With more and more cars getting high tech sound systems, hearing loud music while driving has become a daily occurrence for most people. One council is fighting back and has introduced a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) which gives officers the ability to fine people £100 for anti-social vehicle use.

This could include loud noise, shouting or being sexually suggestive. The measure was introduced after two-thirds of Bradford said they felt unsafe on the roads and said that nuisance drivers were a problem.

PSPO in place

A PSPO is already in place in certain areas of Bradford for antisocial behaviour and between March 2017 and June 2018, alcohol in various forms was confiscated 497 times. Bradford residents seem to be in favour of further PSPOs.

In a consultation of Bradford residents on the roads, 70% of those surveyed said they felt unsafe on the roads and 76% supported a PSPO to help reduce the anti-social behaviour in roads.

How will a PSPO help?

The PSPO is an order that protects the natural environment of an area and keeps residents safe in the area. Certain council enforcement officers are authorised to act upon a PSPO for the purpose of keeping the peace. Police officers are also able to enforce PSPOs.

In this instance, the PSPO can be used to stop anti-social driving. Whether this is wheel spinning excessively, blasting loud music, shouting from windows or being overtly sexual from a car, the PSPO can be used with correct judgement to help with the issue of anti-social driving in the area.

Mr Burns-Williamson, West Yorkshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, said: “I support the step that Bradford Council have approved in the use of Public Space Protection Orders, a move which I believe will help to tackle a number of anti-social behaviour and road safety related issues.”

“Road safety is clearly a significant area of interest in Bradford and for many communities across the county and remains a key focus in my Police and Crime Plan. The PSPO will complement the significant work already undertaken by West Yorkshire Police, the Council and other partners in the District such as Operation Steerside which targets wider road safety offences and behaviour.”

Draconian or desired?

Some have come against the PSPO suggestion, labelling it “a bit draconian” and questioning how personal this could become.

Local councillor in Bradford, Simon Cooke, said of the PSPO “Is there the justification of making criminal what wasn’t criminal before? What we seem to have is a bit of virtue signalling, so we are seen to be doing something about the problem. But it doesn’t really address the problem to any great extent.”

He also raised a valid point of determining what anti-social behaviour in a vehicle was bad enough to warrant a fine or order. One person’s attitude could be completely different from someone else’s on what constitutes anti-social behaviour. “When it comes to music being played too loud is there not a risk that personal music preference may decide if music being played is ‘good or bad’?” he added, showing the potentially highly personal nature of the issue at hand. How can one person decide that someone’s driving is anti-social when it may be a personal prejudice? While strict training and regulations will no doubt be given, both having evidence of the act and being able to justify the reasons for the fine could easily be swayed through personal judgement.

Will the days of people driving around blasting music slowly be going out of fashion or is it overly restricting peoples behaviour? In recent months there has been a lot of talk of driving becoming very big brother like, with cars able to limit top speed depending on the road area soon and next-generation speed cameras that can pick up multiple fineable offences.

Anti-social driving

There are not many people who would openly admit to cutting people up in traffic, blasting loud music or sitting around in a car park drinking. However, the people who use their vehicles for things that aren’t illegal but aren’t seen as proper use could soon be feeling the sharp end of a £100 fine.

One can see both sides of the argument, they aren’t doing anything technically illegal, but people don’t want to be surrounded by anti-social driving. On the other hand, the small minority that does use their vehicles for anti-social purposes are more at risk of breaking the law, such as speeding or distracted driving.

People in Bradford have said bad driving is an issue, but in many large towns and cities across the country, this will no doubt be a very prevalent issue as well. You only need to watch Police Interceptors on Channel 4 to see the amount of dangerous driving that takes place come nightfall. Protecting our roads from dangerous drivers is essential but is this taking it one step too far or is this the next best thing to happen to residential areas?

What do you think of the PSPO? Would you like to see one in your local area? Let us know below

A shocking investigation by a British watchdog has discovered that car dealers are manipulating customers’ interest payments to earn larger commission totalling an ‘unacceptable’ £300 million each year.

The report comes almost two years after the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) declared they would carry out mystery shopping trials of the industry and analyse millions of credit files.

