The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

The potentially enormous safety benefits of self-driving vehicles have long been considered to be among the technology’s biggest assets.

Numerous research projects have found human error is a contributing factor in between 85% and 95% of current road collisions.

The conventional thinking has been that if you remove human error through the use of fully autonomous technology, then the collision rate would fall by a similar amount.

This has been a strong selling point for self-driving vehicles to a public which, so far, seems unwilling to trust the technology.

For example, research conducted last year on behalf of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers found 60% of people said they would always prefer to drive themselves rather than use a self-driving vehicle, while two-thirds of people are uncomfortable with the idea of travelling in a driverless car.

Part of this could be down to unfamiliarity with a technology which is still being trialled and developed, and is many years away from being a common sight on the roads.

But the way the mainstream media overlooks the many hundreds of thousands of incident-free miles travelled in self-driving vehicle trials around the world while sensationally covering collisions also has an impact, argue autonomous vehicle (AV) advocates.

“The headlines go ‘whoosh’ (if there is a collision),” Ben Boutcher-West, head of mobility at kerbside management company AppyWay, told a Westminster Energy, Environment and Transport Forum conference on autonomous transport in the UK.

“The way the media handles some of those events make it very difficult for any OEM to put their name forward and push out a service.

“It’s the way they (driverless cars) are perceived. That for me is all about media and education and the moment these vehicles put a foot wrong, they will be battered like crazy by people who maybe don’t understand the full situation of what actually occurred.”

A study released in America this month by the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS – see panel below), found the perceived safety benefits of AVs could be significantly lower than commonly believed by the wider AV sector.

It claimed self-driving vehicles might prevent only one-third of crashes if automated systems drive too much like people.

“It is likely that fully self-driving cars will identify hazards better than people,” says Jessica Cichone, vice-president for research at IIHS and a co-author of the study. “But we found this alone would not prevent the bulk of crashes.”

The study was criticised by companies and organisations working on self-driving vehicles who argue that it underestimates the technology’s capabilities.

No mistakes can be made

However, any negative publicity can reinforce opposition to the technology and Brian Wong, director at specialist transport law firm Burges Salmon, warns: “If the societal acceptance (of self-driving vehicles) is going to change, then nobody, and least of all the connected and autonomous vehicle (CAV) industry, can really afford for mistakes to be made.”

This places extra importance on the success of AV trials, a number of which have already been carried out in the UK.

These include the Nissan-led HumanDrive project which, in November, saw a modified Nissan Leaf electric car cover 99% of the 230 miles between Milton Keynes and Sunderland in fully autonomous mode, and Driven, led by software developer Oxbotica.

This £13.6 million project ran from April 2017 to December 2019 and focused on completing fully autonomous routes within the complex urban environments of London and Oxford.

The Government has produced a code of practice to provide guidance on trialling AV technologies on public roads or in other public places in the UK.

It makes recommendations on how to maintain safety and minimise potential risks, and was this year supplemented by two new key documents.

PAS 1881 Assuring Safety of Automated Vehicle Trials and Testing was released by the British Standards Institution (BSI) in its role as the UK’s national standards body, and Zenzic, the organisation dedicated to accelerating the self-driving revolution in the UK. In addition, Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) created an updated Safety Case Framework Report 2.0.

PAS 1881 has been delivered in conjunction with the Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CCAV), Department for Transport (DfT) and Innovate UK.

Document author Camilla Fowler, head of risk management at TRL says it aims to accelerate the safe use of connected and autonomous vehicles with guidance and technical standards.

It includes a safety case which details the aim of the trial and what technology is being used. This filters into a risk assessment as well as identifying what action can be taken to mitigate any risks.

“Until this standard was released, there hadn’t been any regulations or standards that document what should be within a safety case,” she says.

“Building trust is about addressing fears over safety and security and one of the key things we need to make sure of is that we are very transparent in our approach to managing those fears.

“Publishing safety cases will go towards helping public trust in AV trials and testing so they can understand what it is that is happening, how many vehicles and where is it happening, what the test objectives are, what are the key risks and what are the control measures.”

New risks

However, risks – as with all new technologies and road transport – will remain.

“There are still more than 27,000 people killed or seriously injured on our roads each year and while CAVs have real potential to reduce that number significantly, they also could bring new types of risks” says Catherine Lovell, deputy head of the Government’s CCAV.

“The sensors could fail to properly gain information about the environment around them, the vehicle could fail to correctly interpret that and choose a safe driving course.

“Or they might be vulnerable to things like cyber-attack in a way that current vehicles are not. So, in CCAV, we’re trying to sort of bring those benefits forward as fast as possible while also being aware of those risks and tackling them.”

It is clear that setting the right expectations for the safety of self-driving cars is an important factor in winning public acceptance for the technology.

And while it would be possible for AV developers to strive for close to zero risk of causing a collision, injury or fatality, it would take a very long time to develop and prove that systems are at that level, says David Hynd, chief scientist for safety and investigations at TRL.

“There is a balance to be made,” he adds. “If you wait that long, a lot of people will have been injured and killed in the meantime, so part of the idea is to find a good balance between what you are really aiming for long-term and being able to save lives and serious injuries as you go along that journey.”

So, how safe is safe enough for an AV?

“It sounds like a very simple question, whereas it’s a really big and quite a difficult question to answer,” says Hynd.

“A lot of people talk about defining safety in terms of a comparison with human drivers, so you could say it’s got to be at least as safe as human drivers.

“It’s got to have no more collisions, no more serious injuries, no more deaths than we currently have on the road network.

“But, if you think about the number of collisions that involve a human component or some kind of failing from the human driver such as drink-driving or speeding, if the car is doing the driving task then it automatically doesn’t have any of those things.

“For me, the target has got to be – as a minimum – that it does at least as well as a very good, alert human driver who is paying attention to the driving task.

That is still quite a woolly definition, but is quite a lot safer than humans on average because everybody sometimes is not as awake as they should be or is not paying as much attention as they should be, and we have other poor behaviours on the road as well.”

Crash reduction likely to be less than expected, says new report

Self-driving cars could reduce collisions by a significant amount less than commonly-held industry expectations, according to new analysis by America’s Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).

The technology has sometimes been touted as key to reducing crashes to almost zero, but the research group, funded by US insurers, found self-driving car technology may actually cut collisions by just a third.

“Building self-driving cars that drive as well as people do is a big challenge in itself,” says Alexandra Mueller, research scientist at IIHS and lead author of the study. “But they’d actually need to do better than that to deliver on the promises we’ve all heard.”

For the study, researchers analysed more than 5,000 police-reported crashes and determined the driver-related factors contributing to those.

They imagined a future in which all the vehicles on the road are self-driving. They assumed these future vehicles would prevent those crashes that were caused exclusively by perception errors or involved an incapacitated driver.

That is because cameras and sensors of fully autonomous vehicles could be expected to monitor the roadway and identify potential hazards better than a human driver and be incapable of distraction or incapacitation.

