The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

At the start of 2019, rumours swept the internet that speed camera tolerances on certain motorways were so strict, they would issue tickets if drivers exceeded the 70mph limit by just 1mph.

This would have been worrying had you not read my report last week on the accuracy of car speedo’s.

The stories  and rumours turned out to be untrue and unfounded. But rather than allow misinformation about speed camera ‘thresholds’ to circulate unchecked, Auto Express asked the UK’s 45 police forces via Freedom of Information requests how strictly their 3,224 speed cameras enforce limits.

The majority of the forces that responded to Auto Express said their cameras would only activate when drivers exceed the speed limit by 10 per cent plus 2mph, in line with prosecution guidelines from the Association of Chief Police Officers.

This means cameras won’t issue tickets until someone is driving at 35mph or more in a 30mph limit, or 79mph or more on the motorway, for example.

The Metropolitan Police, which uses a less strict, 10 per cent plus 3mph threshold, say this is “a proportional response to the high volumes of traffic” in the capital. Lancashire Police also sets its cameras so that they activate at 10 per cent plus 3mph, and says that this has been done “to ensure greater tolerance or discretion”.

A number of forces wouldn’t tell us their camera thresholds, arguing that knowledge of these would encourage drivers to speed. All police forces that told us their thresholds said these applied to both fixed and average speed cameras.

Speed camera thresholds across the UK

I should make it clear that this in no way should encourage drivers to break speed limits as they realise they have a ‘free allowance’. Especially in built-up areas and areas close to schools and homes for the elderly.

Personally, I would like to see greater enforcement of the ‘Keep Left’ rules. Far too often I see cars hogging the outside lane of motorways causing frustrated drivers to either undertake or end up flashing the car in front potentially leading to road rage. By Graham Hill

The Motoring Ombudsman (not to be confused with the Financial Ombudsman) has revealed that few drivers are aware that they can extend their manufacturer’s warranty beyond the initial period. Really? If that’s the case a few dealership salesmen should be sacked!

Anyway, they found that more than half of all participants in a recent survey didn’t know that you can extend the manufacturers warranty. 32% were not aware that you can use an independent provider, you don’t have to take the manufacturer’s warranty.

This is quite important as more people are opting for 4 and even 5 year agreements in order to reduce the costs. In most cases that takes you beyond the manufacturer’s warranty period but whether you take an extended manufacturer’s warranty or take one from an independent provider make sure you check what you are covered for.

Also, if you decide to take out a 4 or 5 year PCP or PCH remember that you have other costs to take into account. Often new cars come with a breakdown service for the first 3 years which would need to be renewed or replaced. Service and maintenance costs increase as more items need to be replaced or renewed. Then there are often connectivity services and subscriptions that need to be renewed such as Sat Nav updates and alerts.

So what may seem like a good deal over say 4 years compared to 3 years, saving £20 per month could easily be eaten up by the added costs in the 4^th year. Graham Hill

Drivers who ignore lane closures on motorways marked with a red ‘X’ will be handed a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) of £100 fine and three penalty points from June 10 2019.

At present, only a police officer catching drivers in the act can issue the FPN but the new Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 2019 was passed on May 13.

The enforcement will mirror motorway speeding offences. By this it means that the police force where the incident took place will issue the penalty.

Edmund King, AA president says; “Although it has taken far too long, this is a welcome measure to improve safety on motorways.

“Our research shows that one in 20 drivers continue to drive in red X lanes even when they’ve seen it, and so far Highways England has written warning letters to over 180,000 drivers about their actions.

“Red X’s are put up to warn of an obstruction, so drivers must get out of the lane when they see them. We have had several incidents recently where AA members’ cars have been hit in a live lane on ‘smart’ motorways.”

Since the beginning of 2017, Highways England has issued over 180,000 warning letters to drivers who have ignored the signs in an attempt to stamp out the behaviour. This clearly hasn’t worked so more extreme measures were called for. By Graham Hill

Thatcham Research that carries out safety tests on behalf of Euro NCAP have now started carrying out tests that tell drivers how easy it is to break into their cars.

