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

OK, I have this great new way of charging you for the electricity that you use. In future, you will be assessed by the amount of hot water you use per annum. The more hot water you use the more you will pay for your electricity. As a result, the Government will expect you to use less water and less electricity to heat the water. Makes sense?

Probably a bit of a silly example but the point is that linking the two items doesn’t seem like an obvious way for you to pay for your electricity. You pay for electricity as you use it – seems like a bloody obvious thing to do! So what’s this got to do with cars?

Well, a lot of what we spend on roads and the roads infrastructure is collected in various taxes. First Registration, Road Fund Licence and Fuel Excise Duties being the three main ones that come to mind (congestion charging, scaled parking charges are others). So how do we work out the charge? We charge based on CO2 emissions! No allowance for other emissions just CO2.

It just doesn’t make sense and even with the CO2 emissions, it’s simply assessed on how much comes out of the exhaust pipe over a kilometre. I might be travelling just 5,000 miles a year in a relatively high CO2 emitting vehicle but still pay more in RFL than someone travelling 40,000 miles a year in a car with CO2 emissions that are slightly lower. Again – makes no sense! What does make sense is charging per mile for the use of our roads – a bit like using electricity!

And that is what will have to be considered if we move over to either very low emission hybrids or zero-emission electric cars. To leave things as they are will mean drivers will pay nothing towards the upkeep of our roads infrastructure. So the first out of the blocks is the Republic of Ireland, working on a scheme whereby drivers pay to use roads by the mile in order to fill what could potentially be a fairly large black hole in the finances.

Our government is keeping an eye on what the Irish are proposing, to see if theirs is a model we should copy.  Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, announced earlier this year that whilst he acknowledged that many people felt that pay per mile was the way forward he had no immediate plans to change from the current method of funding our roads.

Unfortunately rather short sighted! Having said that I’m not sure how we would go about collecting the data and making the charges on motorists. By Graham Hill

Whilst the Government appears to be concentrating on the big issues such as free trade, immigration, security etc. work is still being done on the detail. Auto Express has been asking experts about some of the areas that are worrying Brits travelling abroad.

The first area of concern is driving licences. Will we need a special licence to enable Brits to drive in the EU? Some leaked EU presentation slides suggested that UK licences would no longer be recognised across the EU Bloc. Lawyer, Laura Newton who specialises in motoring and transport, for Rothera Sharp said that this is unlikely.

She believes that the UK driving licence will continue to be acceptable across the EU without additional paperwork required. As she pointed out the UK driving licence is already acceptable outside the EU in Commonwealth countries such as Australia as well as China and the USA where you can use your UK licence for 6 months before it has to be re-issued.

With that system working perfectly well Laura believes that there is no reason why the scheme could not continue post-Brexit. Expecting every driver to apply for an International Driving Licence to permit drivers to drive in each EU country would simply not be desirable or make sense. Added to this is the fact that we will be embedding EU law into UK laws post-Brexit, as they are at the moment, even from a legal viewpoint there is no reason to introduce additional controls.

Even if the UK wants to change or introduce new laws it is estimated that it will take 10-15 years with any changes most likely to be technology related – say automated or driverless cars rather than changes to existing motoring laws. So it’s unlikely that there will be too many arguments against allowing us to use our GB licences in Europe.

The next issue was car safety, would being outside the EU have an effect on safety standards applied to new cars? Well according to the secretary general of the Global New Car Assesment Programme (Global NCAP), David Ward, it will render the UK a ‘Second-hand Dealer’ in car safety. I’m not sure what he meant by that but he went on to say that Brexit meant withdrawing from a complex eco-system of vehicle regulation’, with the UK’s influence in vehicle safety diminishing. Not sure about that either but it looks pretty bad!

On the other hand Matthew Avery who is director of research at Thatcham Research assured us by saying that Brexit won’t reduce vehicle safety because the UK is a signatory to the UN type approval agreement which is the main process governing vehicle safety. He explained to Auto Express, ‘It has almost identical test procedures to those in the EC.’ ‘So even when we leave, our vehicles will still be aligned to the rest of Europe.’

