The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

European think tank claims ‘carmakers’ strategy to promote sales of inefficient, higher-emitting SUVs” is making CO2 targets hard to hit.

 

The popularity of relatively heavy, unaerodynamic SUVs is to blame for the recent rise in new-car carbon dioxide emissions not, as has often been reported, the falling popularity of diesel cars, according to a European think tank.

 

Industry figures show the average CO2 emissions of a new car rose by 2.9 per cent in 2018. European new-car CO2 emissions have also increased following years of decline, falling by nearly 22g/km between 2010 and 2016, but subsequently increasing by a provisional 2g/km in 2018.

 

Carmakers and environmental experts have often cited the falling popularity of diesel cars – which emit less CO2 than their petrol equivalents – as key to this bucked trend. But the European Federation for Transport and Environment think tank, more commonly known as Transport and Environment, says “contrary to carmakers’ claims”, the SUV “sales boom” has increased average CO2 emissions by 2.6g/km since 2013, with falling diesel sales responsible for a mere 0.25g/km rise.

 

The average emissions of the cars produced by manufacturers must be 95g/km by 2021, with penalties of €95 per g/km, per car, for companies not meeting those targets. Potentially huge fines have seen Fiat Chrysler team up with electric car firm Tesla to ‘share’ CO2 emissions.

 

Transport and Environment warns that “EU carmakers are only halfway to achieving their 2021 CO2 target…This is explained by carmakers’ strategy to promote sales of inefficient, higher-emitting SUVs”. Transport and Environment also claims carmakers have decided to “delay the investments into clean technologies required to meet the car CO2 law (in force since 2009) until the last moment.”

 

In July last year, the UK Government’s environmental watchdog made similar claims about SUVs, but this latest report puts firm figures on how much of a rise SUVs are reportedly responsible for.

 

SUVs find favour with buyers for various reasons, including ease of access for those with reduced mobility; convenience for parents who would have to stoop to strap their children into child seats in a conventional car; and the added road presence some motorists feel they have.

 

Visibility from the high driver’s seat of an SUV can also be improved compared to a conventional hatchback or saloon but, with SUVs making up just 7 per cent of the new-car market in 2009, 36 per cent today, and a predicted 40 per cent by 2021, that height advantage is likely to soon diminish as Europe’s pool of vehicles grows in stature.

 

Toyota is highlighted by the report as being the company best-placed to meet its CO2 target thanks to the fact that 56 per cent of its European sales are petrol-electric hybrids. The Renault Nissan Alliance is also in a strong position, mainly, according to the report “due to an early focus on sales of EVs such as the Nissan Leaf and the Renault Zoe.” Volkswagen, it is said, “could comply through a variety of tools such as improvements to combustion engines (new petrol engine and mild hybridisation of the new Golf) and a big ramp up of EVs through its all-electric ID.3.”

 

Firms most at risk of struggling with the 95g/km target include Honda and Ford, with Hyundai-Kia also highlighted as a possible concern. Transport and Environment says, however, that Hyundai and Kia have “recently begun a significant ramp-up of its EV and hybrid portfolio and sales.” The authors also consider that “Fiat-Chrysler would likely not be able to meet its target but will now comply thanks to its pooling arrangement with Tesla.”

 

Julia Poliscanova, Transport and Environment’s director of clean vehicles, criticised car makers for not doing enough to reduce emissions, but predicted: “We are going to see good quality, affordable EVs in the next year or two, not ten, and that’s excellent news for consumers who’ll be saving lots of money at the pump.”  By Graham Hill with the help of Auto Express

The Transport Select Committee calls for ‘nationwide ban’ on pavement parking to prevent pedestrians from being put in danger.

 

Drivers should be banned from parking on pavements so that pedestrians are not put in danger and vulnerable people, such as the elderly and the disabled, don’t feel trapped in their homes, MPs have said.

 

A Transport Select Committee report has concluded that the Government should implement a ‘nationwide ban’ on pavement parking across England, with room in the legislation for the Secretary of State for Transport to allow local authorities to make exemptions in their respective areas.

