The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

If you are a regular reader of my blog you will know that I have been talking about wireless electric vehicle charging for over 3 years. It seems that the industry is seeing sense at last.

Interest is increasing in electric vehicles (EVs), but consumer anxiety and misconceptions over the ease and availability of charging has slowed EV proliferation on a global scale.

While wireless charging addresses many of those concerns, there are still myths circulating about how it works.

In reality, EV wireless charging is as efficient as plug-in options. Wireless EV charging based on magnetic resonance technology operates between 90% to 93% efficiency from the grid to the EV battery, well within the 88% to 95% efficiency range of conventional Level 1 or 2 plug-in EV chargers.

Wireless delivers the same charging power – in the same amount of time – as conventional plug-in methods.

EV wireless charging is flexible. Magnetic resonance requires neither physical contact nor fully accurate car alignment. No mess or fear of forgetting—your EV charges automatically, hands-free. The same charger can support low vehicles like a sports car up to high ground clearance SUVs.

Magnetic resonance can also work through water, snow, ice, concrete and asphalt—so the EV can charge no matter the circumstance or installation.

EV wireless charging is safe. Wireless charging is a totally hands-free experience. No gas pumps or charging cables to mess with.

Magnetic resonance systems deliver energy from a ground pad to an embedded vehicle-side receiver, and all magnetic fields are contained in a limited space underneath the vehicle.

Following years of rigorous analysis and testing by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), wireless EV charging meets all regulatory guidelines for human safety.

Wireless EV charging technology keeps stray magnetic and electric fields below the well-established safety limits used in all consumer products, such as induction cooktops, cellphones or Bluetooth headsets. Sensing and processing hardware, which can detect foreign and living objects and vehicle position, ensure safety and ease of use.

EV wireless charging is being standardised on a global scale. Today, charging connectors have not been standardized across automakers and regions, and drivers sometimes have difficulty finding a plug that fits their specific model.

For wireless charging, automotive industry groups including SAE International (global), IEC/ISO (global) and CATARC (China) agreed from the beginning to create industry standards to ensure full interoperability.

EV wireless charging is dynamic. A future benefit is dynamic charging, which enables charging ‘on-the-go’. This is a breakthrough for taxi fleets which will be able to ‘power snack’ as they move through taxi queues waiting for passengers.

Wireless charging can help accelerate adoption of EVs in taxi fleets—important for the urban environment—by eliminating charging down-time and maximizing ‘in-service’ time on the roads.

EV wireless charging is a key enabler for the future of mobility. Wireless charging will also be critical for autonomous vehicles and autonomous parking, automatically charging by positioning themselves over local wireless charging pads.

While full robo-taxi deployment may be some years out, auto-valet parking is near at hand. Ultimately, robo-taxis are expected to dominate the passenger-miles in urban environments and smart cities, and wireless charging is a key enabler.

EVs are reshaping the automotive industry, and wireless charging can help make them accessible and appealing to all.  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Compensation could be owed to UK business that bought or leased new cars and vans between October 2006 and September 2015, as a result of legal action taken against five shipping firms for price fixing.

MOL, “K” Line, NYK, WWL/EUKOR and CSAV were found to have violated EU competition law by the European Commission on February 21, 2018. The EC held that the shippers had coordinated rates, allocated tenders, coordinated reductions of capacity in the market and exchanged commercially sensitive information to maintain or increase the price of intercontinental shipping of new vehicles.

The companies were fined £343m by the EU and now class representative Mark McLaren has filed a claim against them for overcharging UK consumers and businesses, instructing law firm Scott+Scott UK LLP.

McLaren said: “When UK consumers and businesses purchased or leased a new car, they paid more for the delivery of that car than they should have done, as a result of a long-running cartel by five of the world’s leading maritime shipping companies. I have spent much of my career working in consumer protection and I strongly believe that compensation should be paid when consumers are harmed by such deliberate, unlawful conduct.”

Affected vehicles include those from Ford, Vauxhall, Volkswagen, Peugeot, BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, Toyota, Citroen and Renault.