In purely practical terms it wouldn’t make sense to have our own set of safety standards with so many of our cars being sold in Europe and vice-versa. Future EC directives, such as the proposed mandatory fitment of new tech such as autonomous emergency braking are likely to be adopted by the UK anyway. It wouldn’t make sense to have different designs for different countries. Thatcham, at the forefront of safety in the UK, will continue to be a member of the voluntary programme, Euro NCAP whilst possibly setting the bar higher putting pressure on manufacturers to achieve a new UK five star rating.

As was pointed out we don’t have to be a member of the EC to be a member of Euro NCAP. So Brexit will have no effect. Although, not being a member state when safety is being discussed by the remaining members, means that we will no longer carry the same weight as we did as a leading safety member of the EU influencing decisions.

What will happen to car insurance? As it currently stands all UK motorists have basic insurance cover while driving through EC member countries. The question is will Brits have to pay for extra cover if they drive around various EU countries post Brexit? Initially, it was felt by the Association of British Insurers (ABI), that motorists would need to revert to the old ‘Green Card’ system, whereby they had to apply for and pay for a special cover note before travelling to the continent. However, Ben Howarth, ABI’s senior policy advisor, motor and liability, said the paperwork would not be necessary.

The Government has made it clear that it wants to keep us within the Motor Insurance ‘Free Circulation Zone’. He explained that this would mean that drivers and hauliers should not have to pay for Green Card documentation from insurers when they travel in EU member states after Brexit. Apparently, this is a significant development, and once the Commission has agreed it, which is expected, it means that drivers, haulage operators and insurers will not face the considerable administrative disruption associated with the issuing of Green cards and also avoid border checks.

The ABI advises that drivers check their policies post Brexit as they may not carry the same level of cover that they are forced to carry whilst part of the EU. What is it they say? The devil is in the detail – and so it is with Brexit! By Graham Hill

I was reading a report prepared by road safety charity Brake, about the mental health of company car drivers the other day. The report was rather worrying because it was calling for companies to up their game in this area and identify earlier mental health problems that could affect their drivers.

However, as I read the report I started to think that this situation affects all drivers not just company car drivers so whilst companies could have checks in place, what checks are there when it comes to non-company car or business drivers? The report points out that whilst a happy driver with a positive attitude is not necessarily a safer driver, nor does it mean that a driver with mental issues will not make a perfectly good driver but psychologists have shown that poor attitude and a negative state of mind can adversely affect driver safety.

There is also little information regarding the state of a driver’s mind following an accident. So when an accident occurred as a result of a car going out of control the blame is often put down to tiredness or distraction rather than a sudden attack of depression. This can take the driver into a very dark place leading to suicidal thoughts. And this is worrying.

Companies have and will encourage employees to talk about mental issues which still carries a stigma. Brake wants companies to take this further and in the same way that businesses ensure that their vehicles are properly maintained and roadworthy similar checks on their drivers should also be put in place with drivers’ mental health assessed.

In a response reported in Business Car, Alison Moriarty, road risk and compliance manager for Skanska agreed with the views expressed by Brake but added potentially risky conditions for drivers which included depression, that could make them unconcerned for their own and others’ safety, and anxiety, which could cause sufferers to experience periods of unintended helplessness close to a state of paralysis – potentially dangerous when drivers may need to take split-second decisions to avoid a crash.

A string of recommendations was made to make it easier for employees to discuss mental problems and the importance for businesses to understand and react to the issues when identified. All good news which will hopefully make driving safer but the same checks and balances should also be applied to non-business drivers. Whilst it is believed that business drivers spend more time alone with little interaction with others with whom they can discuss their feelings the same must apply to those who don’t drive as part of their job.

I find it all very worrying. Maybe crashes need more investigation into the mental health of those involved and in-car telematics could be used to check for erratic behaviour. More certainly needs to be done in this area until all cars become driverless. By Graham Hill

If someone had said to you just 5 years ago that technology will have progressed to the point where you could get out of your car, in front of your garage or beside a parking space, press a park button and the car would park itself – you’d have thought they’d overdosed on something dodgy!