On a mission for commission

In 2018, UK motorists borrowed a staggering £37billion on car finance to buy new and used vehicles. The popularity of loans such as Hire Purchase (HP) and Personal Contract Purchase (PCP) enable motorists to buy their car by paying instalments and mean big business for both car dealerships and lenders. In fact, Brits buy about nine out of ten new cars this way.

Yet, a recent investigation by the FCA found that lenders aren’t satisfactorily controlling the ‘conflicts of interest’ that are occurring from the extensive use of commission models that enable car dealers to make more in commission by deciding the interest rate.

Under certain commission models, the regulator estimates motorists can pay around £1,100 extra in interest charges over a four-year period for a typical car finance agreement on a £10,000 vehicle.

About 560,000 drivers have signed contracts where the loan price has a link to the level of commission received by the dealer, yet the watchdog discovered the bulk of dealers neglected to tell their customers they would receive a commission for setting up the loan.

How many car dealerships disclosed they would receive a commission on the sale?

Franchised car dealers: One in 37
Independent car dealers: Four in 60
Car supermarkets: Two in 14
Online brokers: Four in 11

‘Not good enough’

After uncovering serious concerns about car finance agreements from 20 lenders, making up about 60% of the market, the FCA has contacted car finance companies and says it’ll get tougher on the rules of car finance commission deals.

FCA Executive Director of Supervision – Retail and Authorisations, Jonathan Davidson, said:

“We also have concerns that firms may be failing to meet their existing obligations in relation to pre-contract disclosure and explanations and affordability assessments.”

The FCA found a few dealers were only concerned whether their customer was a credit risk.

“This is simply not good enough and we expect firms to review their operations to address our concerns,” added Mr Davidson.

The watchdog is considering strengthening existing FCA rules, limiting the discretion that brokers have to set interest rates, and banning certain commission models.

For those firms identified as failing customers, the FCA will pursue them and take any necessary action.

Although this sounds like earlier mis-selling scandals such as Payment Protection Insurance (PPI), the FCA isn’t intending to make finance companies pay compensation to those customers who paid more than they should have, nor does it plan to do anything about any existing loans.

The motor finance trade body, the Financial Leasing Association (FLA), criticised the FCA’s report.

Adrian Dally, Head of Motor Finance for the FLA, said:

“Regarding the FCA’s concerns about commission structures, their survey work is based largely on out-of-date information and therefore does not reflect the very considerable progress the market has already made in moving away from such structures.

“We look forward to working with the FCA as it modernises its regulations in line with market best practice.”

Navigating the options

If you’re planning on getting a new car, shop around using reputable retailers, compare finance deals, check the total amount you’ll need to pay back, and ask how much the broker or dealer will receive in commission.

If you can’t afford to pay for your next vehicle outright, the next cheapest option is to make a one-off payment using an unsecured personal loan but, unless you’ve got a great credit score, it’s doubtful that you’ll get approved and, by purchasing a vehicle this way instead of taking the finance offered by the finance arm of the manufacturer, you won’t get any money towards the car.

Personal car loans are both easy to understand and set up and you might also get the dealer to reduce the price due to being a cash buyer. Once you’ve paid the dealer, you own the car outright, although that also means you’re responsible for all the repairs!

HP and PCP deals work out more expensive and you don’t own the vehicle until you make the last— often large —payment.

If you buy a car using HP or PCP, try to pay off at least part of the balance with a credit card so you have the extra protection offered under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act, which states that the credit card company has joint responsibility with the retailer—useful if you make a future complaint.

What do you think of the FCA’s findings? Are drivers being ripped-off or pressured into finance they don’t understand and can’t afford? Tell us your views in the comments.

A study using data from the RAC’s Vehicle History Check service, covering more than 32,000 vehicles has shown that over half (52%) of the vehicles checked had a history that could be a potential problem for any purchaser.

Some of these issues could be minor – like a registration change for example, but others were more serious – stolen, scrapped and outstanding finance were just some of the other problems found. Understanding what you’re buying has never been more relevant.

Caveat emptor

Whether you’re looking to find your dream car, a classic from a bygone era, or something more practical, finding the right car can be time-consuming, and if there’s some emotional attachment to it, you’re much more likely to overlook the odd blemish, running fault or bald tyre.