The ratings are ’Superior’, ‘Good’, ‘Poor’ and ‘Unacceptable’. The ratings are awarded based on how well a car performs in a range of security tests. Tey include one that identifies how vulnerable cars are to digital ‘hack’ in keyless cars.

11 cars have been tested so far, of which 5 were rated as ‘poor’. There are Ford Mondeo executive car, Toyota Corolla family hatchback, Lexus UX and Hyundai Nexus SUV and Kia ProCeed Estate.

At the top of the scale rated as ‘Superior’, were Jaguar XE Saloon, Range Rover Evoque, Audi eTron and Porsche Macan SUV’s along with the Mercedes B Class MPV. The Suzuki Jimny small SUV was the only car to be rated ‘Unacceptable’.

According to Thatcham’s Technical Officer, Richard Billyeald, the Jimny was given the rating as a result of, ‘This car scores consistently badly across all criteria, missing some fundamental security features that consumers might rightly be fitted to a new car’.

Thatcham have introduced the new ratings system as a result of increased awareness of car buyers and their demand for more information on security risks. It also ties in with the increasing cost of car thefts in the UK. The Association of British Insurers (ABI) said that the cost of claims relating to vehicle theft has increased in 2018 by 29% compared to 2017 with claims running at £1 million per day.

The ABI pointed out that the main reason for the increase was the increased use of keyless entry systems and the ease with which thieves can hijack the signal from the key fob then use it to unlock and start the car.

The ABI went on to explain that drivers are worried about car theft and that the record amounts being paid out in claims ‘in part reflects the vulnerability of some cars to keyless relay theft’.

In response, the Society For Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) hit back by explaining that the automotive industry ‘takes vehicle crime extremely seriously’. It added, ‘The latest technology has helped to bring down theft dramatically during the past 20 years. However, criminals will always look for new ways to steal cars; it’s an ongoing battle and why manufacturers continue to invest billions in ever more sophisticated security features and software upgrades’. By Graham Hill

Auto Express investigated how accurate the speedometers were on 10 cars were. They did this by comparing how fast the speedos said they were going with the actual speed, revealed by a VBox meter.

Car speedometers are not allowed to ‘under-read’ – they can’t tell you that you’re going more slowly than you really are – but they are allowed to over-read by up to 10 per cent plus 6.25mph. So they could read 50.25mph at 40mph.

All the cars that were assessed were well within legal limits, although some read with near-perfect accuracy, while others over-read by 3mph. This, with the different approaches police have to enforcing limits, means some variance will always remain around speeding.

Commenting on the investigation, AA president Edmund King said it is “sensible to have some flexibility” with speed-limit enforcement, “as the last thing we need is drivers concentrating solely on the speedo and not the road”.

King added that, with speedometers becoming increasingly accurate, “Auto Express’s testing is a valid reminder to drivers not to gamble on their speedo perhaps providing some leeway”.

The speedo accuracy test explained:

The VBox is a clever piece of kit that uses a GPS signal to measure a car’s speed. It’s very accurate, gauging velocity to within 0.1km/h, so is perfect for assessing speedos.

They set their test cars to 30, 50, 60 and 70mph using the built-in speed limiter or cruise control to ensure a steady speed, then used the VBox to measure how fast they were going. This gave them a fair idea of the discrepancy between actual and indicated speed.

“Not many drivers have access to a VBox, but a separate smartphone app or sat-nav can give you an idea of how accurate your speedo is. Here are the results of the tests:

By Graham Hill & Auto Express

At the end of November 2018, Middlesbrough Trading Standards prosecuted a car dealership, Evans Halshaw, which resulted in the court issuing a £134,000 fine for an alleged offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

That being for their second-time failure to disclose in its advertising that a vehicle it was selling had once been owned by a leasing company.  Specifically, stating that it had “one previous owner” without disclosing that this owner was a leasing company.

Trading Standards (in support of a previous opinion by the Advertising Standards Authority) felt that failure to mention this point was “misleading” and could affect the decision of a prospective buyer whether to buy or not.

The consumer who complained about it, had found out about its history prior to purchase and so never went ahead to buy the car in the first place.

For several months subsequently other Trading Standards Departments and consumers have used the ruling to force dealers to reduce selling prices.