Crashes due to only sensing and perceiving errors accounted for 24% of the total and incapacitation 10%.

The study concluded these collisions might be avoided if all vehicles on the road were self-driving – though it would require sensors that worked perfectly and systems that never malfunctioned.

The remaining two-thirds might still occur unless autonomous vehicles are also specifically programmed to avoid other types of predicting, decision-making and performance errors.

However, the autonomous vehicle industry in the US says its cars are programmed to prevent a vastly higher number of potential crash causes, including more complex errors caused by drivers making inadequate or incorrect evasive manoeuvres.

Taking those design choices into account, autonomous vehicles could avoid some 72% of crashes, countered Partners for Automated Vehicle Education, a consortium of self-driving technology companies.

The group says it is “fundamentally speculative” to determine crash avoidance rates.

It adds: “We believe that reducing traffic fatalities by even a third would be something to be proud of. We aim to do even more.”

Other benefits of driverless cars

More accessible transport

In theory, driverless cars mean no driving licence, so people of all ages and abilities could access mobility. There is great potential for enabling older people and those with disabilities to travel.

“I can see AVs being very useful for people who maybe have health issues and are unable to drive, as it may increase their mobility and freedom,” says Camilla Fowler, head of risk management at TRL.

Reduced emissions

Widespread adoption of self-driving vehicles also has the potential to reduce energy consumption and emissions.

This can be done by optimising traffic flow for fuel consumption and platooning where AVs travel very close to each other to reduce aerodynamic drag.

If used as smart taxis or autonomous ride-share, AVs could require a much smaller fleet to service travellers’ needs.

“People often talk about the safety aspects, but I think there are very clear potential benefits in terms of minimising the use of energy to get people from A to B,” says David Hynd, chief scientist for safety and investigations at TRL.

“These benefits – in terms of efficiency and energy consumption – might actually come to be seen as the bigger wins for autonomous vehicles in the long-term.”

Cheaper transport

The costs of drivers and safety requirements (driver rest breaks etc.) are a major outlay for transportation companies. Vehicles that drive themselves would cost less to operate, enabling more, cheaper taxi and ride-sharing-type services.

KPMG says roughly half the cost of on-demand private hire vehicles relates to the driver and, as a result, estimates that AV mobility as a service provision could be up to 40% cheaper than private vehicle ownership by 2030.

Congestion reduction

In theory, driverless cars could organise themselves to optimise road use by ‘platooning’ and by automatically rerouting to avoid congestion.

“Spatially-aware vehicles will drive together at no cost to safety and future capacity increases will be achieved by platooning or cooperative adaptive cruise control,” says Lizi Stewart, managing director, UK transportation, at Atkins.

“Platooning will allow cars to drive with shorter headways and gaps of just 0.5 seconds is the equivalent to at least another whole lane on the motorway.”

Working with smart traffic control could further optimise road use and increase road safety. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

This should still act as a warning to all companies and those that drive for work. Well worth a read!

Serious and systemic health and safety failings that led to the deaths of two employees in a works van would, some might think, attract a charge of corporate manslaughter.

Instead, the employer – Renown Consultants – was charged and found guilty under health and safety legislation and, rather than the police pursuing the prosecution, it was a regulator that was left to prosecute the case.

Twelve years after the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act came into force, there have been just 26 convictions.

Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings was the first company to be convicted under the new legislation after an employee was crushed to death when the sides of an excavated pit collapsed while he was collecting soil samples. The firm was fined £385,000 in 2011, which led to its closure.

Four years later, Baldwins Crane Hire became the first business to face a corporate manslaughter charge involving the death of a company driver.

An investigation by Lancashire Police and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) revealed that the employee had been driving a heavy crane down a steep road, when the vehicle’s brakes failed and it crashed into an earth bank.

The company was fined £700,000 and ordered to pay £200,000 in costs after being found guilty of corporate manslaughter and health and safety offences.

BURDEN OF PROOF

Under the former corporate manslaughter legislation, the prosecution would have had to prove that a ‘directing mind’ – a director or manager – was guilty of gross negligence manslaughter to convict a company for manslaughter.

However, it was difficult to prove against large companies and, following several high-profile failures, the law was changed to allow a company to be convicted of manslaughter without prosecuting any individual.

Health and safety legal expert, Michael Appleby, a partner at Fisher Scoggins Waters, told Fleet News: “Since the law came into force, there have been very few prosecutions and nearly all of them have been against small companies with only a few directors, and, arguably, many of these cases could have been brought under the old law.”

A charge of corporate manslaughter has to be proved to the criminal standard; in other words, beyond reasonable doubt.

This does not apply to health and safety prosecutions.

A prosecution of a company for a breach of section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act for failing to ensure the health and safety of employees, or section 3 for failing to ensure the health and safety of non-employees, is much easier to prove, says Appleby.

“All the prosecution has to prove to the criminal standard is that there was an exposure to material risk and then it is for the company to prove to the civil standard, i.e. on the balance of probabilities, it did everything that was reasonably practicable to control the risks.”

FATIGUE FAILINGS

This was the approach taken in the case where two employees were killed in a works van. Zac Payne, 20, and Michael Morris, 48, died on June 19, 2013, when Payne fell asleep at the wheel of a van operated by Renown Consultants.

The vehicle ploughed into a truck parked in a layby on the A1 and caught fire. Both Payne and Morris were pronounced dead at the scene.

The previous day, Payne had left Doncaster at 4.30am and driven to Alnmouth, Northumberland, arriving to carry out work on the railway. The expected work did not take place. So, after waiting until midday, Payne returned to the Doncaster depot, arriving at 3pm.

On his return journey, he was asked to take on an overnight railway welding job in Stevenage and, with Morris, they set off from the depot four hours later, arriving at the site just before 10pm.

After nearly six hours working on the tracks, Payne was driving back to Doncaster when the crash occurred at around 5.30am.

The police investigation was handed over to the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) in 2014, which found serious and systemic failings to manage fatigue.

Renown was found guilty in March, following a trial at Nottingham Crown Court.

In sentencing the company, Judge Goldsmark said that, while fleet safety policies were in place, operations managers paid “lip service” to them.

Furthermore, despite the company’s insurance policy stipulating only over-25s may drive their vehicles, the judge said it was “common practice” for younger employees to drive to and from jobs.

He said senior operations managers at the Doncaster depot “cut corners”, with “expediency” often overriding known safety policies, and there was a “wilful blindness”, when it came to the management of fatigue, driver time and distances to and from jobs.

He also said that the paperwork relating to fleet-related audits did not tell the full story and breaches of health and safety legislation were “systemic and long-lasting”.

‘NO DIFFERENCE’

Peter Eldridge, a director at the Association of Fleet Professionals (AFP), says a “virtually identical” case occurred in 2003, with a company called MJ Graves International.

Martin Graves, the owner, was jailed for manslaughter after one of his drivers killed a motorist. He was sentenced to four years for gross negligence manslaughter and 12 months, to run concurrently, for falsifying tachograph records.