You may even view a vehicle history check as money for old rope; providing you know what you’re looking for, then it’s plain sailing, but not every problem is that obvious … 17.6% of the vehicles were still in the process of being paid off, so technically they weren’t the ‘owners’ vehicle to sell, a small percentage (0.1%) had been officially scrapped, some were even listed as stolen.

By far the largest discrepancy was a change of registration – 27.5% of vehicles weren’t on the original registration, but for the main part, that doesn’t ring alarm bells – cherished registrations are commonplace now, so providing it has been correctly documented, then there shouldn’t be a problem.

Potential problems

In theory, purchasing a car with hire-purchase, or PCP already registered against it is possible, some potential purchasers may even it see it as the finance company’s problem if their customer is selling the vehicle on, but the reality is that should they default on payment, the finance company could look to repossess the vehicle, regardless of whether it was purchased ‘in good faith’.

Another expensive mistake could be purchasing a car that has been written-off by an insurance company, as 14.2% of the vehicle checks showed. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, providing you’re aware of the situation, but some unscrupulous sellers don’t declare it, and they may not have had to prove the roadworthiness or quality of the repair afterward. This could mean that you’re paying over the odds, for an un-roadworthy or potentially dangerous car.

The importance of such vehicle checks cannot be overlooked; there have been numerous cases where a stolen vehicle was sold on to an unsuspecting or innocent third-party, and it’s only when they go to sell it on again does the identity of the vehicle and its history become apparent. In a case like that, the new owner would most likely lose the vehicle and any monies paid for it.

Protect yourself

If you’re looking to purchase a used vehicle, there are a number of ‘good practice’ measures that you can use to help identify any potential issues. With that said, these aren’t infallible, and for the checking services that offer a guarantee against such issues, you need to adhere to strict guidelines if you stand a chance of winning any money back.

Turning detective will only get you so far – a good rummage through the accompanying documentation such as service history and MOT certificates can paint a pretty clear picture, as can a full mechanical inspection, but unless you truly know what you’re looking for, it may be worth having the inspection done by a professional.

Check that the VIN number looks to be original and matches the documentation; factory numbers don’t get ‘mis-stamped’, are at an even depth and spacing and are located in places that any ‘accidental’ damage is difficult to explain.

Check for unusually high wear patterns across the steering wheel, pedal rubbers and switches – pedal rubbers are easily replaced, steering wheels can be covered but switches are more difficult to disguise or replace.

Look for abnormal wear patterns across all four tyres – this could be an indication of poor misalignment or a geometry problem.

Remove the oil filler cap and look for white sludge – this could indicate a water/oil problem, although be aware that lots of short trips could also cause this.

Look to see if the panel gaps are consistent – a misaligned panel may be an indicator to body work replacement or damage.

If it’s a significant purchase, you may want to think about contacting the previous owner to see if they can add to the history, likewise, any dealer involved in the servicing of the vehicle will have full records of what was done and when (service history books can be faked very easily).

While these measures may not give you a definitive answer, they help to build up a bigger picture of the seller, their attitude toward the car, and how well it’s been looked after. This can be used in conjunction with your own judgement to help you decide if the car is ‘right’.

Have you ever been caught out with a bad car purchase? Do you have any other buying tips to share? Let us know in the comments.

On Monday (4th March,) Volvo announced plans to limit all cars manufactured from 2020 onwards to a max speed of 112mph. This is part of their plans to bring the number of people who die in a Volvo car to zero over the next coming years.

In a press release by the company they teased the launch of Vision 2020, “one of the most ambitious safety visions in the automotive industry.”

How will this work?

Most other manufacturers are using an Intelligent Speed Assistant (ISA), which earlier this year was revealed as near finalised that it would be mandatory for all new cars on the road from 2021. The European Transport Safety Council proposed the changes which were approved by a key group of MEPs and is hoped to come into force for all cars with the 21 plate and higher.

ISA will limit the speed of the car depending on the area the car is. It uses GPS and traffic sign recognition to limit and adjust the max speed. Drivers are able to override the max speed limit by pushing hard on the throttle, in case of overtaking cars or need to move out of the way sharply.

However, Volvo has gone a step further and will electronically limit the car from going no faster than 112 mph, or 180kph. For the Volvo XC90, the flagship SUV, this will reduce the top speed by 20mph, and many of the other new cars will have their top speeds chopped by 18mph.

Zero deaths by 2020?