Apparently, the technology has been about for years but the law has prevented car manufacturers from fitting it to new cars because in order to drive or park a car you must be behind the wheel. Some manufacturers have an app that you can use on your mobile device to park the car so even though you could still be sitting in the car it’s still illegal to use a mobile device whilst in control of a vehicle.

After representations from motor manufacturers, insurers and haulage companies the Government held a consultation on changes to the Highway Code and relevant regulations earlier this year. As a result, changes have been introduced that allow drivers to use a remote control parking device if they are within 6 meters of their vehicle.

Whilst still not 100% clear it would seem that you could use the remote parking on your mobile device if sitting in the car because you have passed control of the car over to the car itself. This will be great for larger cars, having to negotiate tight parking spaces as well as parking your car in a garage that isn’t wide enough to park the car and open the driver’s door.

This is now law and some manufacturers already have these devices available such as Mercedes, Peugeot and Jaguar. Many have applauded the new technology believing that it opens up more parking spaces that may appear too tight but with the aids fitted could shoe-horn your car into the space available. Personally, I feel people should learn to park and as my dad used to say – ‘just something else that can go wrong’. By Graham Hill

New insurer ‘By Miles’ is set to shake up the car insurance industry. The first pay-per-mile insurance policy is believed to save motorists hundreds of pounds each year. Drivers pay a flat rate annual fee to cover the car against damage and theft when the car is parked. Thereafter the driver is charged per mile whenever he uses his car.

The policy is aimed at those travelling less than 7,000 miles per annum which is around 50% of all UK drivers. The distances are recorded by a telematics device that the owners plug into their cars On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) port. Each journey can be tracked and recorded on a dedicated smartphone app then the driver billed monthly based on the distance travelled.

Motorists taking out a policy will be charged a minimum of £150 per annum and 3.0 pence per mile although the per mile charges stop after 150 miles in a single day or 10,000 miles per annum. James Blackham, co-founder of By Miles said car finance has ‘barely changed in 30 years. Every extra mile you drive adds to the risk of having an accident. We think it’s high time that is reflected in the price infrequent drivers pay’.

Matt Cullen of  The Association of British Insurers approved of the new way to insure cars. Motoring habits are changing as are consumer needs so it makes sense to adapt things like insurance policies. The AA also admitted that it was investigating real-time insurance cover. I think that it’s a great idea and should take off. By Graham Hill

According to the RAC, the UK’s pothole problem is getting worse, not better as it should be by now. The number of cars damaged by pothole strikes is at a 3 year high.

Data released by the RAC shows that 4,091 motorists reported breaking down between April & June 2018, the highest 2^nd quarter in 3 years – as a result of snapped springs, damaged shock absorbers and distorted wheels along with other pothole caused damage.

RAC Chief Engineer said councils were ‘not winning’ the battle against potholes. ‘Despite further emergency funding from central government, their budgets are even more stretched than in previous years. The overall quality of our roads should be getting better, not worse,’ he added.

I fear that it will take a major accident caused by a driver losing control of his car having hit a pothole before the Authorities finally take the situation seriously. By Graham Hill

Traffic on UK roads is at an all-time high according to the latest statistics from the Department for Transport (DfT). Car traffic reached 254.4 billion miles in 2017 with overall traffic up by 1.3% on the previous year to 327.1 billion miles.

Van traffic increased to its highest level also, up 2.7% to 50.5 billion miles. Cycle traffic showed the biggest increase in percentage terms, up 3.1% to 3.3 billion miles. Bus and coach traffic dropped by 3.4% from 2.5 billion to 2.4 billion miles.

Finally, motorcycle traffic remained pretty much the same. So what does this tell us? Best to ask a few experts, some of whom apparently hold the view that traffic patterns will be changing as people change from car ownership to car usage. I agree with the switch away from car ownership but rather than a mix and match between using a car, train, bus, plane, autonomous vehicle, cycle, walking etc I see the move from owned cars to leased or rented cars with the exclusive use of the driver.