Eldridge said: “I looked at the Renown case and couldn’t see a scrap of difference because there were systemic failings in the control, there were systemic failings on the part of individuals in the business at Renown and there were systemic failings on the part of the business.

“Why weren’t they prosecuted (for corporate manslaughter)? On the basis of the law, it’s difficult to understand why it wasn’t taken further.”

The police are responsible for investigating suspected cases of corporate manslaughter, but when it came to Renown, it was left to the regulator to pursue the prosecution.

Ian Prosser, HM Chief Inspector of Railways, told Fleet News: “The police had a look and I think they saw the potential complexity in how they would try and pull that sort evidence together.

“Corporate manslaughter is very difficult (to prove) and the HSE were not interested either in trying to take it forward.”

He explained: “We couldn’t bring a manslaughter charge, so we looked for failings in the application of their management system, which, in the end, was where we were successful.”

LEVEL OF FINE

It was the first time that the regulator had brought a prosecution in relation to failures of fatigue management.

Prosser says it was a “very difficult” case. “We were concerned that unless we had every ‘i’ dotted and ‘t’ crossed, we would probably have lost it.”

The firm was ordered to pay a fine of £450,000 and costs of £300,000 after being found guilty under sections 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act and regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations.

Sentencing guidelines for a company with Renown’s turnover, under corporate manslaughter, would have seen a starting point of £800,000 for high level of harm or culpability and £540,000 for a lower level of culpability.

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

The ORR says it didn’t take any action against the directors or senior managers as there was insufficient evidence.

Appleby said: “That may explain why the police did not pursue corporate manslaughter charges because they concluded they would not be able to prove senior management failure.

“It may also be the case that while the police could have concluded that the failure by the company was a bad failure it was not bad enough to be characterised as ‘gross’.”

The judge in his summing up concluded that Renown’s breaches of duty of care were due to the failure of senior management.

However, Appleby explained: “The judge did not go as far as saying that the breaches by Renown were gross breaches, which would be required for corporate manslaughter.

“What he did say was that the company fell far short of the appropriate standard, the breaches occurred over a long period of time and that they were a serious and systemic failure.” By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Private parking firms issued almost a quarter (24%) more tickets in 2019-20, compared to the previous 12 months.

Companies handed out 8.4 million tickets to British drivers during the last financial year, RAC Foundation analysis of Driver and Vehicle Licencing Agency (DVLA) data has found.

This is up from 6.8 million in 2018-19. The data suggests tickets are being issued at a rate of one every four seconds.

Steve Gooding, director at the RAC Foundation, said: “Anyone who received a private parking ticket last year would have been in plentiful company – yet again the number of keeper addresses released by the DVLA to private parking companies has shot up, this time by almost a quarter.

“To put the numbers in context, if every one of the 8.4 million releases came with a ticket to the next Glastonbury festival, Michael Eavis would have to re-run the event over 60 times to fit everyone in.”

Parking companies can obtain vehicle keeper records from the DVLA to chase car owners for alleged infringements in private car parks. Each resultant ticket can cost drivers up to £100.

Sir Greg Knight MP’s Parking (Code of Practice) Bill officially became law in March 2019 with the aim of bringing rogue parking firms into line or putting them out of business.

It allows for a Government-sanctioned code of practice to replace the current self-regulatory standards that are drawn up by the industry itself.

Gooding said: “The hard graft of creating a new code of practice for the industry is currently under way. This will go out for public consultation before being presented to Parliament.

“But the code is just one part of the new framework that needs to be put in place, including a single appeals body and independent scrutiny of the private parking trade associations and their members.”

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “We are committed to cracking down on the minority of rogue parking operators who exploit motorists.

“That’s why we are working with the British Standards Institution on a Code of Practice for the industry that is fair to both drivers and operators. We expect to consult on this new Code later this year.”

The DVLA charges private firms £2.50 per record.

The agency says its charges are set to recover the cost of providing the information and it does not make any money from the process. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Thinking of taking an electric car? You should read this report as there are some really interesting statistics and information included. A fascinating insight – even if I say so myself.

Charge point provider Pod Point has said that traditional time of use tariffs that provide cheap off-peak energy during the night, ‘like Economy 7’, are a ‘crude tool’.

Pod Point told Fleet News, that while time of use tariffs which target periods of low demand overnight work, the cost of generation has always been more variable and that “this variability is increasing markedly with the proliferation of renewables”.

James McKemey, head of insights at Pod Point, said: “As more renewable energy comes online, there will now be a new variable – high and low supply. With renewable energy like wind and solar proving to be very inexpensive and extremely low carbon, we want to move consumption to match these periods, wherever possible.

“Adaptive pricing tariffs that relay a more accurate picture of the cost of electricity are now available. With increasing regularity, price will go negative – particularly in the somewhat artificial low-demand environment of lockdown. Customers are being paid to consume electricity.

“This reflects the need for the electricity system to find a home for generation that would otherwise need to be constrained.”

It has been suggested that smart EV charging could have saved the National Grid up to £133 million during the lockdown period.

During lockdown, abundant renewable generation and record low energy demand have created balancing challenges for the national electricity system operator.

However, in order to benefit from adaptive pricing tariffs, consumers need to have a high degree of flexibility, as figures from Pod Point show that EVs are only charging for 25% of the time they are plugged into home charge points and EVs are plugged in on average every third day, which offers a “uniquely good opportunity to move around when this high-draw (7kW) activity takes place”.

According to a new study by Uswitch, the average EV driver spends £310 per year on electricity to charge it at home.

It also calculated the cost of charging an EV in different countries around the world, based on the average price and mileage in those territories.

McKemey said: “Despite the savings from time of use tariffs, our data indicates that it’s the minority of drivers taking advantage and charging outside of the early evening peak period. While consumers now have more reason to be engaged, there seems to be a significant cohort happy to just plug in and pay their standard tariffs.

“While adaptive pricing undoubtedly incentivises a good number of customers to move their consumption, we remain concerned about clusters of disengaged customers from a grid protection perspective.”

According to research, ‘Sustainable Electric Vehicle Charging using Adaptive Pricing’ by Professor Wolf Ketter at the University of Cologne, adaptive pricing is needed to ensure grid stability as demand for EVs increases.

Ketter says that grid operators and energy providers can use adaptive pricing to influence EV charging demand, preventing any instability in the grid.

Professor Wolf Ketter at the University of Cologne said: “The pricing scheme will distribute part of peak demand by making it more cost-effective to charge their car in non-peak times.

“This will distribute demand in order to alleviate the grid infrastructure and ensure reliable operation.”

However, adaptive pricing may prove more challenging in the public network, says McKemey. He explained: “Adaptive pricing has worked well in Amsterdam where nearly all charging takes place on the street as off-street parking is rare, meaning it takes a similar role to home/work charging.

“In the UK the situation is reversed on average. Public charging is considered an ‘on demand’ resource and a smaller proportion of charging is done here.