The claim is being brought in the Competition Appeal Tribunal as a collective action on an opt-out basis, so that all eligible consumers and businesses will benefit from any damages awarded without incurring any legal fees or risk of adverse costs.  The value of the claim is believed to be in excess of £150 million – or up to £60 per vehicle.

Businesses or consumers that purchased one or more new cars, or light commercial vehicles, between October 2006 and September 2015 are automatically included within the class.

Class members will not pay costs or fees to participate in this legal action. The legal action is being funded by Woodsford Litigation Funding.  There are no legal or other fees, or any risk of adverse costs, for class members.

For additional information or to register interest, visit https://www.cardeliverycharges.com  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

The electric vehicle homecharge scheme and workplace charging scheme have been confirmed for another year by the Office for Low Emissions Vehicles (OLEV).

It has also confirmed the continuation of the on street residential chargepoint scheme for another year.

From April 1, 2020, the grant will be set at £350 towards the cost of purchase and installation of a chargepoint at home through the electric vehicle homecharge scheme, and £350 towards a chargepoint socket at work through the workplace charging scheme. This is a reduction from £500.

Businesses are now allowed 40 sockets under the workplace charging scheme, up from 20.

The grant has also been extended to include larger electric motorbikes.

Local authorities can apply for a grant to cover part of the capital costs of installing chargepoints for residents who lack off-street parking. The grant rate will be set at £6,500 per chargepoint – extendable to £7,500 in certain circumstances.

To date, more than 120,000 domestic chargepoint installations have benefited from grants as well as more than 6,500 workplace installations, across the UK.

The Government says reducing the grant rate will enable more people to benefit from both schemes and provide better value for money for the taxpayer. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Fewer than half of van drivers use hands-free or Bluetooth technology to make calls, according to research conducted by Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles.

Van drivers make on average seven calls a day whilst driving and spend an average of 37 minutes on the phone for work each day however, only 41% of drivers use hands-free and Bluetooth technology on a frequent basis, according to a Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles survey.

Claire English, head of fleet at Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles, said: “Mobile phone use behind the wheel is a topic that we’ve been monitoring over the past couple of years and the recent statistics show it’s still a huge safety problem on UK roads.

Despite carrying a hefty punishment, it lacks the taboo of other offences such as drink-driving and this needs to change.

Van drivers ignoring mobile phone laws risk getting a £200 fine and six penalty points on their licence.

According to the RAC Report on Motoring, 17% of drivers in the UK admitted to sending and receiving texts, checking e-mails or posting on social media while driving. Last year, Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles revealed 23% of drivers do not have hands-free kit in their van.

The Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles research also revealed that van drivers in London, Yorkshire and the Humber, and the North East are most likely to dial using the handsfree-technology while Scottish van drivers are twice as likely to give hands-free a miss compared to any other region.

Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles offers a Bluetooth hands-free kit as standard across its entire model range. English said: “As part of our Working With You promise, we’re committed to improving safety on UK roads for both our customers and other road users, always ensuring we provide the right equipment for the job, for example offering Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) and a handsfree kit as standard across the range.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Millions of motorists have been ripped off in a £150million delivery scheme to inflate the price of new cars, it is claimed.

Eight in ten new cars have seen price increases of up to £60 after shipping firms conspired to fix delivery costs, according to a lawsuit.

A total of 17million cars are said to have been affected over ten years. Now lawyers are to launch a US-style ‘class action’ against five of the world’s biggest shipping firms to try to win money back for consumers.

Customers affected include those who bought from Ford, Vauxhall, Volkswagen, Peugeot, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Toyota, Citroen and Renault, between October 2006 and September 2015.

At the heart of the case is a line near the end of every customer’s new-car bill which reads: ‘Plus delivery.’

The exact amount of ‘overpayment’ owed per customer will vary based on how far the car may have travelled, including from the Far East and the US.

The maximum overpayment is £60 with an average of about £9 per car. But if a family has bought or leased a number of new cars over the decade the sums quickly add up, according to legal firm Scott+Scott which is bringing the action.

