The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

If you’re like me and constantly on a diet, which clearly isn’t working or we wouldn’t still be on one, we fool ourselves into believing that we stick exactly to the diet but in truth, we have all the right intentions but when it comes to the crunch we fall short and succumb to chocolate, biscuits, cakes and much more. So whilst we know what we should be doing we do the complete opposite!

It seems that this is the case when it comes to the switch away from fossil fuels to planet-saving alternatively powered cars such as hybrids and electric cars. To prove the point fleet management company CLM carried out a survey amongst car drivers. 400 drivers were asked a series of questions with the following results: 24% said that they would consider a fully electric car, 32% said the same for a plug-in-hybrid and 36% said they would consider a conventional hybrid.

However, in the real world where people swear they are sticking to their diet – but aren’t, these people who say they would go green or greener with their next car are saying it because they want people to believe they actually care about the planet. The truth is that they do care but money talks and if it’s cheaper to buy and run a diesel or a petrol car – that’s the choice made for them.

So back here in the real world, just 0.57% of the cars registered are pure electric, 1.83% are plug-in-hybrids and 3.38% conventional hybrids. That is crazy! Are we all fooling ourselves into believing we can continue as we are because everyone else will switch over to cleaner cars or is it simply down to cost? Or could it be, as CLM MD John Lawrence alluded to – simply down to education?

They found that only 26% of those surveyed could identify a plug-in hybrid whilst 38% could identify a conventional hybrid. On the other hand, 64% could identify a fully electric car. Whilst most of us look on and see how cars are evolving at a rapid rate we struggle with understanding how the vehicles work and how they improve the environment.  If your car usage consists of several short trips around town every day then a Plug-In Hybrid or electric car would be the best but forget the electric and possibly the Plug-In Hybrid if your daily usage requires you to drive long distances.

You could end up spending many a pleasant hour sitting on the hard shoulder of a motorway. So whilst most of us would like to think we are environmentally conscious, in truth we could all do a lot more to bring pollution levels down but for each of us the question is – at what cost? By Graham Hill

If you thought that there was ever healthy competition amongst car manufacturers to the benefit of consumers – think again. They work much more closely than you think – often to the detriment of consumers.

In one case six truck manufacturers were found to have colluded in order to coordinate the pricing and release of new technologies needed to meet stricter emissions standards and when the new tech. should be released. The collusion lasted from 1997 – 2011 and ended up with total fines of £3.4 billion being issued against all of the participating manufacturers by European Commission.

The Competition Commissioners carried out a raid on the 6 companies which included Daimler, Daf, Iveco, Volvo and Renault. Scania decided not to settle with the Commission and were fined a year later for being a member of the Cartel. MAN was also part of the Cartel but as they had cooperated and provided evidence against the others they were immune from any fines.

A report in Fleet News revealed that following the investigation into the truck firms, the Commission, working on some inside information, decided to look further afield and found that German manufacturers, i.e. Daimler (Mercedes), BMW and VW Group had colluded to control the rollout of new technology for cleaner cars. Last month it was widely reported that the European Commission was carrying out an investigation into the allegations.

The antitrust investigators have already uncovered proof that the ‘Circle Of 5’ had held meetings to control the introduction of emission-reducing technology. The circle of 5 included Daimler (Mercedes), BMW, VW, Audi and Porsche. VW and Daimler have assisted the investigations and by being whistleblowers have avoided any fines. That certainly doesn’t seem right!

In October offices of several German car makers were raided and papers and other evidence removed. The German press suggested that there was evidence showing that the car makers had colluded to restrict the size of AdBlue tanks in order to reduce cost and space but potentially cause drivers problems.

Original AdBlue tanks were 35 litres that could clean emissions for up to 18,500 miles. In the end, after getting their heads together they ended up fitting tanks with just 8-litre capacity. The commission is currently investigating claims that the companies concerned colluded to limit the development and roll out of Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Systems to reduce harmful Nitrogen Dioxide emissions from passenger cars with diesel engines.