I can’t envisage a time when the vast majority of the population would be happy to plan every trip rather than walk out in their onesy and slippers, jump into their car, drive to Tesco Express and buy an emergency pint of milk, loaf of bread and bar of chocolate rather than wait for a bus either way or order an Uber.

Having said that, I have friends in London who have never owned a car so what do I know. Better turn to those in the know. According to the SMMT new vehicle sales dropped to 2.5 million in 2017 down for the first time in 6 years. They are predicting a further drop this year of 5.1% to 2.4 million new vehicles.

Christoph Domke of KPMG predicted that if this trend continues we will also see a decline in manufacturers. We have 27 at the moment but he suggests that within 10 years this could decline to just 10. An interesting statistic was the rise in access to a car in each household. In 1951 it was as low as 15% but in 2016 that had jumped to 77%.

However, dig a little deeper and it can be seen that families in the lowest income level fare much worse with just 44% of households having access to a car. This has led to confusion. Lowest income families may actually be leading the way to Mobility as a Service (MaaS) the latest buzz expression. Behind the expression is the mix and match of cars, trains, taxis, car shares, autonomous cars etc.

But lower-income families use public transport more because of necessity rather than a planned structured approach to mobility. So will we ever see the day when the majority, if not all, vehicles on the road are driverless and driven by electricity? Motorbikes create a challenge I think, not only to become driverless but also to be spotted and avoided by driverless cars. I mean some motorbikes are capable of 180 miles per hour – that is bloody fast.

On the other hand specialist company MaaS Global launched its app called ‘Whim’ in the West Midlands in April 2018. It offers multi-modal transport alternatives to car ownership. Within the first month there were 3,000 downloads of the app which combines access and payment for various types of transport including public transport, car hire and taxis.

The general consensus was that this could work well in larger towns and cities but it wouldn’t be so attractive in rural areas where public and even private transport links are nowhere near good enough for such a scheme to work. Time will tell! By Graham Hill

I’ve been in this industry for over 30 years and it worries me greatly the levels of incompetence displayed by those at the sharp end. I don’t blame the sales staff, it often stems from the top. Directors and senior management struggle with basic product knowledge that spreads like a cancer throughout the organisation.

Whether it’s an independent dealership, dealer group, bank owned finance company, manufacturer-owned finance company or independent their basic knowledge is abysmal. Unfortunately, this attitude spreads throughout the organisation which means that customers are incredibly poorly informed and likely to make wrong financing decisions or the right decision but unaware of all the implications and the potential true costs.

I broke the story over 2 years ago that the PPI claims industry was eying up the car finance industry and the new regulations that were being introduced by the relatively new FCA. They were getting a sniff that all was not well inside the industry and there was potential for mis-selling claims.

If you think of what happened when a PPI claim was successful, people were having all their premiums returned. Could this mean that customers could have all their payments returned and the car given back as a result of being given bad information by an ill-informed or crooked salesman? The first test cases will give us an idea.

In the meantime, I see false reporting in the press and idiots masquerading as experts giving poor advice to consumers. There is little doubt that I am rapidly becoming the most influential person in the UK when it comes to vehicle finance. My appointment as non-executive director of one of the most progressive PR companies in the UK will help this along. Especially as the company chairman is as gung-ho as I am and supports me.

To illustrate my point I’m not going to mention names in order to avoid any unnecessary legal challenges but the Chief Operating Officer of one of this country’s largest dealership groups wrote a pile of nonsense in response to a poorly written piece in the Times. He, first of all, criticised the paper for the warning about potential problems with the claims industry. Defending the indefensible!

He then rants on about the difference between PCP and Personal Contract Hire (PCH) making a big issue about PCP not being a lease. This is fundamental. It is a form of HP agreement and HP agreements are leases – idiot. Any finance other than a loan is a form of lease. If someone else owns the goods whilst you have the use of them – it’s a lease! That’s basic accounting something one would expect someone in his position to know.

With HP or a PCP you only own the goods when you have paid all the money owed plus an option to purchase fee. If you want to read my views of the industry and reveal masses of PCP secrets go to Grahamhilltraining.com and register to download my PCP report. I’m explaining just about everything once and for all. Next on my target list is PCH. By Graham Hill