Volvo’s Vision 2020 is a definite jump in the car safety world. To suddenly go from quite basic systems not even under ten years ago to there now being plans to stop deaths in Volvo cars completely seems a huge leap. Volvo has often been a leader in the safety industry with its calls for a universal safety standard in autonomous vehicles.

However, nearly 1.25 million people a year die in a motor vehicle. Can this ambitious strategy really come to fruition? Volvo has admitted that on technology alone they cannot bring the number of deaths to zero. In light of this, they want to work to change user behaviour as well as improving their technological capabilities.

“Volvo is a leader in safety: we always have been, and we always will be,” said Håkan Samuelsson, president and chief executive of Volvo. “Because of our research, we know where the problem areas are when it comes to ending serious injuries and fatalities in our cars. And while a speed limitation is not a cure-all, it’s worth doing if we can even save one life.”

“We want to start a conversation about whether car makers have the right or maybe even an obligation to install technology in cars that changes their driver´s behaviour, to tackle things like speeding, intoxication or distraction,” said Mr Samuelsson. “We don’t have a firm answer to this question, but believe we should take leadership in the discussion and be a pioneer.”

People simply do not recognise the danger involved in speed, says Jan Ivarsson following on from Mr Samuelsson’s statement, one of Volvo Cars’ leading safety experts.

“As humans, we all understand the dangers with snakes, spiders and heights. With speeds, not so much,” said Mr Ivarsson. “People often drive too fast in a given traffic situation and have poor speed adaption in relation to that traffic situation and their own capabilities as a driver. We need to support better behaviour and help people realise and understand that speeding is dangerous.”

Other safety issues

In the research that Volvo did, they found that there were three gaps in their safety procedures. One being speeding, the other two intoxication and distracted driving. Both of these relate highly to user behaviour over the car, but at a special safety event on March 20th, they plan to reveal solutions for combating these two issues.

With these safety issues also comes the question of intrusiveness. As said earlier do carmakers “have the right or maybe even an obligation to install technology in cars that change their driver’s behaviour?” Is this something that we as people, want to have controlling our lives?

Is Big Brother kicking in or is it ok to have advanced safety features that can change our driving behaviour? The question here must be posed of if we all had perfect driving, these safety features wouldn’t be needed, and we would be able to drive without autonomy taking over.

However, unless a drastic change happens anytime soon, it seems unlikely that people will stop speeding anytime soon. In 2017, 203 people died in a road traffic collision as a direct result of exceeding the speed limit. Every year since 2013, over 200 people have died because of exceeding the speed limit. This anti-speeding advert from New Zealand shows the truly devastating consequences speeding has, we’d recommend watching it, but we will place a warning as it is quite triggering for those who may have been involved in such an incident before.

What do you think about Volvo’s plans? Where does technology stop being able to protect us? Let us know below

Last May, PetrolPrices wrote about how clean air campaigners wanted to ban the car-based school run. With figures showing that a quarter of all cars are on our roads during school drop-off and collection times, a new plan to reduce air pollution—and defend children against poisonous vehicle-related fumes—will now fine parents who drive their children to school.

Hundreds of head teachers are piloting schemes to stop drivers pulling up to the school gates, with £50 fines and even penalties leading to points on their licences for those who snub the ban.

Public health emergency

Schools in Hackney, East London and in Southampton, banned parents from parking at their school entrances just before Christmas, and thousands of other schools are preparing to join the pilot. While the scheme is voluntary at present, campaigners are calling for the ban to become mandatory at all schools and nurseries—something that the almost 2,000 schools and nurseries in areas with dangerous levels of air pollution will welcome.

To help transition parents and children from car to foot, various initiatives are taking place, such as, ‘park and stride’ schemes and the temporary closing of roads.

Some schools are going further to deliver their message, with schoolchildren handing out fake tickets to parents who arrive in cars and others even taking part in ‘playing dead’ protests. Police officers in Solihull, West Midlands are helping the cause by issuing fines to motorists who don’t follow the ban.

While the changes to the school run may anger many time-challenged parents, one cannot dispute the evidence showing the detrimental effect traffic pollution has on our health.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has described air pollution as a ‘public health emergency’ and their latest figures attribute 4.2 million deaths worldwide every year to ambient air pollution with around 40,000 premature deaths in the UK each year.