“It is in the home/work environments, where most energy flows into car batteries, that adaptive pricing is likely to be more effective.”

Pod Point says it supports measures to make home charge points “charge smartly by default”, with the option of manual override for customers who need to charge immediately. This proposal formed part of the recent Electric Vehicle Energy Taskforce report.

In May, Pod Point announced it was expanding the number of Homecharge and Commercial customer for whom it can install, by adopting a case-specific approach to installations.

The National Grid Electricity System Operator says it is confident the grid will be able to cope with the increased demand for electricity driven by more EVs, because it is confident in the rise of smart charging.

A National Grid Electricity Operator spokesperson said: “Smart charging and vehicle to grid technology means we can use renewable energy more efficiently, charging when the sun shines or the wind blows and potentially discharging back to the grid at times of peak demand.

“With an estimated 35 million electric vehicles on the roads by 2050 or sooner, we have a fantastic opportunity for the transport and electricity sectors to work together to deliver a low carbon transition that benefits all electricity.”

Bosch recently launched a new mobile app that gives EV drivers access to more than 150,000 charging points across Europe, by allowing users to find and pay for charging with a clear breakdown of costs.

Elmar Pritsch, the president of the Connected Mobility Solutions division of Robert Bosch GmbH, said: “With our recharging services, we are developing a universal key to one of the biggest pan-European recharging networks. In doing so, we are making electromobility even more viable.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Plans to increase walking and cycling in England include new powers for local authorities to fine drivers for motoring offences and the country’s first ‘zero-emission’ city.

The Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, outlined the Government’s plans today (Tuesday, July 28), following a commitment made in May to spend £2 billion encouraging more people to choose so-called active travel options.

They include, new enforcement powers that will allow local authorities, rather than the police, to enforce against moving traffic offences such as disregarding one-way systems or entering mandatory cycle lanes.

The change has already largely taken effect in London, where reports suggest it has significantly reduced police workload on traffic offences, allowing officers to prioritise more important matters, while also improving enforcement.

The Government is proposing that motorists be issued with a warning for a first offence, and fines for subsequent offences.

The changes to enforcement are just one small part of a package of measures published by the Department for Transport (DfT) in a new report – Gear change: a bold vision for cycling and walking.

Johnson argues that to build a healthier, more active nation, “we need the right infrastructure, training and support in place to give people the confidence to travel on two wheels.

“That’s why now is the time to shift gears and press ahead with our biggest and boldest plans yet to boost active travel – so that everyone can feel the transformative benefits of cycling.”

The report includes plans to create at least one zero-emission city. It says that the DfT is looking for at least one small or medium-sized city which wants to create a zero-emission transport system, with extensive bike lanes, an all-electric (or zero-emission) bus fleet, and a ban on nearly all petrol and diesel vehicles in the city centre, with deliveries made to consolidation hubs and the last mile being done by cargo bike or electric van.

The initiative could be done in conjunction with the existing competition for an all-electric bus town, it says.

PHYSICAL SEPARATION

Elsewhere in the report, it stresses that the Government will no longer fund new cycle route provision on busy roads which consist of painted markings or cycle symbols.

Instead, it wants to see as many as possible of the existing painted lanes upgraded with physical separation. It says that cycles must be treated as vehicles, not as pedestrians.

New cycle provision which involves sharing space with pedestrians, including at crossings, will also no longer be funded. Again, the report says it wants many of the existing facilities to be upgraded with physical separation.

Furthermore, it argues that a quicker way of providing safe, low-traffic cycling is to close roads to through traffic, usually with simple point closures, such as retractable bollards, or by camera enforcement. This, it says, may be useful where the road is too narrow for a separated cycle lane.

However, it stresses that the closure would only affect through traffic. Residents, visitors, or delivery drivers needing to reach anywhere along the road would still be able to do so – though they might have to approach from a different direction. For example, a small number of routes from key suburbs into a city could become bus and cycling corridors, it said.

Transport secretary Grant Shapps says that coronavirus has provided the country with a “once in a lifetime opportunity” to create a shift in attitudes.

“The measures we’ve set out today in this revolutionary plan will do just that. No matter your age, how far you’re travelling, or your current confidence on a bike – there are plans to help and support you.”

To encourage people to continue to take up cycling, cycle training will be made available for every child and adult who wants it, accessible through schools, local authorities or direct from cycle training schemes.

More cycle racks will also be installed at transport hubs, town and city centres and public buildings, and funding will go towards new bike hangars and on street storage for people who don’t have space to keep a bike at home.

CHANGES TO HIGHWAY CODE

Furthermore, the Government has launched a consultation on the Highway Code to better protect pedestrians and cyclists; improving legal protections for vulnerable road users; and raising safety standards on lorries.

The main alterations to the code being proposed are:

• Introducing a hierarchy of road users which ensures that those road users who can do the greatest harm have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others.
• Clarifying existing rules on pedestrian priority on pavements, to advise that drivers and riders should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross the road.
• Providing guidance on cyclist priority at junctions to advise drivers to give priority to cyclists at junctions when travelling straight ahead.
• Establishing guidance on safe passing distances and speeds when overtaking cyclists and horse riders.

BIKE REPAIR VOUCHERS

Alongside the launch of the strategy, today the first batch of bike repair vouchers worth £50 will be released.

The scheme aims to help more people choose cycling over public transport, with vouchers released in batches in order to help manage capacity across participating stores.

The first 50,000 will be available just before midnight tonight (Tuesday, July 28) on a first come first served basis to those who register online.

Government says it will work closely with industry during this first pilot launch to monitor its success and adapt the scheme as necessary before rolling it out more widely.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on fleet operations and business travel

Sponsored by Sixt.

A discussion hosted by Fleet News on the UK business response to the fleet challenges presented by Covid-19.

A panel of experts will provide an insight into the trends and changes that they are seeing, before leading a debate and discussion among participants, including delegates, on future working practices, changes to travel policies, opportunities offered by mobility solutions and implications for fleet sizes, replacement cycles, funding methods and vehicle type.

Chaired by editor in chief Stephen Briers, in this 45-minute webinar, he will be in conversation with:

Dale Eynon is director of Defra Group Fleet Services and will give a fleet operator view of how covid-19 is affecting fleet operations

Kit Allwinter is senior consultant at AECOM and is a specialist in sustainable and active travel including shared mobility. He will provide a view on how Covid-19 is changing the way people travel and business working practices, etc. and the implications for travel and fleet activity, especially in urban areas

Paul Hollick, chair of the Association of Fleet Professionals. He’ll be representing the views of UK fleets, providing insight into how their operations are likely to evolve and change due to new working practices sparked by the coronavirus pandemic.

Simon Turner, campaign manager at Driving for Better Business, which has created a Covid-19 toolkit, driver app and management portal to help fleets back to business.