 

The report argues that pavement parking places pedestrians in danger from moving traffic or trip hazards, such as a kerb, by forcing them to step into the road to get around stationary vehicles. People with mobility issues or visual impairment and their carers are “disproportionately affected” by this.

 

In addition, the Committee says pavement parking exacerbates or can be a cause of social isolation and loneliness, as it makes vulnerable people feel unable to safely leave their homes or physically prevents them from doing so altogether in some cases.

 

The report took aim at the Government, with the Committee finding it “profoundly regrettable” that no “concrete actions” have yet been taken to tackle the issue of pavement parking.

 

At present, pavement parking is banned in London and Scotland is considering following suit. In 2015, the Government said it would look at the issue in England, but the resulting consultations and reviews did nothing to improve the situation.

 

Lillian Greenwood MP, chair of the Transport Select Committee, commented: “We are deeply concerned about the Government’s failure to act on this issue, despite long-standing promises to do so.

 

“We appreciate that this is a thorny problem that may be difficult to resolve to the satisfaction of all, but the Government’s inaction has left communities blighted by unsightly and obstructive pavement parking and individuals afraid or unable to leave their homes or safely navigate the streets.

 

“Scotland is currently legislating for a national ban, while London took action to tackle this issue 45 years ago. The Government must act to improve the situation in the rest of England and it must do so quickly.”

 

A spokesperson for the Department for Transport said: “We are committed to ensuring that our roads work for everyone, but are aware that pavement parking can cause real problems for a variety of road users. This is why the Department recently concluded a review to better understand the case for changing the law, and will be announcing our next steps over the coming months.” By Graham Hill with thanks to AutoExpress

Yes they do! It’s all well and good having a car that sweeps you up to 60 miles per hour in 4 seconds but that’s no good if you can’t stop the bloody thing. OK, it may not be that bad but tests carried out by various car magazines have revealed some surprising results.

 

In the first place an electric car doesn’t have an engine, it has an electric motor but add in the bank of batteries and the weight shoots up making an equivalent EV much heavier that takes longer to stop even with upgraded brakes.

 

The next factor is the rolling resistance of the tyres. In order to maximise the efficiency of the car it must be fitted with as low rolling resistance tyres as possible. Unfortunately, this means that whilst some low rolling resistance tyres have very good grip they don’t tend to be as good as those fitted as standard to petrol and diesel cars.

 

Tyre technology improves constantly so the EV car manufacturers are expecting the situation to improve as new tyres developed specifically for just EV’s are launched.

 

Finally, there is the regenerating braking technology that takes unused energy that would normally be lost and transfers it back to the battery. These systems can be set in such a way as to slow the car down as soon as you take your foot off the accelerator. This can give the feeling of not braking so aggressively when you apply the brake.

 

However, this should not affect the braking in an emergency braking situation. Clearly, more work needs to be done here! By Graham Hill

Many new cars, without most drivers knowing it have a battery recharging system fitted that operates in a similar way to KERS on an F1 motor racing car. This happens because with so much draw on the battery in a modern car with climate control, audio systems, sat navs and other big users of the electrical system, including firing up the car, more power generation is required than a traditional car generator.

 

With so much charging and draining going on the batteries must be much more sturdy than the batteries fitted to my early cars so it’s important that you have fitted the correct quality of battery when changing it. A situation understood by an Audi TT driver who bought a used car for use mainly at the weekend.

 

So he bought a replacement battery from the RAC and got them to fit it. All was fine but after about 18 months and well within the warranty period the battery failed. He called out the RAC, costing him £30 as he wasn’t a member but they said if the battery was faulty they would replace the battery and refund the call-out fee.

 

However, when the engineer inspected the battery using their test equipment it said the battery was faulty but the diagnostic machine told the engineer not to replace it. RAC Customer Care responded to the driver’s complaint, as explained by Whatcar, in a letter that said the most probable cause of the failure was lack of use which breached their warranty as being poorly maintained.

