The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

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

Things in the world of motoring are completely unbalanced when I find myself agreeing, more than once in a decade, with commentator Mike Rutherford. Not only that and just to show that I think about my blog, this item follows on from the last entry explaining that we are suffering a terrible underspend in our roads infrastructure in Britain.

As Mike points out we are around number 70 in the list of countries around the world when it comes to miles of road per capita. In this country, we have around 67 million inhabitants with a road network of jus 263,000 miles. In France, they have 66 million inhabitants with an eye-watering 640,000 miles of roads.

No wonder we spend disproportionate amounts of time sitting in traffic queues! Even Italy with a population of 61 million inhabitants has more miles of roads than us at 300,000. It’s an absolute disgrace that successive Governments have disregarded our roads.

Traffic jams cause increased pollution, make travel times longer and use more fuel but even worse is the way that it makes us all less efficient. The Government has expressed concerns about our efficiency but part of the problem is our road infrastructure. We can’t be doing anything if we are sitting in traffic for hours on end.

Getting back to the statistics, Spain has a population of 47 million with 424,000 miles of roads. Even Scandinavia with a population of just 10  million Swedes has created 330,000 miles of roads. 5 million Finns had a massive 282,000 miles of roads to speed along – that’s a population of 90% less than us with more miles of road than GB.

Australia with a bigger area but fewer inhabitants than GB has 500,000 miles of roads. Finally the US with a population of 328 million has 4.4 million miles of roads. As Mike points out this situation is not only a disgrace it is becoming a joke and extremely embarrassing. We are so bad we are behind Namibia and Estonia.

Now whilst some of the roads aren’t of the highest quality in some countries and some roads are pavementless we are lagging behind most other sophisticated countries buy a large margin. It can take years just to build a few miles of motorway so we really need to get our fingers out now and agree some heavy spending on our roads infrastructure or run the risk of the whole country grinding to a stop.  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

The RAC Foundation is to receive funding from the Department for Transport (DfT) to look into the ways that accidents, resulting in fatalities and injuries, are investigated in order to find out the genuine cause and how the accidents may be prevented in the future.

£480,000 is being invested in the project allowing the Foundation to recruit the services of specialists and use sophisticated data analytics to come to more accurate conclusions. For example, speed may result in an accident but why was the driver speeding?

Was there a distraction, a fault with the car or simply trying to meet unrealistic appointment or delivery targets set by an employer? Beyond individual cases, the data will be used to identify patterns relating to the make and model of car, the driver, temperature, time of day, road conditions, number of passengers etc.

By analysing the accidents in a totally different way to the police, who are looking to apportion blame, they are hoping to have a positive effect on the number of accidents and the outcomes. Let me be clear, accidents resulting in death or injury are down massively.

In 2016 the number of deaths was 1,792, up 4% over 2015 but compared to 10 years earlier the death rate is down 44%. However, the rates are starting to flatline so new ideas have to be developed if we are to bring them down further. The RAC Foundation believe they will be having a positive effect very soon.

They are introducing some of the techniques that accident investigation teams use when working for Maritime, Air and Rail organisations when trying to find the cause of a crash. By having an independent body it will take a lot out of time spent by the police investigating accidents leaving them to get on with other duties. By Graham Hill

A Government-backed study has shown that those who take the speed awareness course are 23% less likely to re-offend than those that accept the penalty points and pay the fine. Ipsos Mori analysed 2.2 million drivers caught speeding, comparing those who attended an awareness course and those who didn’t, preferring to pay the penalty.

Just 5% of those who attended a course re-offended within 6 months, compared with 7% who opted for a fixed penalty notice. The results persisted over time with 21% of those attending a course re-offending after 3 years compared to 23% who took the points.

The analysts couldn’t prove that taking the course led to fewer accidents because ‘the number of collisions, available for analysis was too small’, but Ipsos Mori said it was ‘probable’ that the courses have ‘positive road safety effects’.

Transport Minister, Jesse Norman said, ‘The National Speed Awareness Course is clearly working well in preventing drivers from putting other road users at risk by breaking speed limits’. Having attended a course a couple of years ago I agree that it has a positive affect. 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

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

Far too often motorists, when parking on private land owned by developers or local authorities, are victimised and subsequently fined with dodgy parking penalties.

Jayne Snow, 25, drives a mid-sized car and paid to park in a council run bay. She didn’t overrun her stay but still received a parking ticket. Medway Council, who issued the ticket, did so by suggesting that her car was too long.

I kid you not – that was the reason for issuing the ticket. Her car measured four and a bit metres, which isn’t long, but she still received a fine of £75. She challenged the fine by explaining that her car wasn’t too long, the bays were too short.

After revisiting the car park with a tape measure she pointed out that her parking bay along with those close by measured just 3.5 metres.

This would only make the bays legal for Smart cars and similarly sized cars but not the tens of millions of other cars used daily.

Jayne, went on to point out to the council that their own standards stated that parking bays should be a minimum of 4.8 metres, not sub 3.5 metres.

Having won her case Jayne is now campaigning for other motorists to stand their ground when they feel that a parking ticket has been unfairly issued. Challenge and certainly don’t pay is her advice if you feel you’ve done nothing wrong.

Her advice is, ‘Check your evidence, do your research and stand up to authority.’ The Council cancelled the fine but not until Jayne had received a great deal of publicity.

Under the proposed ‘Jayne’s Law’, she would not only have had the fine cancelled she would also be awarded compensation for her time and expenses involved in fighting the imposed fines.

It seems that there is a movement afoot to get this issue raised in Parliament via Jayne’s local MP. Where do I sign? 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