They will also be investigating claims that the German 5 did the same with ‘Otto’ particulate filters (OPT’s) which reduce harmful particulate emissions from passenger cars with petrol engines. The Commission has stated that it aims to establish whether the conduct of Daimler, BMW and VW have violated anti-trust rules that ‘prohibit cartels and restrictive business practices, including agreements to limit or control technical development’.

Having said that the Commission said ‘At this stage, the Commission has no indication that the parties coordinated with each other in relation to the use of illegal defeat devices to cheat regulatory testing’. According to the report, the 5 were discussing many things at the meetings including the speed that convertible roofs should open and close, common quality requirements for car parts – I interpret that as deciding how long cars should last.

They also discussed common testing procedures, car safety developments and even the speed that cruise control will work. All very worrying. In closing, the Commission indicated that manufacturers could possibly put up a defence as the rules allow for cooperation between manufacturers in the name of safety and improved productivity. It begs the question as to what will happen after Brexit with no common oversight by the Commission when it comes to cars being sold in the UK? By Graham Hill

Those who take out a PCP or PCH that end up giving their car back at the end of the lease know how annoying it is to have to pay for repairs to their alloy wheels. A few years ago the average cost was about £30 – £50 to have one alloy repaired. But since the introduction of Diamond Cut Alloys that cost has increased to about £95 – £110 per wheel so I thought it would be useful to mention a new Alloy Wheel Protector.

Diamondbrite has brought out a new alloy wheel protector. The cost is £199 per set and has to be fitted to the wheels by a qualified fitter. The protector sticks to the edge of the wheel rim to form a toughened polymer barrier between the alloy and the kerb.

It can be fitted to used and new wheels and can be removed if need be. They can be left on the wheel when changing tyres or they can be removed. They can be created to blend in with the wheel shade or you can make a statement with a range of different colours.

The Diamondbrite protector works particularly well on Diamond Cut Alloys. So having the protectors fitted when new can save a great deal of money at the end of your lease. It also keeps the wheels looking good all the time you have the car. The protectors come with a 12-month warranty, cost £199 including fitting. There are fitters all over the country, contact Diamondbrite to find out more and your nearest fitter. www.jewelultra.com. By Graham Hill

The Department for Transport (DfT) has revealed that an amazing 1 in 4 drivers who died on our roads in 2017 wasn’t wearing a seat belt. Official figures revealed that 1,793 people were killed on UK roads last year. Of those, 27% were not wearing a seatbelt, up from 20% the previous year.

The fine for not wearing a seatbelt is currently £100 which rises to £500 if the case goes to court. Clearly, this isn’t enough of a deterrent. As much as we hated Jimmy Saville his clunk click campaigns worked but what on earth causes drivers not to belt up when they get into a car? It just doesn’t make sense. We need some new campaigns to make drivers aware of the dangers that still exist.

On to cars:

Cars are exposed to dangers as a result of ineffective speed bumps. A survey carried out by Confused.com revealed that over a fifth of drivers had experienced car damage as a result of speed bumps with repairs costing an average of £141. Whilst not classed as a road defect local authorities have paid out over £35,000 over the last two years in compensation.

Confused.com surveyed 2,000 motorists of whom 22% reported damage caused by driving over a speed bump of which there are 29,000 in the UK. Tyre damage was the most common – in 48% of the cases followed by 33% reporting suspension damage. 41% felt that speed bumps caused too much damage whilst a quarter said that they did nothing to reduce speed – probably the drivers who sustained damage to their cars – idiots!

Advice from Confused.com’s motoring editor, Amanda Stretton was to check the height of the speed hump if they sustained damage whilst driving at a reasonable speed to see if you qualify for compensation. Might have been handy to explain what that height should be! By Graham Hill

A company has been set up to deal with end of lease or rental charges when consumers or businesses receive excessive charges for damage repairs, excess mileage and late or missing service history. They will fight your case on a now win, no fee basis and so far they have had a success in 66% of the claims they have handled.

On average they have recovered £355 per claim for their clients which represents about a 54% saving on their original bill. The company takes a 30% cut of the money refunded or saved. Whilst I feel that these guys could help out most of what they suggest will be covered in my PCP report as end of lease charges are the same whether you take the car on a PCP or on a PCH.