 

The driver, knowing that lack of use could still drain the battery and over 18 months he had only driven 2,030 miles he put the battery on trickle charge when the battery was not in use. This was explained to Whatcar who stepped up and contacted the RAC.

 

In the end the driver was reimbursed the callout and the cost of a new battery but as we expect people to use their cars less and use public transport more surely the manufacturers should look at this situation and make batteries that hold their charge better and ensure that unnecessary systems shut down when the car is parked.

 

In the meantime, whether it’s a warranty, insurance policy or finance agreement it’s important to read them and understand all the terms and conditions. This is something that I’m campaigning for, better pre-contract information. The driver should have been made aware of this key piece of information before taking the battery.

 

By Graham Hill

As the number of stolen cars fitted with keyless entry continue to hit the headlines causing drivers with the system fitted to their cars to have sleepless nights whilst others of us are paying for the cars stolen in increased premiums.

 

Some have taken to fitting steering locks each time they leave their cars but some manufacturers have started taking steps to avoid crooks being able to pick up signals coming from your ‘key’ indoors, then transmitting the signal to a colleague by the car then gaining entry to the car and driving away.

 

Ford have brought out a simple switch, whereby you can disable the keyless entry but as one owner found, having bought his desirable Focus ST just before the switch was fitted it can’t be retro-fitted.

 

But all is not lost. There are pouches and boxes that you can put your ‘key’ into that will block the signal and if you’re brave apparently you can put it in the microwave but don’t forget it’s in there as any metal could blow up your microwave or if plastic it will melt.

 

Ford, along with other manufacturers have come up with a new keyless key that uses sensor technology. Called the sleeping key fob it is still to be launched but when released Ford drivers will be able to buy the new style fobs for £65 per key (Fiesta) and £72 per key (Focus) with no mention of any other models.

 

A sensor in the fob detects that there has been no movement for more than 40 seconds and disables it so it no longer emits a signal. Whilst the new keys should have been available in May Whatcar reported that the keys were still not available in their October edition.

 

Other manufacturers are working on similar replacements so contact your local dealer for an update if you are still concerned about crooks gaining entry to your car using keyless signals.

 

By Graham Hill

As we see a mass push to turn motorways with hard shoulders into Smart Motorways, Highways England has revealed the costs to motorists.

 

Each camera on new “smart” sections of Britain’s motorways is expected to rack up £600,000 in fines every year.

 

Disobedient drivers will be slapped with £100 fines and three penalty points under the controversial new system being laid out by road chiefs.

 

So many motorists are expected to be pounded by the punishment that police are recruiting more staff to deal with the extra workload.

 

One of Britain’s biggest police forces, Thames Valley, is taking on an extra 15 civilians to process all the fines expected when Highways England switches on the smart sections of the M4 and M40 later this year.

 

The move has prompted complaints that drivers are being milked for cash under the new system.

 

Smart sections use variable speed limits and the hard shoulder as an extra lane during busy periods to control traffic and improve safety.

 

There have already been calls for smart motorways to be scrapped after four people were killed on one stretch of the M1 as there was no safe place to stop.

 

AA president Edmund King said: “If more resources were put into making the gantry signs accurate and the variable speeds right for the conditions, you might not need more resources for enforcement.

 

“Accurate technology and more consistent and appropriate speed limits would actually reduce the levels of fines.

 

“Any ‘income’ from fines should go into making these roads safer by sorting technology and doubling the number of lay-bys.”

 

The huge numbers expected to be caught by the automatic cameras – either for breaking the speed limit or straying into lanes that have been temporarily closed with a red ‘X’ gantry sign – are revealed in a report by Thames Valley police.

 

It said of the smart motorways which will be introduced later in the year: “It is anticipated that the M40 and M4 will each capture 30,000 infringements per year.”

 

A Highways England spokesman said: “There are around 150 speed camera sites on smart motorways; normally one between each junction.

 

“They are clearly signed and are bright yellow for visibility. The vast majority of drivers on smart motorways drive within the speed limit.”

 

There are already more than 200 miles of smart motorway in the UK, including London, Birmingham and the North.