I for one was extremely happy to hear in April that on appeal, the fine had been overturned.  The judge ruling that the ex-business use of the car would have had no effect on its value. In order to clarify his position and in a veiled criticism of the original prosecution and its original outcome, the judge added that the courts exist to protect consumers against bad bargains where the playing-field is not level – and not irrational prejudice against ex-business use vehicles whose values are entirely unaffected.

In my opinion, this case illustrated a total naivety of those who are responsible for legal decisions. I know more about the motor industry than most in the UK which means I constantly see bad advice being given to consumers and businesses. Most businesses lease their cars and vans these days but some still buy them outright and service and maintain them themselves.

So what trading standards was saying was that if a car had been leased it was likely to be in poorer condition than those which were privately owned or owned by a business and in the case of BT maintained in their own workshops. As the leasing companies own the leased vehicles there is no way of finding out whether the car was leased privately or through a business.

And even if the cars were leased through a business the constraints on the lessees by the leasing companies are such that the condition of ex leased cars is better than privately owned cars and cars owned by companies.

Had the ruling remained ex-lease car values would have plummeted pushing up lease costs to customers. Another declaration that should be made to buyers is whether a car was an ex rental car. But again this isn’t as straight forward as it seems. Stephen Byers stopped the activity of heavily discounting pre-registered cars with his Supply Of New Cars Order 2000.

As a result, cars have been sold to daily rental companies at big discounts then sold on as ‘Pre-Registered’ but with the first owner a daily rental company. The problem is that you can’t tell if the car that was first registered to a daily rental company was actually used for rental by possibly a hundred different drivers or was sold as a Pre-Reg with no miles on the clock.

The one car that finds itself outside the constraints is the ex-demonstrator which can be a bag of bolts. They are often abused by sales staff who take the cars home at night and over the weekend. One manufacturer revealed that they mop up parts from all over the world from their various production plants which can result in some poor quality cars with many suffering with squeaks and various noises that simply can’t be repaired.

In industry, I was general manager in a large PLC and I had the transport department within my control. We had 700 cars and vans and they were meticulously looked after by the drivers but every week we had transporter loads of demonstrators dropped off from BMW’s to Vauxhalls, Hondas to Mercedes all with zero miles on the clock. Frankly, we allowed the salesmen and engineers to use the cars to let off steam in. They were abused and mistreated but were returned fully valeted looking like new cars. I would personally never ever have a demo. By Graham Hill

Drivers repeatedly caught leaving their car engine running while parked could be hit with instant fines in a bid to curb pollution, according to reports.

Environment secretary Michael Gove has backed Westminster City Council’s call to be granted powers which could see drivers who are caught idling to be fined without warning, the Times says.

The existing arrangement sees officers issue a warning, followed by a fine if a driver keeps the car running for at least a minute – depending on which regulation is used by an authority fines can either be £20 or £80.

Experts claim idling engines are harmful to the environment as they can produce greater emissions than one which is in motion.

Westminster City Council issued just 20 fines last year but other councils – including City of London, Camden, Croydon, Reading, Norwich and Canterbury did not issue fines for idling.

Nickie Aiken, Westminster Council leader, said: “Fines are our last resort but when we establish a pattern of persistent idling we need to be able to send a message.”

And she argued the likes of supermarket delivery vans should be hit with a four-figure sum to be “sufficient deterrent”

Mr Gove said that instant fines for repeat offenders should be considered as a solution to the problem.

It was important to ensure that the new powers would be used proportionately by councils, he added.

Camden council, which wants to be able to issue instant fines, has warned more than 400 drivers but has issued no fines since it was granted the powers last year

The Department for Transport said: “We are determined to reduce the damaging environmental impacts of drivers who keep their engines running while stationary, especially those in school zones.

“This is why we are making guidance for local authorities clearer, so that they know how and when to target drivers falling foul of the law. We will be polling local authorities to understand how any potential review of these powers may look in the future.” By Graham Hill & AOL News

Did you know that some insurers reduce their premiums by up to 20% if you have a dash cam fitted in your car? I personally believe that fitting a dash cam as standard in a car should be a legal requirement and could be fitted into the rear of the rear view mirror.