The European Environment Agency (EEA) Executive Director Hans Bruyninckx described air pollution as ‘an invisible killer’ and explained that road transport emissions are often more dangerous than those from other sources, as they occur at ground level and in cities, near people. Experts say children are more at risk from pollution because toxins stay inside their bodies longer, and that a ban on parents sitting in their cars at the school gates would have a significant effect on reducing children’s exposure to pollution.

Tragic consequences

Experts know the level of air pollution to be a major risk factor for childhood asthma. In 2017, 1,320 people died of asthma in England and Wales—a 25% rise in one decade.

Alison Cook, Director of Policy and Communications for the British Lung Foundation, said:

“Toxic air is linked to asthma and chronic chest problems, and damage to the lungs in early age is irreversible.

“That’s why illegal levels of pollution around schools is hugely worrying.

“Banning cars from school gates will help reduce pollution in classrooms, but this is just a drop in the ocean. Action on [a] local and national level is needed to help people move to cleaner forms of transport such as walking, cycling and public transport.”

In February 2013, Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah’s nine-year-old daughter Ella died from an asthma attack.

Ms Kissi-Debrah says the high levels of air pollution where they lived and where Ella went to school, were to blame. The family lived next to one of London’s busiest roads 25 metres from the South Circular Road in Lewisham, South East London.

After Professor Stephen Holgate found spikes in air pollution corresponded with Ella’s 27 asthma-induced hospitalisations episodes, Rosamund campaigned hard and now has approval for a second inquest into her daughter’s death. If conclusive, Ms Kissi-Debrah wants air pollution added to the death certificate. If this happens, it will be the first time air pollution has appeared on a death certificate.

Last year we wrote about the Mayor of London’s plan to reduce vehicle emissions across the capital, by introducing a 24-hour Central London Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) this April.

Earlier this month, Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan spoke about his new green fund to help schools fight toxic air with ‘pollution barriers’ in the playground.

Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said:

“It is unacceptable that our filthy air is affecting the lung growth and respiratory health of our young children, especially those who go to school by busy, polluted roads.

“My funding will help create much needed new spaces for communities to enjoy and help reduce toxic pollution with green barriers in and around schools to protect our children from polluted air.”

‘Just get out and walk’

Many are worried that banning the school run as we know it will only shift the problem elsewhere, but as Jenny Wiles from the walking charity Living Streets said last summer; an awful lot of families live close enough to school to walk the whole way and so where possible they encourage people to ‘just get out and walk and solve the problem completely’.

Some parents might even consider applying for their pre-school children to go to their most local school, negating the need for a car to get there. For those children who live too far from their schools to walk or those in rural areas, free transport is often available.

One thing looks certain; if parents and caregivers don’t make changes to lessen the traffic pollution around schools, somebody else will and the consequences for not complying with the rules could get expensive.

What do you think about the ban on driving children to the school gates? Is it necessary? Are parents time-pressed or lazy? Tell us your views in the comments.

New DVLA stats released earlier in the week show that over 460,000 vehicles in 11 cities nationwide are clamped or fined yearly for failing to tax their cars.

The new advertising campaign targets 11 areas nationwide where the highest number of untaxed vehicles were found. It aims to raise awareness about what not taxing your vehicles will lead to, whether that is a fine, penalty or it being clamped and potentially towed.

Worst areas for clamping

The 11 areas chosen to be targeted for this advert are based on the numbers for enforcement actions taken in 2018, whether that is a penalty, fine or clamping.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, London was the worst for untaxed vehicles across the UK. Whether this is down to higher numbers of CCTV cameras, a higher proportion of people packed into the area, or merely because there simply are more people not taxing their cars in London it is very unknown.

However, the high contrast between London and the rest of the UK, over 50,000 more than anywhere else, shows the drastic need to crack down on untaxed motorists.

Removal of paper discs

Back in 2014, the DVLA removed paper tax discs, saying that an online database was a more cost-effective way forward, saving the Treasury around £10 million a year.

The lost revenue from the higher number of people not taxing their cars is predicted to be over £100 million, which is going to be a quarter of a million a year lost on average. Since 2014, experts approximate that the number of people not taxing their vehicles has increased by 28%.