Stuart Donnelly, Sixt (sponsor)

Topics:

• Changes to working practices (agile/remote/office working)

• Changes to travel policies (travel to work, travel to client, travel to supplier etc)

• Implications for fleet size (new car/van sales demand)

• Impact on replacement cycles (new car sales demand) and annual mileage

• Impact on demand by vehicle type (EV, Hybrid, Petrol, Diesel)

• Changes in funding preference (fewer traditional 3-4-year contract hire lease agreements and more flexi-hire contracts?)

• Active travel policies (walk, cycle, other)

• Public transport policies (to work, at work)

• Role for other mobility preferences (car share, car clubs, mobility budgets)

By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

The Government is being urged to overhaul motoring taxation and replace it with road pricing as part of its plans for a ‘green’ recovery.

Facing a long-term decline in fuel duty from the electrification of vehicles, the change could stabilise tax revenues, while cutting congestion and emissions.

A poll taken at the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership (LowCVP) annual conference showed a majority in favour of a new road-user charging scheme, with 60% backing the policy. Just more than a quarter (27%) voted against the measure.

The LowCVP survey also found that nine-in-10 respondents (91%) think the time is right for a more radical and rapid change in the decarbonisation of transport.

In a new report, Campaign for Better Transport also says the coronavirus pandemic has provided the Government with the ideal opportunity to overhaul the current tax regime.

It says a “new approach” to road pricing is needed that captures the impacts from use of the road space by vehicles, including congestion, air pollution and carbon emissions.

“Such variable, distance-based charging would reflect the impacts of individual journeys more appropriately and, unlike clean air zones or congestion charges, account for both pollution and congestion at the same time,” it said.

The report – Covid-19 Recovery: Renewing the transport system – details a charging mechanism based on distance travelled, time of day, location and level of emissions.

As the pace of electrification of road transport grows, the report argues that such a regime should provide a mechanism for charging vehicles according to their environmental impact and use of the road space.

Darren Shirley, chief executive of Campaign for Better Transport, said: “As the UK begins the process of recovery, the Government must now focus its ambition on accelerating the shift to sustainable transport.”

The Green Party and campaign group Greener Journeys are also making similar arguments for the introduction of road pricing.

London assembly member and Green Party local transport spokesperson, Caroline Russell, said it was “high time” the UK moved to this “modern and sophisticated” approach.

End fuel duty freeze

Claire Haigh, chief executive of Greener Journeys, wants road pricing introduced alongside ending the freeze in fuel duty.

“The Chancellor should take the opportunity of record low oil prices to increase fuel duty,” she said. “The money should be ring-fenced to incentivise the take-up of cleaner vehicles and improve public transport.

“At the very least, the Chancellor should end the freeze and increase fuel duty in line with inflation.”

The fleet sector has already shown it is receptive to road pricing as a replacement of other road and fuel duties. Fleet News has been calling for the Government to launch a feasibility study since its Fleet Industry Manifesto report in 2015.

Andrew Burn, partner and head of automotive at KPMG, told Fleet News: “It would be good to continue to keep fuel duty flat.”

He also doesn’t expect fleets to see a fuel duty reduction in the future as it does not play into the Government’s green agenda and net zero ambitions.

The fuel duty escalator was introduced in 1990 as an environmental tax to stem the increasing pollution and congestion from road transport, but it has been frozen since 2011.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimates that the failure to increase rates in line with CPI inflation has cost the Treasury £5.5bn a year since 2010-11.

Revenue from fuel duties now stands at £28bn a year, which is 1.3% of national income. Revenue peaked at 2.2% of national income in 1999–2000. Had it remained at that level the Exchequer would currently be getting an extra £19bn.

In its Green Budget, published late last year, IFS highlighted how revenue from fuel duties had fallen since 2000 and called on the Government to consider road pricing to maintain its tax take.

New analysis by the RAC shows that fuel duty was down by £2.4bn in April and May compared to the same time last year.

Revenue from diesel duty (charged at 57.95p per litre like petrol) was hardest hit. Despite being the fuel of business, duty on diesel fell by 49% during April and May to £1.5bn compared to £2.9bn in 2019.

Revenue from duty on petrol fell to £251 million in May – the lowest figure since 1990 – and £383m in April, making a total of £634m.

Over the same two months in 2019 duty on petrol brought in £1.6bn (£799m in April and £822m in May).

In terms of monthly tax from fuel duty, the £946m raised in May was the 33rd lowest figure – only months from the early 1990s were lower when there were some 24m vehicles on Britain’s roads compared to the 31.8m today.

HMRC fuel duty receipts – £m
	Petrol	Diesel	Combined total
Apr-20	383	815	1,198
May-20	251	695	946
Total	634	1,510	2,144
Monthly average	317	755	1,072
Apr-19	799	1,528	2,327
May-19	822	1,411	2,233
Total	1,621	2,939	4,560
Monthly average	811	1,470	2,280
£ change 2019-2020	-987	-1,429	-2,416
% change 2019-2020	-61%	-49%	-53%

RAC head of roads policy Nicholas Lyes, described the lost tax revenue as a “further blow” to Treasury coffers.

“The temptation for the Chancellor might be to recoup some of the losses by increasing fuel duty, but with the country staring down the barrel of one of the sharpest recessions on record such a move would risk choking any economic recovery at a time when drivers and businesses are most struggling,” explained Lyes.

“This perhaps gives the Government a glimpse into the future of when fuel duty revenues start to decline more sharply with the rise of electric and other alternatively fuelled vehicles. Treasury officials might want to start thinking about how the Government approaches such a scenario considering fuel duty normally generates around £27bn a year.”

Fuel duty receipts will have increased as lockdown restrictions were eased, but the latest fuel sales figures from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy show there is still some way to go.

Fuel sales at filling stations across the UK were 23% below pre-lockdown levels at the end of June. Diesel sales were 20% lower than before lockdown and petrol sales were 26% lower than would be expected.

In the eight weeks prior to lockdown being imposed on March 23, average daily road fuel sales were 17,690 litres per filling station.

The lowest average daily figure recorded was 2,500 litres, on April 12, at the peak of the pandemic.

Ashley Barnett, head of consultancy at Lex Autolease, told Fleet News that even if individual mileages remain below average, there are likely to be more vehicles on the roads as people avoid public transport due to the coronavirus.

“While Treasury income from fuel duty has dropped during lockdown, an increase in vehicles on the roads would address some of this.

“Longer-term, the reduction in income from fuel duty is the ‘elephant in the room’ when discussing the transition to electric vehicles (EVs), but we are many years away from there being a significant reduction in the annual amount generated.

“As the momentum shifts away from petrol and diesel, there may come a time where the Chancellor feels fuel duty can be increased, to encourage drivers who are cautious about making the switch to electric.

“At the same time, when EVs become sufficiently ‘mass market’, a more appropriate taxation method than fuel duty may need to be considered, especially if they continue to be cheaper than petrol and diesel on a wholelife cost basis.”

Tom Brewer, head of sales and marketing at Volkswagen Financial Services (VWFS) Fleet, added: “Clearly, the level of (electric vehicle) uptake now being seen will impact future tax receipts through reductions in company car tax, VED and fuel duty.