Years ago cars didn’t have immobilisers fitted but they are now a statutory requirement along with a car alarm. And it would cost considerably less than the cost of fitting an aftermarket unit.

Dash cams can be incredibly useful in the event of an accident in order to help the driver prove his case and the incidents of ‘Cash For Crash’, where a driver pulls in front of an innocent driver and brakes hard causing the car behind to hit the car in front, then every person in the car in front making a whiplash claim, has reduced as a result of dashcams.

Dashcam footage has also helped police to apprehend dangerous drivers and drunk drivers following erratic and dangerous driving. But for the cameras to be effective they must be capable of creating clear footage with easy transfer to a mobile device.

With this in mind AutoExpress have tested out some of the popular brands and come up with their top 3 cameras.

Their Best Buy was the Nextbase 612GW, priced at £249.99. It has a 150 degree lens capture with recording in 4K Ultra HD. In the tests number plates were easy to read as were road signs and pedestrians could be seen I a low light. A polarised filter enhanced colour quality and settings were easily adjusted on the move. The BlackVue had better picture quality but the price difference gave the Nextbase the edge.

Recommended was the Blackvue DR900S-1CH with the best picture quality but priced at £399.95. It has a 162 degree lens capture with recording in 4K Ultra HD at 30 frames per second making it the most accurate. In the tests this cam recorded pedestrians and number plates well even in low light as a result of the 8megapixel camera. Settings are changed via a downloadable app. It is WiFi enabled so recordings can be uploaded from the camera to Cloud Storage. In summary the cam and the features justify the high cost – loved by the testers.

Also recommended was the Thinkware Q800 Pro at a cost of £269. The unit looks a little messy as it comes with a hardwire lead powered by a plug and play 12v unit. There is no screen and and footage is accessed by the Thinkware app. The unit comes with a Sony Exmor R Starvis sensor to record 1440p quad HD quality footage at 30 frames per second. The review describes the quality as good but behind the first two. Lowlight conditions are the strength of the Thinkware with Night Vision 2.0 is excellent.

If you want to see all of the reviews you need to get your hands on the 1^st May edition of Auto Express. By Graham Hill

Over a fifth of drivers have got out of their car to confront another driver in road rage incidents according to latest survey data. And a further 39% have said that they have been affected by road rage on more than one occasion.

Amazingly, 19% of drivers admitted getting so angry whilst driving that they deliberately followed another driver. The survey polled 1,000 motorists and was carried out by motor data firm HPI. While women were more likely to follow other motorists, men were more likely to get out of their cars in road rage incidents.

Those that responded to the survey said dangerous overtaking was the most common reason for road rage while van drivers were felt to be the most irritating road users followed by cyclists and minicab drivers. Let’s all just calm down – life’s too short. By Graham Hill

Following a BBC Freedom Of Information request it was found that the DVLA had mishandled the personal data of 2,000 drivers over the last 12 months.  During a ten-month period in 2018 and 2019, the DVLA reported 439 data breaches, which affected 2,018 people.

These data breaches saw the DVLA send important documents – including driving licenses, passports and marriage certificates – to incorrect addresses, affecting the equivalent of around seven people per day. For comparison, the Passport Office had five data breaches over the same time period, while HM Revenue & Customs had 10.

All of the breaches were reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office, between 25 May 2018 and 18 March 2019, following the introduction of tougher data protection laws. Royal Mail advised that important or sensitive documents should be sent via a tracked special delivery. The DVLA said the data breaches were the result of “human error” by staff at their headquarters in Swansea.

A DVLA spokesperson said: “Last year, we dealt with more than one billion customer interactions. We received more than 16 million items of mail and sent out more than 93 million, including 10.6 million driving licences.

“However, we take our duties to protect data extremely seriously and have an open and transparent culture where staff report any potential breaches.

“We ensure we review all reports to identify what more can be done. While these figures are a very small percentage of our overall transaction volumes, we take these seriously and have apologised to those concerned.”

Whilst one could argue that in the scale of things 2,000 is a very small number, that’s fine unless you are one of the 2,000 affected. Not one piece of data should go astray so sort your systems out DVLA. By Graham Hill with thanks to Auto Express.