The biggest issue for most is hiring a car abroad. You return to find that your credit card has been used to pay for some repairs to the hire car that you weren’t even aware of with no proof that damage had been caused. In those cases an outside agency could be really useful.

In the meantime download my 200 page guide by visiting www.grahamhilltraining.com  By Graham Hill

You should do if you are a driver of a fairly new diesel car. However, according to Fleet News, less than a fifth of drivers are aware of the existence of a tank of AdBlue in their cars and what it is there for? They were quoting research by Radius Payment Solutions (RPS).

RPS, a fuel card business, investigated driver knowledge of AdBlue which revealed, despite most new diesel vehicles having a tank, 90% had never used AdBlue.

The survey also found that despite associated environmental and health impacts, more than 25% had no idea about the benefits of the product.

As I’ve explained in the past, AdBlue is a fluid treatment that is injected into the exhaust gasses. It can filter out more than 90% of harmful NOx emissions converting into steam and nitrogen, resulting in less pollution.

They suggest that the AdBlue tanks need to be filled every six months, often during servicing, however, the rate at which cars use AdBlue varies depending on how economically they are driven, the engine size and total/average mileage.

This means that business drivers who tend to be on the road for longer will need to understand what AdBlue does and certainly where the filler cap is. The report says that average consumption of AdBlue is around one litre every 600 miles but could reach up to a litre every 350 miles depending on how the car is being driven.

The range between refills ranges from 3,000 and 12,000 miles, meaning some drivers will top-up their AdBlue reservoir at least once between normal servicing. My car is now 3 years old and I have never had to top my car up between services. Some manufacturers offer larger AdBlue tanks as an option.

Jonathan Haseler, Regional Director – UK at Radius Payment Solutions, said: “For something that should be a regular maintenance check like filling oil and screen wash, the findings are certainly surprising. Our cards help facilitate the purchase of AdBlue, making it easier for companies to adhere to emissions standards whilst offering consistently transparent pricing.”

Bit of a sales pitch there. What people also aren’t aware of are the constituant parts to AdBlue. It consists of urea, found in Urine, pigs urine to be more precise. I’m so glad I shared that. What the report doesn’t mention is that your car won’t run if you run out of AdBlue.

Whilst you should have plenty of warning you should know where the filler cap is, sometimes by the fuel cap sometimes in the boot. The car will warn you when it is out and as long as you don’t stop the engine it should continue on. But as soon as you stop the engine it will no longer start again till the AdBlue is topped up. By Graham Hill

New rules came into force in May with the most controversial being the visual test applied to diesel cars. I mentioned in earlier posts that the examiner now has to look at the tailpipe of any diesel to see if there is smoke, of any colour, emitting from the exhaust. If there is it’s an immediate fail.

The other visual check is for any tampering of the particulate filter. Any signs of tampering is also an immediate fail. Following the new tests the Prestige Motor Warehouse carried out a survey amongst 50 MOT stations across the UK and found that in the first 3 months following the rule changes the number of cars failing their MOT testa has increased by 24%.

With other rules either tightened or introduced there was also a 12% increase in petrol engine failures. Other new checks included under-inflated tyres, contaminated brake fluid, and fluid leaks, these being responsible for several of the failures. There is certainly no reason to fail on tyre pressure, a quick visit to a garage before going for the test should sort that out. By Graham Hill

When I first started driving, a few more years ago than I would care to contemplate, we had a pretty wide choice of power source to drive our cars. We had ummm – petrol or ummm petrol. Trucks had diesel engines but in those days they had to have a diesel pump in the operators depot because you couldn’t buy diesel at a garage.

I think my first experience of a diesel car was when a neighbour had a diesel Peugeot 505 which you could hear turn into our road – a good half mile away. It sounded like a bag of bolts! Of course, things changed but whilst many drivers chose diesel cars because they were economical and with better sound insulation you couldn’t hear the engine in the car it meant we were stuck with a simple choice – diesel or petrol.

Then along came LPG. It was great for chuggers like the Land Rovers that might squeeze 10mpg from their diesel engine with the wind behind them, driving down a one in one hill with all the seats removed. Suddenly driving a Land Rover other than across a ploughed field made sense once you added LPG. But with so much space being taken up by the fuel tank it never really challenged petrol or diesel, especially in a family saloon.