“Longer term alternatives to emissions-based taxation such as road pricing may well be viable in replacing VED and/or fuel duty.

“A debate on future taxation models is clearly going to be needed as the Exchequer looks to balance the books.”

PUBLIC FINANCES

Balancing the books will prove a difficult task for the Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, with the UK economy facing its biggest decline in 300 years.

The OBR suggests that the economy will shrink 12.4% in 2020, with borrowing expected to increase to the highest peacetime level.

The latest data shows borrowing grew by 1.8% in May.

It leaves the Government on course to borrow £372bn this year to pay for the shortfall between tax revenues and public spending.

In a recent HMRC report, the impact of coronavirus on Government coffers was visible in reductions in receipts collected across a number of taxes.

Tax officials said reductions were due to a combination of changes to payment timing, responses to Covid-19 policies and the emerging economic impacts of the pandemic.

The report added: “At this stage it is not possible to fully unpick how much of the fall in tax receipts relates to changes to the timing of payments and how much relates to changes in the underlying economic activity. The effects of Covid-19 on HMRC tax receipts will become clearer over time.”

The data showed total HMRC receipts for April and May 2020 were £45.2bn lower than in April and May 2019, mainly due to VAT (£25.6bn), income tax, capital gains tax and national insurance contributions (£9.8bn) and corporation tax (£5.4bn).

The OBR has also warned that the economy will not return to its pre-coronavirus size until the end of 2022, while unemployment is expected to rise to 12% by the end of this year, falling back to 10.1% in 2021.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show the number of workers on UK company payrolls fell by 649,000 between March and June.

However, unemployment has not yet surged, as many predict it eventually will, because large numbers of employers have put workers on the Government’s furlough scheme.

The latest data shows that more than nine million private sector workers are, effectively, on the Government payroll.

It should have therefore come as no surprise that the Chancellor’s summer statement failed to deliver any incentives for the fleet industry and the wider automotive sector.

So far, the Government’s plans for a ‘green’ economic recovery have focused on jobs and softening the blow of phasing out the furlough scheme.

In a £30bn give-away, Sunak announced a VAT cut on hospitality and offered firms a £1,000 per employee bonus to keep furloughed staff.

A much publicised possible scrappage scheme for electric vehicles (EVs) did not materialise, neither did a mooted VAT cut for the automotive sector.

SMMT ‘DISAPPOINTED’

Mike Hawes, chief executive of UK automotive trade body, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), said he was “bitterly disappointed” the Chancellor had stopped short of supporting the industry.

However, a scrappage scheme costing hundreds of millions of pounds, proved a step too far for a Government facing record debt and a dwindling tax take.

Ben Creswick, managing director of JCT600 Vehicle Leasing Solutions (VLS), argued: “A scrappage scheme would not benefit the company car market, but existing incentives such as the plug-in car grant and new company car tax rates, which allow a driver to have an electric car for just a few pounds a month, are doing the job.

“The range of EVs is increasing and the low total cost of ownership means they are finding their way on to choice lists. Availability of product is the only concern.”

Paul Hollick, chair of the Association of Fleet Professionals (AFP), says its time to consider how the Government might balance the books. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Air quality improvements achieved during lockdown, if maintained, could weaken the case for clean air zones (CAZs).

It has been five years since the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) published a report highlighting the need for CAZs in six cities.

London, Birmingham, Derby, Leeds, Nottingham and Southampton were projected to fail EU air quality standards by the end of this year, unless action was taken.

Initial Government plans were challenged in the courts, by environmental lobby group Client Earth, for failing to tackle the problem in the shortest possible time.

The Government published its final plan for tackling roadside nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels in 2017, with 61 local authorities in England now required to tackle illegal levels of pollution.

London introduced its ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ) in April 2019, forcing all but the cleanest vehicles to pay to drive into the city centre.

Several cities, including Leeds and Birmingham, have signalled their intention to follow suit, announcing charging zones of their own, with operators of non-compliant trucks and vans facing daily charges of up to £100 and £12.50 a day, respectively.

Nottingham has decided against a charging CAZ.

It has, instead, employed a range of other measures, including a workplace parking levy and investing in public transport, to ensure it reaches compliance in the shortest possible time.

POLLUTION LEVELS PLUMMET

Covid-19, however, has forced councils to reassess plans and sparked a rapid call for evidence from Government to fully understand the impact coronavirus is having on changes in air pollution emissions, concentrations and exposure.

In the first few weeks of the pandemic, the Government told Commercial Fleet it had agreed with Leeds, Birmingham and Bath to delay the introduction of CAZs in their areas until after January 1, 2021.

Other towns and cities planning to charge vehicles to drive into their CAZs, such as Bristol and Newcastle, were already planning to launch their schemes after that date.

The enforced delay has come as towns and cities are also reporting record reductions in pollution, with low levels of traffic due to lockdown.

In Oxford, 75% of NO2 comes from transport and, with roads clear of congestion, levels are now below the legal limit in the city centre for the first time in generations.

A city council spokesman said: “Since the beginning of lockdown we have seen a 65% reduction in air pollution levels in Oxford city centre.”

To put that historic reduction into perspective, over the decade to 2019, air pollution levels in Oxford had decreased by 36.8%.

It is set to become the first city to introduce a zero-emission zone (ZEZ) next summer, charging all petrol and diesel vehicles to enter the city centre.

Leeds City Council, which will charge Euro V or lower diesel HGVs £50 a day to enter its zone from January 1, 2021, at the earliest, gave no figures, but said pollution levels had fallen due to the quieter roads.

The council added that it was not possible to reliably predict the long-term impact that the coronavirus will have on traffic. However, it did not address the long-term viability of a charging CAZ, if air quality gains are maintained.

Instead, a Leeds City Council spokesman said: “We must be ready to introduce measures that can rapidly improve air quality if emissions begin to return to pre-Covid levels.

“At the same time, the council will continue to promote and enable a shift towards cleaner, greener travel and will encourage the widespread adoption of behaviours, technologies and policies that reduce emissions including use of electric vehicles and working from home.”

In Birmingham, where non-compliant HGVs will be charged £50 and vans £8 per day from January, 2021, at the earliest, the city council revealed that early analysis of the data suggests an average reduction in NO2 of some 36% from the day before the lockdown was introduced to just more than a month later.

The fall correlates to a similar dip in traffic levels, which were at about 30% of the ‘norm’ expected in April.

A Birmingham City Council spokesman explained: “While the Covid-19 lockdown measures have been in place, we have seen a significant reduction in road traffic and a reduction in the levels of nitrogen dioxide.”

However, he said: “As lockdown measures are eased it is highly likely the volume of traffic will increase, and the levels of nitrogen dioxide will return to pre-Covid levels.”

In Bath, where non-compliant HGV’s, buses and coaches will be charged £100, and  taxis and vans £9 from January 2021, at the earliest, the council estimates that the average level of NO2 has fallen by some 20% on where it would expect them at this time of year.

