into the mains. The fact is that very few were and is yet another con trick perpetrated by the car manufacturers as they know this is what happens! By Graham Hill

Now here is something really interesting that proves you can learn something new every day! And this piece of information could affect every single driver with his own insurance as well as companies running fleet cars. It all came about after I read a question regarding 3^rd party damage, following a car accident, when the damage is caused to local authority owned property.

For example if you were to hit a road sign or street light or maybe smash into a bollard or worse still damage barriers or even the road surface. I was shocked to read that a company running a fleet of vehicles was billed £46,000 for barrier repairs without realising the length of the replacement barriers.

The warning was raised by claims management company actually called Claims Management & Adjusting. They had found that in particular fleet operators were being targeted by local authorities for some obscene repair costs. As it turned out the claim mentioned was for a much shorter stretch of barrier as the authority had claimed in yards but the length was only a third as the measurement was actually in feet, not as stated in yards.

After pointing it out the claim was written off. The claims company also claimed a success when an invoice for £56,000 worth of re-surfacing work was challenged after obtaining information under the Freedom Of Information Act that showed a larger stretch of road had been repaired for £750.

It would seem that not only are there a few disproportionate claims for damage but Highways England has allowed certain contractors to decide upon charges and repairs without further reference as long as the claims were under a threshold, commonly £10,000. This caused me to look further into this situation and what a can of worms it turned out to be.

Most people are of the opinion that you only have to report an accident to the police and your insurance for the following reasons; if someone has been injured (report to police and insurance), there is a claim going to be made against you by another motorist (insurance only) or you are going to make a claim on your insurance for damage repairs to your own car or your contents/passengers (insurance only).

However, knock down a bollard and cause little or no damage to your car you may think that this is the responsibility of the local authority and simply drive off. In fact you have caused damage to a third party’s property so by driving off you could be committing a criminal offence. But then you may think that no-one saw you so where is the evidence but with CCTV cameras and people with mobile phones everywhere you may find that several weeks later you receive a bill for the damages.

But having not reported the accident to your insurance company within a certain period (see your policy) they may no longer be obliged to pay out. It seems  that it can take several months for a local authority to make a claim against a driver. Whilst I’m told that every car insurance policy will cover you for third party damage, that isn’t just someone else’s car or someone’s front wall, it also covers you for what is known as ‘street furniture’ which includes road signs, bollards, hoardings etc.

But if you fail to meet the terms and conditions of your insurance policy or they can prove contributory negligence you could be facing a hefty repair bill. In addition you are obliged to stop after an accident and pass your details to anyone involved or the owners of property that has been damaged. If there are no casualties you don’t have to involve the police.

However, if you have damaged privately or authority owned property you must report the accident to the police if the owner of the property is not available to take the details from you. So as you can see this is a bit of a minefield and what may have seemed like a minor accident could potentially leave you thousands of pounds out of pocket! By Graham Hill

Back in March of this year Ford made a fairly major announcement at the Geneva Motor Show that few newspapers or car journals picked up. They announced a new service scheme that would initially be rolled out to fleet customers but could finally be made available to all customers of Ford cars and vans both new and used.

As the manufacturers compete against large networks of independent service providers and small garages they have come up with a cheap and competitive option, mobile servicing. Specialist mobile service vans have been around for a few years to service commercial vehicles, that are often parked for hours on site or outside buildings, in which the drivers are working, saving the owners time and cost by having their vehicles serviced by a mobile unit during down time.

Initially Ford have successfully rolled out 8 mobile service units, as a pilot scheme, within the M25. They have now been operating for over a year. Ford’s chairman, Andy Barratt, announced that he plans to increase this number within the M25 to more than 100 operating out of Ford Stores and Transit centres. The scheme will be extended nationally if seen to be successful.

The first cars that will be included in the scheme will be the Ford premium brand, Vignales, sold through their 68 Ford Stores. It’s an interesting concept that other manufacturers will be looking at very carefully. By Graham Hill

I don’t know about you but speed cameras totally confuse me. Many have been shut down around the country because they were too expensive to keep going which is strange because I would have thought anything more than a couple of fines a week and they would be in profit.

I’m a believer in speed cameras being installed near danger spots such as schools, old people’s homes and play areas but as we know they were often put up behind a bush, tree or building where there was no extra danger to pedestrians or other drivers, they were there to catch motorists and boost the coffers of the local authority or those managing the cameras.

Well that’s what I thought but I clearly got that wrong with so many shut down. On the other hand those who argue against speed cameras would claim that they are unnecessary as the number of detected motoring offences more than halved between 2004 and 2014, from 4.33 million to 1.62 million, in their minds proving that cameras are unnecessary. Really?

Maybe it has something to do with the huge drop in active speed cameras. Having reviewed the situation a committee of MP’s have suggested that relatively low cost average speed cameras should be used more widely. These would help to replace the large drop in traffic police who not only caught those speeding but also acted as a deterrent parked at the side of motorways or simply cruising our roads.