The ‘class action’ – a group legal suit under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 – has been filed in the Competition Appeal Tribunal on behalf of consumers and businesses who purchased or leased new cars and vans between 2006 and 2015.

In 2018, EU watchdogs found the five shipping firms guilty of running an anti-competitive price-fixing cartel – and fined them £330million.

They ruled that the firms had coordinated tenders, allocated customers, conspired on capacity reductions, and exchanged commercially sensitive pricing information to maintain or increase shipping prices.

All the companies had acknowledged their involvement and agreed to settle the cases, watchdogs said.

The shippers were caught out by a so-called ‘ratters’ charter’ which gives immunity to the first member of any cartel to blow the whistle on their partners. This gives guilty firms an incentive to ‘rat’ first on the others to avoid hefty fines.

Lawyers say car-makers are not the guilty parties, pointing out that they too were outraged by the rip-off.

The five companies are Japanese carriers MOL, K Line, and NYK, Sweden’s WWL/EUKOR, and Chile’s CSAV. Although not household names, their role in moving cars around the world is huge.

The case is being led by Mark McLaren, formerly of consumers’ group Which? A pre-trial hearing is expected in the autumn.

He said: ‘When UK consumers and businesses purchased or leased a new car, they paid more for the delivery than they should have done… I strongly believe that compensation should be paid when consumers are harmed by such deliberate, unlawful conduct.’

David Scott, of Scott+Scott, said: ‘Consumers and businesses who bought or leased a new Ford, Volkswagen, Peugeot, BMW, Mercedes or Toyota, for example, are owed money.’

He added: ‘Just because these international shipping companies aren’t household names shouldn’t mean that they are able to get away with it.’

If the ‘class action’ case is won anyone who bought an affected car will be automatically entitled to money back. All they need to do is provide their details and proof of purchase or lease and they will get paid.

The shippers have already been hit be penalties beyond the EU, including Australia, China, Japan and the US.  By Graham Hill thanks to the Daily Mail

In this article I’m warning about Coronavirus and how to best protect the inside of your car without damage. Whilst most of us are taking precautions at work and at home it’s easy to forget about our cars. And if we remember to protect our cars you should know that some cleaners that we use on work surfaces are not suitable for the inside of your car and can cause serious damage.

For example, bleach and hydrogen peroxide both kill the virus but can damage your upholstery. And I’m not talking neat I’m talking about those chemicals as a constituent part of the cleaner. So it’s important that you check the component parts of any cleaner that you intend to use. Another dodgy ingredient is ammonia. You should not use any ammonia-based product on car touchscreens as they can damage the anti-glare and anti-fingerprint coatings.

If you are the only person in your car then the risk is reduced but of course if you participate in a car share or you regularly rent cars you need to take more care. Make sure you have some sanitiser gel to use in the car and to share with passengers. Then also treat the steering wheel (considered to be one of the highest sources of germs that you will regularly come into contact with – higher than a toilet seat).

Clean the gear shift, door handles, inside and out, indicator and windscreen wiper stalks, buttons, touch screens, armrests, grab handles, seat adjusters, in fact anything that you or a passenger may have come into contact with.

So having checked the ingredients for the above you also don’t want to pay over the odds for product that is aimed at auto interiors but are being sold at a premium. So what can you use that is cheap? Experts recommend Isopropyl Alcohol as being the most effective against Coronavirus and safe for the interior of your car. The most effective contain over 70% alcohol.

Manufacturers of product in the US suggest that most, if not all car surfaces have been tested safe to be cleaned with Isopropyl alcohol, from plastic to metal and leather, even soft cloth upholstery. If in doubt consult the manufacturer/dealer and if you are really worried use their proprietary product. Don’t forget if you use say a bleach-based product and it damages the leather seats etc.and the car is being handed back at the end of the agreement you could be charged a substantial amount to repair/replace the damaged seating.

Vigorous washing with soap and water can also destroy a coronavirus. Coronaviruses are surrounded by a protective envelope that helps them to infect other cells, and destroying that envelope can effectively disarm them.