However, a spokesman for Bath and North East Somerset Council, said: “Currently there is no evidence that the improvement in air quality seen during the pandemic will be maintained.

“In light of messages around the use of public transport, the reduction of vehicles being updated and replaced for newer, cleaner vehicles and the need for social distancing the NO2 levels within Bath and North East Somerset may well soon continue at the pre-pandemic levels or increase further.”

He added: “Compliance is measured over an annual mean calculation and therefore short-term improvements cannot be taken as definitive proof of a wider trend. Therefore, to suspend or remove the plans would be premature.”

LONG-TERM AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS

New figures from the Department for Transport (DfT) show how low traffic levels fell at the start of the lockdown, but also reveal they are far from back to pre-lockdown levels.

During the first full day of lockdown (Tuesday, March 24), car use fell to less than half (44%) of the expected level. Light commercial vehicle (LCV) use stood at 55%, HGV use at 84%.

Three months later and the day after retail outlets were allowed to open on Monday, June 15, car use had risen, but was still only at 70% of normal levels. Van use and HGV use had grown to 84% and 92%, respectively.

The latest DfT figures, for Monday, June 29,  show car use stood at 72%, van use 88% and HGV use 96%

In line with Government advice to avoid public transport, cycling levels have doubled during some weekdays and trebled at the weekend.

Meanwhile, national rail use remains extremely low at 11% and London tube use stands at just 16%.

Long term, technology will continue to reduce the need for face-to-face meetings and more people will continue to work from home or stagger start and finish times, cutting rush hour traffic.

A Fleet News survey shows more than half (53.6%) of fleet managers are currently working from home.

More than half (57.3%) of respondents also said that the majority of company cars they operate were not being driven for work.

It’s clear that the future of CAZs will rely on air quality improvements experienced during the lockdown being maintained long-term

.

But the Government CAZ framework states: “Where air quality has improved to the level required and there is evidence this improvement would be maintained, the Government expects local authorities to remove the elements of the zone that are no longer required at the earliest opportunity.”

A Government spokesman told Commercial Fleet it is committed to creating a “green legacy” from the pandemic and building on the unprecedented levels of walking and cycling seen across the country.

“Improving air quality as soon as possible remains vital and we continue to engage with local authorities and keep plans for all clean air zones under constant review,” he said.

TIME TO PAUSE

Natalie Chapman, Freight Transport Association (FTA) head of urban policy, believes Covid-19 presents an opportunity for central and local government to “pause and assess” whether CAZs are the most effective way to improve air quality long-term.

The FTA argues that CAZs will not provide any lasting benefit to air quality, as the Euro VI/6 vehicles required to enter a zone without charge will come into fleets of their own accord, as part of the natural fleet replacement cycle.

Euro VI has been mandatory in all new trucks since 2014; by the start of 2021 – when many of these CAZs are due to go live – FTA estimates that more than half of the UK truck fleet will already be Euro VI.

“The scheme will soon become redundant,” said Chapman. “Instead, Government would be better placed to adopt a more comprehensive range of measures, such as incentivising the uptake of alternatively fuelled and electric commercial vehicles, more effective management of congestion, and enabling more deliveries to be re-timed.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Fleet and business new car registrations are showing signs of recovery, but private demand is far greater, new figures from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) show.

There were 72,550 new company cars registered to fleet and business users in June, a 10-fold increase on the 7,347 company cars sold in the previous month of May.

However, June’s fleet and business new car registrations were still 46% (60,749 units) down on the 133,299 company cars registered in June 2019.

Overall, there were 145,377 new cars registrations new last month, down 34.9% (78,044 units) on June 2019.

Private demand proved more resilient than business, down 19.2% in June with orders made pre-lockdown resulting in 72,827 registrations and accounting for more than half of the market.

The market is almost 616,000 units, or 48.5%, behind the same period last year. But, with one in five showrooms in England remaining shut throughout June, and those in Wales and Scotland unable to open until the end of the month, there remains some uncertainty regarding the true level of demand, says the SMMT.

Mike Hawes, SMMT’s chief executive, explained: “While it’s welcome to see demand rise above the rock-bottom levels we saw during lockdown, this is not a recovery and barely a restart.

“Many of June’s registrations could be attributed to customers finally being able to collect their pre-pandemic orders, and appetite for significant spending remains questionable.”

The hoped for release of pent-up sales has not yet occurred, says the SMMT, with consumer confidence for big ticket purchases looking weak meaning that automotive is likely to lag behind other retail sectors.

As the wider retail and hospitality sectors re-open and society and the economy begin a gradual return to normality, the true picture of consumer confidence is likely to emerge.

However, concerns remain with the Government’s Coronavirus Jobs Retention Scheme winding down and major employers across all sectors announcing significant job losses. The subsequent effect on livelihoods as well as on business and consumer confidence will not help a depressed market, it says.

The scale of the impact on the fleet sector can be seen in the results of a Fleet News survey in the June digital edition of Fleet News.

Fleets said they expected the long-term impact of coronavirus on operations to include reduced mileage, greater use of technology and fewer company cars.

Hawes said: “The Government must boost the economy, help customers feel safer in their jobs and in their spending and give businesses the confidence to invest in their fleets. Otherwise it runs the risk of losing billions more in revenue from this critical sector at a time when the public purse needs it more than ever.”

Jon Lawes, managing director of Hitachi Capital Vehicle Solutions, believes there are “positives” as the industry edges closer to pre-Covid-19 levels of output.

“With car showrooms and dealerships reopening from June, the month marks a significant improvement from the year on year comparisons for May and April (89% and 97%, respectively),” he said.

“New car production will be significantly down this year, but there will be a requirement for people to replace vehicles and we expect there to be a shift to a demand for used cars in the autumn.”

He continued: “Today’s figures also highlight a growing demand for electric and hybrid vehicles, which represent 21.7% of new registrations this year. 

“These figures will continue to increase as more EV product with longer range becomes available and more charging infrastructure boosts driver confidence.”

Electric Vehicle (EV) New Car Sales Surge

New battery electric vehicle (BEV) registrations increased massively last month (June), compared to June 2019.

There were 8,903 pure electric new cars registered in June – a 262% increase on the 2,461 pure EVs sold in the same month last year.

Diesel new car registrations were down 60% and petrol fell 40% compared to June 2019’s figures. Registrations of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) were up 117% year-on-year, from 2,270 units in June 2019 to 4,926 PHEVs registered last month (June).

Ashley Barnett, head of consultancy at Lex Autolease, said: “The coronavirus outbreak has proven extremely challenging for the new vehicle market, but even during the height of lockdown, monthly EV registrations were still up year-on-year.

“We see emerging from lockdown as a clear opportunity to accelerate the progress that’s already been made in terms of cleaning up our roads – especially because a shift towards more flexible working patterns and the need for less business mileage could make EVs more practical for more people.”

The appetite for electrification is increasing among fleets, with leasing companies reporting record levels of demand from company car drivers, according to the June digital edition of Fleet News.