 

Advice by Highways England reported in the Sun is as follows:

 

 How to safely drive on a smart motorway

Highways England gives the following advice when driving on a smart motorway:

• Never drive under a red “X”
• Keep to the speed limit shown on the gantries
• A solid white line indicates the hard shoulder – don’t drive in it unless directed
• A broken white line indicates a normal running lane
• Use the refuge areas for emergencies if there’s no hard shoulder
• Put your hazard lights on if you break down

 

By Graham Hill and the help of The Sun.

Fears that Germany is heading for recession are mounting after industrial production in the eurozone’s most important economy fell sharply in July. The 0.6pc drop in factory output will put pressure on the European Central Bank to take urgent action.

 

The official data for July followed up the disclosure that total output, or GDP, in Germany fell in the second quarter. A further decline in GDP between July and September would mean that Germany is in recession.

 

The driving force behind this reduction is reported to be car manufacturing which has plummeted by 20% from its peak at the end of 2017. The main contributor has been the sharp switch from diesel and petrol to hybrid and electric vehilces.

 

A transition that the Germans have struggled to keep up with when compared to the rest of the world. And with the spotlight on their biggest producer – VW, they have also struggled to keep on top of the tougher real-world emissions tests applied to current petrol and diesel models.

 

Whilst this has generated a financial cloud over the whole of the Eurozone – when Germany suffers, everyone suffers! And it may make life a little easier when Boris finally gets round to negotiating a deal, how will this affect British buyers of German cars?

 

Well, I’ve got it wrong in the past but whereas I had predicted increases in European car costs and lease rates at the beginning of the year I hadn’t expected Germany to be on the verge of recession.

 

So this could be good news for German car buyers In the UK and good for lease rates as German producers fight to keep their factories open and maintain staff levels. This could result in some large discounts coming our way and some exceptional lease rates.

 

That may sound like a good reason to hold back your decision to take a new car but I should add that this may not be the case if we exit without a deal or if the German economy suddenly shows signs of improving so if you see a good deal, don’t delay – ‘fill yer boots’! You may never see the deal again. By Graham Hill

There are many similarities between the way that consumers are assessed when taking out car insurance and taking out finance. The main similarity is that decisions are based on either inaccurate or inadequate data and what could be described as illegally biased interpretations.

 

I will be talking more about the inadequacies of the finance systems in due course but in the meantime the following appeared in Saturday’s Mail regarding Insurance premiums.

 

Researchers at Which created a series of scenarios to see how much they would be quoted on Confused.com and MoneySupermarket.com. In one, the driver had damaged his car, but had not claimed for the repairs. Two of the cheapest quotes – from Hastings Direct and Churchill – wrongly guessed the driver had made a claim as a result and factored this into the quote.

 

When this was corrected, Hastings Direct lowered its premium by £10, but Churchill made a reduction of £207 – a cut of more than 25 per cent.

 

Which? also found that while it is compulsory to declare all recent driving incidents, not all comparison sites let you specify which, if any, led to claims, resulting in some incorrect assumptions.

 

Which? previously showed how some insurers offer discounts of as much as 15 per cent for using a dashcam, however many comparison websites did not. Seemingly irrelevant questions about lifestyle and personal circumstances also affect quotes.

 

For example, they were on average 4 per cent cheaper for homeowners and 4 per cent more for divorcees – apparently based on the assumption a divorcee is more likely to have an accident.

 

It also found that the way drivers describe their job title can influence premiums.

 

When the driver called himself a painter (working in art), his cheapest was £372, but when he listed himself as an artist, it fell to £343.

 

Which? Money editor Jenny Ross, said: ‘To beat these quirks compare different routes for buying insurance, look at various levels of cover from different providers, and shop around every year.’

 

Confused.com said the findings will help them work with insurers to improve their quote process. MoneySuperMarket said: ‘We work with insurers to make sure we ask the right questions, however we do not control how insurers interpret our data.

 

‘We don’t ask customers to supply the cost of a recent claim as this is often something they will not know – for example, costs may have been paid direct by an insurance firm to a garage for repairs.’