“Friction from cleaning also participates in the destruction,” says Stephen Thomas, M.D., chief of infectious diseases and director of global health at Upstate Medical University in Syracuse. “You want to do the best with what you have, so even soap and water can chip away at the risk.”

Soap and water are also safe for most car interiors—especially fabrics and older leather that may have begun to crack. Just be sure not to scrub too hard, says Larry Kosilla, president of car detailing company AMMO NYC and host of a popular YouTube channel about car detailing.

Most car leathers and imitation leathers have urethane coatings for protection, which is safe to clean with alcohol. But most leathers are dyed, and cleaning too vigorously can remove the dye.

Kosilla says he’s heard from car owners who think their light-colored leather is getting dirtier as they scrub it, which isn’t the case. “It’s not getting dirtier, you’re removing all the color on top,” he says.

Take care of your leather upholstery after you clean it, says John Ibbotson, chief automotive services manager at CR. “You should use a good leather cleaner, then a good leather conditioner afterwards,” he says.

If your car has fabric upholstery, Kosilla warns against cleaning it with too much water or too much soap. “The goal is not to create too many suds. If you get suds, you’ll have suds forever,” he says. In addition, if you soak through the fabric down to the cushion beneath, it could end up creating a musty smell or encouraging mould growth in the cushions. Instead, Kosilla recommends lightly agitating the fabric with a small amount of water and laundry detergent.

Both Stout and Kosilla recommend cleaning all surfaces with a microfiber cloth. That’s because they’re made of fabric that consists of tiny little loops that capture and sweep away dirt and dust particles before they can scratch delicate or shiny plastic surfaces. By comparison, the dirt and debris in your car can stick to even the cleanest paper towels or napkins and scratch surfaces—”like sandpaper,” Kosilla says.

Once you’re finished cleaning, don’t forget to wash your hands before and after driving. It’s a good habit to get into even outside of the spread of COVID-19, as it will keep your steering wheel and other frequently touched surfaces in your car from looking dingy.

“The number one thing is to clean your hands,” Kosilla says. “You can clean your steering wheel, but if you have dirty hands, you put that dirt back on.”

Washing your hands is still one of the best ways to defend yourself against COVID-19, says Thomas.

“It is known that coronaviruses can persist on surfaces, but as of right now we still think infections via respiratory transmission are still primarily the main route from person to person,” he says.

So there you have it, views that I’ve collated from the UK, US and other countries. The thing is don’t panic but take extra precautions and hopefully, you’ll be safe and virus free. By Graham Hill

Pollution from tyre wear can be 1,000 times worse than what comes out of a car’s exhaust, according to a new study by Emissions Analytics.

Harmful particle matter from tyres – and also brakes – is being exacerbated by the increasing popularity of large, heavy vehicles such as SUVs, and growing demand for electric vehicles, which are heavier than standard cars because of their batteries.

Exhaust emissions have been rapidly reduced by car makers as a result of the pressure placed on them by European emissions standards. New cars now emit very little in the way of particulate matter but there is growing concern around ‘non-exhaust emissions’.

Non-exhaust emissions (NEE) are particles released into the air from brake wear, tyre wear, road surface wear and resuspension of road dust during on-road vehicle usage. No legislation is in place to limit or reduce NEE, but they cause a great deal of concern for air quality.

Richard Lofthouse, senior researcher at Emissions Analytics, said: “It’s time to consider not just what comes out of a car’s exhaust pipe but particle pollution from tyre and brake wear. Our initial tests reveal that there can be a shocking amount of particle pollution from tyres – 1,000 times worse than emissions from a car’s exhaust.

“What is even more frightening is that while exhaust emissions have been tightly regulated for many years, tyre wear is totally unregulated – and with the increasing growth in sales of heavier SUVs and battery-powered electric cars, non-exhaust emissions are a very serious problem.”

NEEs are currently believed to constitute the majority of primary particulate matter from road transport, 60% percent of PM2.5 and 73% percent of PM10 – and in its 2019 report ‘Non-Exhaust Emissions from Road Traffic’ by the UK Government’s Air Quality Expert Group (AQEG), it recommended that NEE are immediately recognised as a source of ambient concentrations of airborne particulate matter, even for vehicles with zero exhaust emissions of particles – such as EVs.