Every two years the DVLA publish a report into Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) evasion statistics. The last report published in 2017 showed a drastic increase in vehicle stats compared to 2015, with a statistically significant increase of over 1%. Administrative factors such as the removal of paper tax discs were attributed along with the removal of automatic tax transfer when you the vehicle changes hands.

However, an increase from 0.6% untaxed in traffic figure in 2013 to 1.4% in 2015 and then 1.8% in 2017 shows that all the factors combined have not been as successful as perhaps thought. While these figures may seem small, 1.8% of the market equals around 755,000 vehicles on our roads.

Hence the reason for the new DVLA campaign. They’re hoping that by showing the stark consequences of not taxing your vehicle and reminding people how easy it is, they may be able to lower this figure.

Used under Open Government Licence v3.0 for editorial purposes only.

DVLA Head of Enforcement Tim Burton said: “This campaign has a clear message for anyone who flouts the law in this way – tax it or lose it. It’s never been easier to tax your car, so there really is no excuse. We would rather not have to clamp or remove vehicles, but this campaign highlights the consequences of not taxing a vehicle. Having your vehicle clamped is expensive and inconvenient – and you could end up losing your car.”

Tax changes recently

In April 2017, the DVLA changed tax figures by introducing higher rates for newly registered vehicles and in last years budget, they secretly announced that it would increase in line with RPI.

It was also announced that VED would be ringfenced for the Strategic Road Network, essentially building more smart motorways and major roads. This comes into effect on April 2019 and is the third year in a row that VED has increased.

What do you think of the findings? Do you think that less people have taxed their cars since the removal of tax discs? Will this new campaign help? Let us know what you think

Zip merging

The sign is used on motorways and dual carriageways, it shows that one lane ahead is blocked by an obstruction, but the confusion comes from understanding the next action. Pulling over into the next lane as soon as it’s possible is the majority choice, but one that is technically wrong.

What the sign is actually telling you to do is to continue driving in the lane until you’ve almost reached the merge point, then slowly ‘zip merge’ into the clear lane, where it’s safe and clear to do so. Just 27% of drivers knew the correct meaning in the survey, the last three percent believed that ‘straddling both lanes, blocking vehicles from reaching the head of the queue’ was acceptable.

Another survey by a national tyre chain also found that one in five road signs are a mystery to the average driver.

Avoidable breakdowns

The survey by Halfords was carried out as part of a roadworthiness campaign, but the fact that there are typically 85,000 breakdowns each year, with an estimated 40% being preventable isn’t what’s at interest here, this is more about driver education and habits.

36% of motorists admit to never reading the Highway Code once they’ve passed their driving test, and 20% of drivers haven’t read it within the last decade, is it a wonder that identifying signs isn’t at the forefront of their thoughts?

It seems easy to understand a great many of road signs, the ones we see daily are perhaps even ignored, only ever taking notice of ones that are clearly warning of danger, but while we may have a basic understanding of what they mean, could we 100% positively identify the sign and the textbook meaning? It’s doubtful.

Some years ago, AutoExpress polled 1,000 readers, 90% thought that driving standards were falling, but only 15% of respondents felt their driving standard had dropped, perhaps a brush-up on the Highway Code could help to change that thinking?

Highway code

While it’s easy to think that the Highway Code hasn’t changed significantly, you may be surprised to hear that in the last three years alone, there have been 48 updates to it, including changes to the MOT regulations, learner driver laws and penalties for using a handheld device.

With some organisations calling for more regular eye tests as part of an ongoing campaign to increase road safety, perhaps part of the test should include a brush-up on the Highway Code, or at least the changing road signs to help with awareness of what they all mean and how to respond correctly.

While it could be argued that the sign in question and the lack of knowledge regarding it is purely a case of semantics, the fact is that swapping lanes prematurely could actually increase congestion in the build-up to the blockage, and that’s before we get to the highly inconsiderate act of blocking the road so other drivers can’t ‘queue jump’.

It’s frustrating to see other motorists policing the roads themselves, the Police always advise against such actions, and yet drivers continue to act in such a manner. Maybe it’s those drivers that should be labelled as un-thinking or selfish, rather than the drivers happily going about their business, in full compliance of the law?

Bedtime reading

If you’re one of the 36% of drivers that haven’t read the Highway Code since passing your test, or even if you haven’t picked up a copy in the last five years, it could be worthwhile to familiarise yourself with the latest regulations and driving standards.