The committee have recommended that revenue generated by fines should be re-invested, through road safety grants, rather than kept by local authorities. Even with the shut down of many Gatso’s 90% of all Fixed Penalty Notices in England and Wales are detected by cameras. Exceeding the speed limit resulted in 254 fatal accidents in 2014, 16% of all fatal accidents, as well as 1,199 serious accidents.

Whilst the committee has recommended the use of average speed cameras there are some experts that have said that you have to ask why people speed and in many instances it is a result of being under the influence of alcohol or drugs, so these people get away with a fine and points for speeding when in fact they were committing a much more serious crime.

Speed cameras also allow those driving carelessly or without due care and attention to get away with a relatively small fine and 3 points. Personally I’m not sure what the answer is but time will tell if the roads are made safer through the installation of average speed cameras on motorways and A roads. By Graham Hill

The number of plug in car grants could reach the Government’s latest target much quicker than expected after 11,000 applications were made in February. The surge came about because the £5,000 Government grant was to be replaced by a new grant structure for Ultra Low Emission Vehicles (ULEV) as of 1^st March.

The new structure, consisting of 3 tiers, is now in force. For cars with zero emissions and a range of more than 70 miles (category 1) there is a grant of £4,500 on offer from the Government. Vehicles with a lower zero emission range than 70 miles (category 2 & 3), such as plug in hybrids, with either a petrol or diesel engine there is a £2,500 grant.

There is also a price cap, so category 2 & 3 cars costing more than £60,000 will receive no grant although category 1 cars with a zero emission range of over 70 miles will attract the full £4,500 grant. According to the Office of Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV) a total of 16,000 low emission plug in vehicles were ordered in January and February compared to 14,500 for the whole of 2015.

So clearly zero and low emission cars are gaining acceptance helped along by some very attractive deals from the leasing companies. OLEV explained that the new grants are set to run till March 2017 or until 40,000 sales of category 1 vehicles and combined sales of 45,000 category 2 & 3 vehicles have been reached. To date a total of 67,000 grants have been provided and on current trends the Government targets could well be reached before the end of the year.

The Department for Transport would not confirm that due to the increased pace of hybrid and zero emission car sales they would review their targets but given their ultimate objective that all vehicles should have zero tailpipe emissions by 2050 it is highly likely that they will continue to encourage the sale of low emission vehicles with grants, albeit that they are likely to reduce in time.

On the other hand support is likely through improving lease rates as manufacturers aim to hit their lowering emission targets across their vehicle ranges. So if you are looking to help save the planet keep an eye out for my great hybrid deals as a preference to buying outright. There could be even greater savings than the grants offered by the Government. By Graham Hill

I know we all get a little irritated when we see the sign ahead slowing us down to 40mph and the 3 lanes we were happily trundling along about to reduce to a mere single lane but I didn’t realise that when this happens that the roadworkers are in serious danger.

Not of being run over by an inattentive speeding motorist, although this does happen, but in danger of being duffed up by a motorist who feels annoyed that he has been slowed down, abused, spat at, hit with all sorts of projectiles etc. Labourers near Wivanhoe in Essex have been subject to increasing violence from passing motorists whilst creating a new cycle lane, with one motorist caught brandishing a knuckle duster.

The local council has now followed other councils with similar problems and issued workers with police style body cameras to hopefully act as a deterrent as well as provide proof in the case where an attack takes place leading to a prosecution. Other councils suffering similar problems are in the North East and Midlands leading to the issue of these cameras to workers. Reports of attacks range from workers being punched to being shot at with an air rifle.

Ten companies that carry out roadworks have reported 441 incidents in one year alone, including 174 physical attacks. With this scale of incidents it probably won’t be long before all roadworkers are issued with body cams and even portable CCTV to record any illegal behaviour or attacks by motorists.

A sad reflection on our society when people are just doing their jobs. And if you want to duff up someone find the health & safety pen pusher who decided to cone off 5 miles of road for a hundred yards worth of repair work! By Graham Hill

You will probably remember the sad case of the Glasgow refuse truck driver who fainted at the wheel resulting in an accident causing six people to lose their lives and several more to suffer injuries.

The driver had suffered fainting attacks since 1976 but this was unknown to his employer who was held responsible, as any employer would, for the actions of their employee and for allowing him to drive their truck in the first place.

This was still the case even though they claimed that the driver had not told them of his condition. But this raises an interesting point because I only recently found out that it is unlawful for an employer to ask a job applicant about their disability or health until after they have been offered the job.

How crazy is that? However, you can apply for the medical records on the applicant, provided he or she agrees, under the Access to Medical Reports Act 1988. The medical practitioner (normally the applicant’s GP) is then obliged to provide the records requested.

If you are an employer who either provides company vehicles or pays employees to drive their own vehicles on company business by way of a car allowance or pence per mile, you have an obligation to ensure that they have the appropriate licences and do not suffer from health conditions that may affect their driving.

As an employer you are able to carry out regular assessments on drivers to ensure that they are still fit to drive. And as an employee if you have a condition that may affect your driving you are equally obliged to make your employer aware. By Graham Hill