To understand the scale of the problem, Emissions Analytics performed some initial tyre wear testing. Using a popular family hatchback running on brand new, correctly inflated tyres, it found that the car emitted 5.8g/km of particles.

Compared with regulated exhaust emission limits of 4.5mg/km, the tyre wear emission is higher by a factor of more than 1,000.

Emissions Analytics notes that this could be even higher if the vehicle had tyres which were underinflated, or the road surfaces used for the test were rougher, or the tyres used were from a budget range – all very recognisable scenarios in ‘real world’ motoring.

Nick Molden, CEO of Emissions Analytics, said: “The challenge to the industry and regulators is an almost complete black hole of consumer information, undone by frankly out of date regulations still preoccupied with exhaust emissions. In the short term, fitting higher quality tyres is one way to reduce these NEEs and to always have tyres inflated to the correct level.

“Ultimately, though, the car industry may have to find ways to reduce vehicle weight too. What is without doubt on the horizon is much-needed regulation to combat this problem. Whether that leads to specific types of low emission, harder wearing tyres is not for us to say – but change has to come.”

Mike Hawes, SMMT chief executive responded to the findings: “Making sensationalist claims based on testing of a single vehicle is not credible and, quite frankly, irresponsible. Emissions from safety-critical brakes, tyres and road surfaces are very difficult to measure, and a challenge already taken seriously by the sector, governments and a UN global group, which are working together to better understand, and agree, how to test them in a scientific way. Further, there is no evidence to suggest that electric vehicles have a propensity to emit more non-exhaust particulates than any other – in fact, their regenerative braking systems mean wear is significantly reduced.” By Graham Hill with thanks to Fleet News

The first electric vehicle (EV) code of practice has been launched to ensure that consumers receive fair treatment from domestic charge point installers.

The Electric Vehicle Consumer Code (EVCC) aims to reduce the mis-selling of home energy generating systems such as photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage and improve installation quality.

The code is a voluntary scheme which domestic charge point installation businesses can subscribe to, identifying them as reputable.

The code draws on experience from the Renewable Energy Consumer Code (RECC) for small-scale renewable technologies. Both the Electric Vehicle Consumer Code and the Renewable Energy Consumer Code are administered by Renewable Energy Assurance Limited (REAL).

Virginia Graham OBE, chief executive of Renewable Energy Assurance, said: “RECC has played a foundational role in enforcing high consumer protection standards in the small-scale renewable energy industry since 2006.

“We aim to extend the lessons learnt from that sector into the rapidly-growing world of EV home charge points.”

The launch of the code follows the Government’s announcement made in February that intends to consult on bringing forward the date banning the sale of new internal combustion engine cars and vans from 2040 to 2035.

Transport minister Rachel Maclean said: “Zero emission vehicles are cutting transport emissions and improving air quality, making our communities healthier, better places to live. Having the right rules and regulations on charge point installation standards is important and we want to see industry showing leadership in this area.

“We welcome the Electric Vehicle Consumer Code which aims to protect both people and installers of electric charge points in homes across the UK.”

There are currently around 1,000 businesses in the UK authorised to install domestic charge points through the Government’s Electric Vehicle Homecharge Scheme – one in four of these are also a RECC member.

Nina Skorupska CBE, chief executive at the Renewable Energy Association (REA), said: “The EV charging industry is committed to best practice. Decarbonisation of the UK transport sector is our aim, but to achieve this we need to bring consumers with us on the journey and ensure they are confident about the low-carbon products and services on the market.”

Installer Joju Solar supports the introduction of the Electric Vehicle Consumer Code.

Chris Jardine, technical director of Joju Solar, said: “As an experienced installer of EV home charge points, Joju is well-placed to support this important consumer protection initiative. With the EV charge point sector set to grow exponentially we need to ensure consumers have the confidence they need to play their full part.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Diesel drivers enjoyed the 11th biggest monthly drop in pump prices since 2000, with the price of the fuel falling 4p per litre (ppl) in February, according to RAC Fuel Watch data.