It’s unlikely that anyone will learn the full meaning and action of all 100+ road signs, but it’s a useful exercise in updating your own knowledge-base, and who knows, you may learn something new.
Should you wish to take part in the Halfords survey, you can find that here; please note that PetrolPrices has not been paid to endorse this survey, and has no affiliation with the survey or the creators and promoters. We put such links in at the interest of our readers.

Do you think that driving standards are falling? Should the average motorist know the meaning and action of all road signs? Will you share your result from the test? Let us know in the comments.

In just seven weeks, a new daily charge is to be introduced for entering the City of London, it will affect all pre-Euro 4 petrol vehicles and pre-Euro 6 diesels, with no resident discount nor blue badge exemption, it’s thought that up to 2.5 million vehicles could be affected.

Unlike the congestion charge, this new tax will be levied 24-hours a day, 365 days a year, but to offset the tax, there will be a London-only vehicle scrappage scheme implemented for families on ‘low incomes’. According to Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, the air quality in London is “a national disgrace”.

£25 million

Around 28% of people living in London are in poverty, and with London’s public transport costs being some of the most expensive in the world, many rely on their car for commuting, shopping and emergencies, more so than in other parts of the country.

But with the roll-out of the new Ultra Low Emission Zone, it’s thought that around 25,000 people per day could be expected to pay a further £4,550 per year to enter the city, and in October 2021, the scheme will spread to cover everything in-between the North and South Circular Road.

To avoid pushing families in to further poverty, a new car scrappage scheme will be introduced for those on low incomes, although no details have yet been published, aside from the headline grabbing ‘£25 million scheme’.

£10 per vehicle

The headline figure doesn’t seem that impressive when you realise that it equates to just £10 per vehicle in real terms, but the devil is in the (unpublished) detail.

As a bare minimum, a vehicle will need to be manufactured from around 2006 onwards for unleaded (forget diesel – 2015/16 or newer), and when demand squeezes the supply network, prices will inevitably rise.

It’s unlikely that the scrappage scheme will be paying cold hard cash to allow for a private purchase, which pushes the consumer to buy through a business, with an already fair mark-up on the vehicle but there will be an increase in paperwork for the dealer, which of course increases their overhead – so prices will rise further, or the quality of the product will reduce, meaning that a buyer will be getting a lesser deal either way.

Even working to a payment of just £500 per vehicle, that would only allow 50,000 vehicles to be swapped, to put that into perspective, that’s just 2% of the affected vehicles. The next question would be what kind of vehicle can you buy from a car dealer for £500?

25,000 per day

It’s thought that 25,000 vehicles each day would be liable for the extra tax, which over a five day week would equate to £1,562,500, or just over £80 million per year, that’s before congestion charging is taken into account.

Official sources will tell you that the congestion charge is a success; private car usage has fallen by around 39% since the introduction of it, but that doesn’t tell the complete picture – private hire vehicles, taxis and Uber use has increased by around 29%, it’s the increase in these vehicles that has led to journey times on public transport being extended, which of course has led to a decline in the number of people using public transport as it’s seen as too unreliable. Despite the volume of traffic being less, the average journey time has still increased, the speed of traffic has reduced further.

In 2017, TfL registered the first drop in revenue for the congestion charging zone, they also lost the £700 million / year operational grant from the government, and Sadiq Khan promised to freeze public transport fares, at a cost of £640 million, despite passenger numbers and fare revenue being down by £240 million.

Could there be an extra motive behind the Ultra Low Emission Zone charging? And the extension of that?

Clean air

Nobody is denying that air quality is an issue, and measures should be put in to place to tackle it, but hitting the poorest families that are reliant on their vehicle to just survive shouldn’t be part of the equation.

With plans in place to charge employees parking at work, congestion charging, and ULEZ charges, owning a car has never been more expensive, and despite the Mayor of London trying to sugar coat it, the pill is very bitter to swallow.

Town centres are dying, a further 16 city representatives were at the Clean Air Summit where Khan announced his plans, they were all in agreement that the motorist should bear the brunt of the cost to clean up the pollution, but what happens when dirty vehicles are replaced with clean? Who will pay then?