 

Hastings Direct said: ‘When the customer clicks through to our website, we do give the option to check their data which would enable them to specify further.’

 

Churchill said: ‘Anyone purchasing through a comparison website can still phone their preferred company to provide any further detail.’ By Graham Hill thanks to Which? And The Daily Mail

Number plate offences are at a five-year high, so just how easy is it to buy a dodgy plate and what is the DVLA doing about it?

The UK’s number plate system is wide open to abuse because of the easy availability of fake plates online, while the number of traffic stops for missing or dodgy plates reached a five-year high in 2018, Auto Express can exclusively reveal.

 

In two linked investigations, we asked police how many number plate offences they had issued tickets for between 2014 and 2018; separately, then we ordered three sets of number plates from online suppliers, all of which were delivered no questions asked, and would be illegal to display on the road.

 

• How to transfer a number plate from one car to another

 

Official data obtained by Auto Express via Freedom of Information requests shows that police issued 9,170 tickets for number plate offences last year across the UK, the highest figure in the past five years.

 

Number plate offences

2014    8,635

2015    7,662

2016    7,671

2017    8,247

2018    9,170

A total of 41,385 stops were made by police between 2014 and 2018, with officers issuing 11 per cent more tickets last year compared with 2017 for number plates not meeting regulations, or plates that were missing from vehicles altogether. London’s Metropolitan police issued the most tickets or rectification notices for dodgy plates (4,411) over the past five years, with Northern Ireland police issuing the second highest number of tickets (4,005).

 

What’s the penalty?

 

Motorists can be issued with a Traffic Offence Reports (TOR) or a Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme (VDRS) notice (escaping a penalty if the fault is fixed within 14 days) for various offences related to number plates, including missing or obscured plates, and plates not conforming to regulations.

 

Top forces for number plate offences

Police force     Offences (2014-18)

Metropolitan   4,411

Police Servic of Northern Ireland       4,005

West Yorkshire           3,501

Humberside     2,652

North Wales    2,274

Of the 35 police forces to respond to our request, 23 provided offence codes, revealing that roughly 70 per cent of stops made for number plate offences are for driving or keeping a vehicle “when the registration mark fails to conform to regulations”. Number plates not meeting regulations could contain improperly placed characters, be made up using an unofficial font, or have colour-capped screws placed in their characters to change how the plate reads.

 

What do the authorities say?

 

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) told us that all number plate suppliers based in the UK “must be registered with DVLA and must conduct checks before supplying number plates”. The organisation added,“It is an offence to not request the required documentation from the customer [or] keep a record of the transaction, or to supply a non-compliant number plate.”

 

However, at least two of the suppliers we ordered plates from are based in Jersey and they may not be breaking the law there, because it is a separate jurisdiction from the UK.

 

The DVLA told us: “Our officers conduct intelligence-led enforcement activities to tackle a wide range of offences, to investigate and, where necessary, prosecute suppliers – including those who trade illegally using the internet.” The organisation also highlighted that drivers who alter the appearance of their plates face a fine of up to £1,000 and risk having their personalised registrations confiscated.

 

• Banned UK number plates

 

The National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) told us “ANPR [automatic number plate recognition] data is increasingly enabling police to identify vehicles operating on cloned plates using tools such as journey time analysis. Thisfurther informs our investigative work.” The organisation also advised that “local forces continue to offer crime prevention advice… dependent upon the particular offending seen in their locality”.

 

Jack Cousens, head of roads policy for the AA, said: “Car cloning is on the rise and the DVLA is not doing enough to tackle online retailers. Buying banned registration plates in road-legal specifications is concerning, but more worrying

 

is the ability to lift a number plate off a website and copy it without any ownership checks.

 

“Ultimately, the buck stops with DVLA for not doing enough to tackle online retailers issuing plates to those who have no legal right to claim them.”

 

What we did

 

Cloned plate

 

We copied a registration from a BMW X5 (the most commonly stolen car in 2018, according to Tracker) offered for sale in an online classified ad.