Petrol fell by 3p (2.93p) a litre to 124.02p – its 19th biggest drop in a month. Diesel was down by 4.24p to 127.04ppl, which means the cost of filling up a 55-litre family car with diesel is £2.33 cheaper at £69.87. For petrol it is £1.61p less than it was in January at £68.21.

Asda is leading the way among the big four supermarket fuel retailers by selling petrol for 116.78ppl – 3.5p lower than it was at the start of February and 3.5p cheaper than its closest competitor.

It also reduced diesel by 5.9p to 118.8ppl which makes it 4p cheaper than its nearest rival.

The average price charged for unleaded between all supermarket sites is 119.19ppl and 121.62ppl for diesel – around 5p less than the UK average prices.

The pump price reductions have been driven by a $10 slump in the price of a barrel of oil from a high of $60.28 on 20 February to $50.41 by the close of the month.

Over the course of the whole month though the reduction was far smaller at just $3, with a barrel having started February at $53.48.

As a result, the wholesale price of unleaded dropped to below 90p a litre before delivery, retailer margin and VAT.

The last time a price as low as this was seen was at the end of January 2019 which led to an average UK pump price of around 119ppl – 5p less than the current average.

The diesel wholesale price finished February at 92ppl – the last time this was recorded was at the end of August 2017 which also translated to a forecourt price of around 119ppl – 8ppl lower than the current UK average price for diesel.

RAC is calling on retailers to keep cutting their pump prices so drivers are charged a fair price which properly reflects the large reductions on the wholesale market.

RAC fuel spokesman Simon Williams said: “While it is good drivers are benefitting from lower forecourt prices, in reality the wholesale price is such that the big four supermarkets, which dominate UK fuel retailing, should cut their prices again.

“At the moment both fuels are 6p a litre too expensive which means for petrol we should really be seeing a UK average of 118p.

“Unfortunately, we don’t think diesel will come down to the 2017 price of 119p a litre due to wholesale prices only dropping to 92p a litre briefly as a result of oil suffering its biggest weekly decline in more than four years.”

Williams says that the oil price has slumped due to the spread of the coronavirus prompting fears of slower global demand, which may well lead to a move from oil producer group OPEC and its allies to restrict production when they stage an extraordinary meeting in Vienna on Friday (March 6).

“If they decide to take action to prop up the barrel price it would very likely put an end to falling forecourt fuel prices,” said Williams.

Regional fuel price variation

Regional average unleaded pump prices

Regional average diesel pump prices

Whilst the report was aimed at business users it also applies to consumers so worth reading what Brake, the safety body has to say.

Failure to comply with basic vehicle standards can result in tragic consequences, according to the latest report released by Brake’s Global Fleet Champions.

‘Vehicle maintenance and mechanics’ outlines the consequences of not complying with vehicle standards and explains how to improve maintenance and checking procedures to ensure vehicles remain a valuable resource.

The report outlines that regular checking and servicing of safety-critical components such as brakes and tyres can fix small problems early on, removing the need for costly repairs and expensive insurance claims.

John Eastman from the Institute of Road Transport Engineers believes that fleet managers should take a systematic approach towards the maintenance of vehicles. He said that preventative maintenance has several benefits, not least the improved safety, reliability and wellbeing of people who drive for work and other road users.

The report also features advice from Autoglass, who advises fleet managers on how to effectively maintain advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) to ensure the technology works effectively.

Jeremy Rochfort, national sales manager for Autoglass said: “The adoption rate of ADAS in fleet vehicles is much higher as fleet cars tend to be newer and come with up-to-date safety features. However, our research shows that keeping up to date with technology ranks low down on fleet decision-maker’s priorities.

“That’s why we’re committed to educating the fleet industry on the importance of ADAS calibration and investing in our technical expertise and capabilities to ensure we can match the rising demand for these services.”

The report follows the recent release of the road safety report launched by Brake.

Global Fleet Champions is a not-for-profit global campaign to prevent crashes and reduce pollution caused by vehicles used for work purposes. ByGraham Hill thanks to Fleet News