What do you think of the vehicle scrappage scheme? Is it a genuine effort to help the poorest, or merely sugar-coating the pill? Let us know in the comments.

As UK roads get more and more congested, it seems that some drivers will have to become what they have, on the whole, despised for years. A cyclist. INRIX is saying it could now be quicker to cycle than to drive if you commute into a city centre.

In many major UK cities, cars are travelling slower than the average cyclist does on the last mile of their journey. A new report by INRIX, a big data company specialising in roads, found that it was quicker to cycle than to drive, based on last mile speed in 6 major UK cities.

UK wide picture

On average, drivers in the UK lost 178 hours yearly due to congestion, costing the UK £7.9 billion over the year. For an average UK driver, this is £1317, an impressive amount when you look at it.

Six cities across the UK had an average last mile speed of 10mph or less, and when the average cyclist does 9.6mph, it seems almost ridiculous to carry on driving. While for some they may not be able to drive, for those who have adequate facilities at workplaces or live close enough to walk/cycle, it seems a much better option. In six UK cities, you’d actually travel faster by bicycle than a car.

In Central London, Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, wants 80% of journeys into the city centre to be by public transport, walking or cycling by 2041. At the moment, people are avoiding public transport finding it to be unreliable slow, or not getting them there when they need it to be.

As the table below shows, unsurprisingly London has the highest cost of congestion per driver, and the highest time lost due to congestion. Birmingham came in second in the UK but placed 51st in the overall worldwide ranking, much better than London’s 6th place.

Leeds congestion increased by 6% over the year, and one traffic campaigner from Leeds cited the evergrowing number of single drivers entering and crossing the city centre. Rob Greenland, co-director of Social Business Brokers, said to the Yorkshire Post “The cause of the near-daily congestion isn’t … a car broken down on the inner ring road, or whatever today’s excuse is. It’s the fact that there are too many people travelling alone in cars, so that when there’s a problem (traffic light failure, collision, broken down car) the system collapses. There is no resilience – because too many of us are travelling in a way that the system just can’t cope with.”

UK vs the World

While London placed 6th overall, the rest of the UK fared better, with Birmingham coming in a respectable 51st and Glasgow in 54th.

For comparison, Dublin did not do well at all, as the city actually had the slowest last mile travel speed of any city worldwide, which is “The time it takes to travel one mile into the central business district during peak hours.” On average, you would drive at 6mph in the centre of Dublin during peak times, which is the worst of any city and urban area in the UK!

Last month, we told you about NICE wanting to give cyclists and pedestrians priority on roads, and so it seems that over the next twenty years, cities across the world will be designed with cyclists and other forms of transport over cars, as they help to reduce congestion in major cities, and you’ll go faster in a fair few of them.

Commenting on the report , Glynn Barton, Director of Network Management at TfL, said: “We are taking bold action to reduce congestion and improve London’s poor air quality. This includes removing the Congestion Charge exemption for private hire vehicles and reducing the time taken to clear up unplanned incidents, ensuring that roadworks by utilities companies and others are better coordinated. We are also working with the freight industry to encourage more efficient deliveries across the capital.”

“To directly tackle poor air quality, we are ensuring that buses, taxis and private hire vehicles are as green as possible, alongside the introduction of the Ultra-Low Emission Zone this April. In delivering the Mayor’s ambitious plans for 80 per cent of all journeys to be made by public transport, walking or cycling by 2041, our plans will further help tackle congestion across London.”

Worst UK roads to drive on

In rush hour the worst UK road was the A406 from the Chiswick Roundabout to Hanger Lane, with a daily delay of 15 minutes. The A406 also pops up further down the list in spot 6, with the congestion from the A1 to the A10 having a daily delay of 11 minutes. At peak travel time in London, the average mph was just 15.58 mph, and a reasonably fit cyclist can do up to 25mph on their commute, so it might be quicker to cycle for you if you live in a city centre.

Fifteen minutes daily may not seem like much, but over a year it equals to 61 hours for someone doing a daily journey, just over two and a half days.

In Leeds the Leeds Road/Saltaire Road was the worst, with the section between the Harrogate Road and the Bradford Road having a daily delay of 11 minutes, equaling 44 hours over the year.

Would you consider cycling to work if you knew it would save you time and money? Do you think cities should be doing more to reduce congestion? Let us know below