Of course these days, whilst you can still buy LPG at some garages you now have even more sources of fuel to propel you down the road. Petrol, diesel, petrol hybrid, diesel hybrid, plug-in hybrid, electric vehicles and the hydrogen cell that was pretty much wiped out by the introduction of electric.

However, it would seem that hydrogen isn’t dead. Manufacturers are now designing and developing hydrogen/electric hybrids. The first out of the blocks is the Hyundai Nexo which uses the hydrogen cell to drive a motor to create electricity. They suggest that the car will have a range of 414 miles, top speed of 111mph and a 0-62 in 9.2 seconds. Sounds great but the price tag of £60,000 might put a few people off!

It’s a nice looking SUV that is similar in size and looks to an Audi Q5. Would certainly solve the range and re-fuelling constraints of electric cars. Will this idea catch on – adding even more choice to an already confusing range of power plants? Haven’t got a clue just like I haven’t got a clue as to whether we will be in or out of Europe next year! Time will tell. By Graham Hill

I have just been looking at artists’ impressions of electric cars of the future. They look amazing, like mini caravans with plenty of room to relax have a chat, have a drink, watch TV and even stretch out and have a snooze. It all looks fantastic, a great way to travel but read other reports and they say we will never get to a situation where a car will completely drive itself.

According to safety reports, you won’t be able to go out, have a skinful, fall into your electric car, announce to Siri that you want to go home and let the car take over whilst you throw up into a bag for life. In fact, you will still have to be in a driver’s seat and still capable of taking over the controls in the event of an emergency or the systems failing. So which is right? What are we to believe?

The same applies to Diesel vs Petrol. There is constant confusion over the emissions. Old diesels are, without doubt, not good for the environment. The high levels of NOx are not good for people’s health and particulates (soot) are bad for health and bad for buildings causing deterioration. Compare that with the damage to the ozone layer caused by high CO2 emissions from petrol cars – the next environmental panic.

So should we drive diesel cars or petrol cars if we can’t afford the premium prices or lease rates of hybrids or electrics? Latest test results show that there are virtually no particulate emissions from the latest diesel engines and whilst NOx from diesels is still slightly higher than petrol, CO2 emissions are still higher from petrol compared to diesel so in truth there is little to choose between the two.

That is until the newly developed Bosch system gets added to diesel cars. The estimate is that NOX emissions from diesel cars will drop to about 10% of the new levels that will come into force in 2020. In the meantime what should drivers do? We need less confusion and a consistent message. By Graham Hill

If you read the reports in the press it’s easy to believe that we currently only do business with Europe and once we extract ourselves from the EU we will suddenly be free to trade with the rest of the world. This is a nonsense, we’ve been buying cars from and selling cars to the US for as long as I can remember.

Currently, we buy cars from the US and we pay customs duty for the privilege. This isn’t something that has been organised through the EU, we simply trade with the US. We are invoiced for cars, we pay 10% duty, add that to the cost of the car, add on shipping costs and add VAT to the lot (no duty payable on the shipping costs). And that’s what happens at the moment. So nothing will change after Brexit.

In the short term there is little advantage, however, in the long term we will be free to negotiate a free trade agreement with the US and save 10% on imports whilst US businesses will be able to import UK built cars for 10% less. However, that could take a long time as all imports and exports would need to be reviewed with less chance under the latest Trump protectionist policy.

Outside the EU we will lose the negotiated free trade agreements that already exist such as South Korea. We import a lot of Kias and Hyundais to the benefit of UK drivers but until we can re-negotiate a deal, just for the UK, we will end up paying 10% more in duty. On the other hand the EU exports goods to South Korea and other countries with whom they have free trade agreements. However, the free trade agreement only works if over 55% of the items exported are made (or have added value) in the EU.

But as we are leaving the EU if our component manufacturers and service providers such as designers contribute towards the overall cost of the products being exported on Free Trade Agreements they will no longer be part of the EU content and could give rise to either UK manufacturers moving to Europe or the EU exporters sourcing components and services from inside the EU. It really is more complex than was originally thought. By Graham Hill