Company car drivers will pay no tax on a pure EV this tax year, while drivers of PHEVs are also enjoying much more favourable rates.

The RAC’s Rod Dennis said that it was a “significant milestone” that electrified vehicles of all forms accounted for more new cars than diesels, last month.

He continued: “Registrations of pure battery electric vehicles continue to remain strong, a trend that will hopefully continue as more come on to the market.”

Although, he said: “We are yet to see how the appetite for new cars among both fleets and private drivers will be affected by the coronavirus and a possible economic downturn.”

He added: “The number of new plug-in hybrids registered last month, while still strong, was far below pure electric vehicles.

“This is something to watch in the coming months as manufacturers begin to introduce new hybrid options for their existing vehicle models.

“It will be very interesting to see if more drivers opt one of these rather than commit to a vehicle entirely powered by batteries.”

Commenting on the overall new car market, Michael Woodward, UK automotive lead at Deloitte, said: “Despite the year-on-year decline in sales, these results will have exceeded many people’s expectations.

“Dealerships have worked hard to encourage consumers back through their doors. However, the full scale of these efforts may not be reflected in June’s figures as supply issues delay some registrations.”

Karen Johnson, head of retail and wholesale at Barclays Corporate Banking, added: “Looking ahead, further questions arise around how changing patterns in working environments and consumer attitudes might impact on car sales.

“On the one hand, many people are working from home and so don’t need a car to get themselves to work every day. Yet on the other hand, people are being advised to stay away from public transport and so may well need their own vehicle to simply get them from A to B.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

A loss of confidence in public transport looks set to change how employees will travel to work as the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown eases, new research has found.

A survey by private hire company Addison Lee has found six out of 10 London commuters will change the way they travel when the return to work begins after lockdown.

Meanwhile, recruiter Robert Walters discovered 34% of UK employers surveyed are considering changing working hours to avoid busy commuting periods.

The Addison Lee research of 1,000 commuters across the capital’s 32 boroughs found 55% of commuters plan to change the time of their commute to avoid peak hours, 49% plan to use their own vehicle (up from 23% pre-pandemic), while 28% plan to complete at least part of their journey on foot.

It also found 40% plan to use private hire vehicles as part of their journey.

Liam Griffin, CEO of Addison Lee, said: “Our research shows a clear shift away from commuting on public transport due to safety concerns.”

It reports 69% of respondents say that, even with the introduction of face coverings, taking public transport to and from work makes them feel anxious, while 72% say they will avoid using the tube during their commute unless essential when they return to work.

In response to the research, Addison Lee is asking the London Covid-19 Transition Board to make the safe return to work a priority and actively work with all the capital’s transport providers on a common set of safety standards.

It says this will give commuters confidence to return to work using a variety of means of transport that respect social distancing and the capital’s environmental needs.

The Robert Walters survey found 49%of employers are planning to stagger return to work based on employees’ own health risks related to Covid-19, while 46% will be staggering their return depending on how critical their role is to the business.

Its full findings are:

What strategies are UK employers considering (or have implemented) to bring employees back to work
Staggering return to work based on employees’ own health risks related to COVID-19 (e.g. respiratory or chronic conditions)	49%
Staggering employees return depending on how critical their role is to the business	46%
Creating smaller workgroups to limit mixing of employees/groups in the workplace	40%
Changing working hours to avoid busy commuting periods	34%
Offering employees the opportunity to volunteer to come back to the office	33%
Splitting employees into shifts based on specific criteria (e.g. by name A-M and P-Z work different days)	28%
Returning to work strategies will be based on local infection rates and risk (e.g. different strategies by location)	28%
Not sure, we have not yet considered a return to work strategy	29%

Lucy Bisset, director at Robert Walters, said: “What the research highlights is that despite the success of home working, employers are keen to start encouraging their staff back into the workplace and are happy to take necessary steps and put procedures in place to help enable this.

“A return to office brings about many perks, including social inclusion, better workplace collaboration, a separation of homelife, and a reinforcement of company values.

“What employers need to do is merge the perks of office-life with what people have been enjoying about working from home; for example – flexi-hours, a relaxed atmosphere, and avoidance of busy commute times.”

Robert Walters also found 87% of employees would like more opportunities to work from home post-return, with 21% stating they would like to work from home permanently.

While 83% of firms have stated that the experience of Covid-19 will encourage business heads to have employees to work from home more often, they also cite concerns over employee productivity (64%), senior leadership preferring traditional ways of working (57%), and the nature of the business e.g. face-to-face sales (36%), as the key barriers to achieving this.

They also expect the long-term impact of coronavirus on operations to include reduced mileage, greater use of technology and fewer company cars.  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Extra and Westmorland have been rated England’s best motorway service operators by visitors in the independent transport user watchdog’s latest survey.

In the fourth annual survey, Transport Focus asked almost 10,000 customers about their experience at all 112 motorway services in England, between February and March before the coronavirus lockdown. Visitors had their say on facilities such as toilets, staffing, food and drink.

Extra, operator of six sites in the survey and Westmorland, which operates four sites, achieved the joint highest overall satisfaction score (97%). Compared to last year’s survey, Extra saw a significant increase in satisfaction of eight percentage points to 97%. Westmorland had the most ‘very satisfied’ visitors at 87%.

Across the country as a whole, motorway service operators performed well with 93% of visitors satisfied with their experience (an improvement on last year’s 90% and the highest score since the survey started).

Visitors were least satisfied with the value for money of the food or drink they bought to eat in the services at 69%. Those who drive for a living, which includes HGV drivers, were the least satisfied at 89%, however, this has increased from 83% in 2019.

Anthony Smith, chief executive of the independent watchdog Transport Focus, said: “As the country emerges out of lockdown and people take to the roads for staycations this summer, motorway services will provide a vital opportunity for drivers to take a break on their journey.

“Motorway services provide customers with a great experience with friendly and helpful staff, but there is still room for improvement when it comes to the value for money of the food and drink on offer.”

Drivers were also asked what impact their visit to the motorway services had on their mood on arrival and when leaving the services. 2% of visitors say they arrive feeling tired, frustrated or stressed. The visit to services significantly reduces visitors’ negative mood to just 5%.

Euro Garages has the biggest year-on-year increase in satisfaction from 86% to 96%.

All three of the larger operators saw an increase in satisfaction this year; Roadchef (up from 92% to 95%), Moto (up from 90% to 93% and Welcome Break (up from 90% to 92%).

Overall, the survey found:

89% of visitors were satisfied with the cleanliness of the toilets

69% of visitors thought the food or drink they bought to eat in the services was value for money

94% of visitors buying food or drink rated the friendliness and helpfulness of staff as good

This year visitors were also asked how they thought the services they stopped at compared to others. Across the four Westmorland sites 94% of visitors felt they were ‘better’ in comparison to other services they had visited.

Euro Garages (two sites) and Extra (six sites) both had more than half of visitors describing these services as ‘better’ in comparison to others they had previously visited. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News