 

We then ordered this number plate, LS15 ***, from Jersey-based My Showplates, and were not asked for any details aside from an address and credit card number during the ordering process. The plates arrived within two days. My Showplates did not respond to our requests for comment.

 

Banned plate

 

We bought the number plate BO19 CKS – a registration banned from the road by the DVLA for being too rude – from A1 Show Plates, a company with an almost identical address to My Showplates.

 

Despite selecting ‘Road Legal’ from a ‘Plate Legality’ menu, this banned plate arrived within two days, and we were not asked for documentation other than an address and credit card number. A1 Show Plates did not respond to our requests for comment.

 

Incorrectly spaced plate

 

NU02BER, a legitimate reg offered for sale by the DVLA, was supplied to us by Show Plates Direct. But we took out the space between the ‘2’ and ‘B’ when ordering the plate, making it illegal to display on the road.

 

We contacted Show Plates Direct, who initially claimed that it had “no such order for this registration or indeed payment from this E-mail address”. The firm did not reply when we provided an order number and explained to them that we used a different E-mail address to place our order.

 

The responsible vendor

While the three companies above sent us dodgy plates with no questions asked, one supplier acted in accordance with UK regulations.

 

• Most expensive personalised number plates

 

DVLA-approved, Yorkshire-based Number1Plates asked us to provide a copy of our V5C logbook, retention certificate or other proof of ownership, as well as a utility or bank bill. We did not send these documents, did not receive the dodgy plates and Number1Plates subsequently refunded our £25.97.

 

Why are fake plates bad news?

 

Police Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras may not read improperly spaced number plates, plates with incorrect fonts and those with colour-capped screws. This makes crime enforcement more difficult – although police stress that ANPR tools are becoming more sophisticated.

 

A more worrying issue is cloned plates. A criminal with a stolen car may find an identical car for sale online, get a duplicate plate made up based on the advertised car’s registration, then fit this plate to the stolen car. The advertised car won’t have been reported stolen so this cloned plate won’t activate police alerts, despite being placed on a stolen car. The number of drivers telling the DVLA that their car had been cloned has quadrupled over the past six years. By Graham Hill thanks to Auto Express

The Road Vehicles Registration and Licensing (Amendment) Regulations 2017 came into force on May 6, 2017 and drivers abroad and fleet operators, who may have either ignored them or were unaware of them would be wise to take note of them.

 

As we prepare to exit the EU it is likely we will see the Europeans take a tougher position when UK drivers are found to commit motoring offences.

 

The regulations require the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) to provide details of the registered keeper of vehicles alleged to have been involved in certain motoring offences across the EU.

 

The details include name, address and date of birth; or legal status if the keeper is not an individual, as well as the make/model and chassis number of the relevant vehicle.

 

The alleged offences include failure to stop at a red light, drink-driving or driving under the influence of drugs, speeding and using a mobile phone while driving.

 

Cross-border EU prosecutions for road offences have been unusual, rare even, but these regulations may change that situation for the better from a road safety point of view.

 

Of course, for employers, there’s the risk that they have simply added another layer of bureaucracy to operations, as well as opening employees to the risk of a foreign prosecution for offences they may deny having committed.

 

In real terms, there are some business considerations for those with a European reach. One of these could be the requirement to engage with foreign justice systems – language barriers and cultural differences may present a challenge, for example.

 

Larger operators may have been able to task in-house legal teams with managing this role, but smaller players may need to find external support – and, of course, this will come at a cost.

 

Another consideration is the interplay between employee relations and the regulations.

 

Businesses will need to ensure their employment contracts and handbooks are up to date, and that their procedures for managing employees accused/convicted of criminal offences abroad are adequate.

 

Operators should also consider their position with regards to supporting (or otherwise) accused employees with legal assistance – especially if a guilty verdict would have a significant impact on the employee’s ability to continue in their role.

 

For those travelling abroad in their own cars, it is important to have insurance cover in the case of a foreign prosecution. Not all insurance policies, even with legal cover, will defend the insured whilst abroad. Check with your insurer. By Graham Hill with thanks to Fleet News.