2015: Volkswagen admit to fitting some of their diesel cars with a ‘defeat device’, aimed squarely at cheating the emissions tests for diesels around the world, in whichever form that testing took place. To date, it’s thought to have cost the Volkswagen Group over £38bn in penalties, fines and compensation.

2018: The High Court of Justice has awarded the Volkswagen Group nearly half-a-million pounds in compensation with regards to costs for a Group Litigation Order that directly relates to the ‘dieselgate’ scandal.

Legal action

As the latest round of legal action against Volkswagen commences, in which investors are seeking compensation for the loss of share value to the tune of £8.2bn, there have been a number of “unnecessary and ineffective hearings” brought against the VW group in 2017 by legal firms acting on behalf of the UK owners, many of which have been premature, needless and unreasonable according to the court.

With this in mind, they will be awarding costs against some of the claimants to the value of £468,000 to Volkswagen, but it should be noted that this in no way diminishes the legality or the action against the Volkswagen Group in the longer term; this is perhaps more of an indication of the ‘ambulance chaser’ attitude toward the legal teams trying to make a fast penny from the action.

Despite there being no payout (as yet) for UK owners, Vopayoutn have already settled many cases in America, with claimants receiving a typical payout of between $5,000 to $10,000 depending on the age of the vehicle, so far, they’ve paid around $14bn.

The UK situation

To date, Volkswagen has offered to remove the defeat device from affected vehicles, as a free of charge service, but some drivers have commented on the lack of performance of the vehicle afterwards, which is no surprise.

There are a number of planned actions against the Volkswagen Group, the reason why the High Court has sided with VW in respect to the compensation has nothing to do with their liability, but there has been a deadline imposed; you need to register your claim before 26th October 2018 regardless of whether you’ve had the device removed or no longer own the vehicle. Missing this deadline could mean you’re not eligible for compensation.

Gareth Pope, head of group litigation for Slater and Gordon said: “Volkswagen have demonstrated high levels of contempt for UK owners by refusing to admit liability in the UK, over the same issue that they’ve paid compensation for elsewhere. They are relying on existing and former owners to not sign up to a group action”. It must be stated that Slater and Gordon are one of the firms criticised by the court for bringing premature and unnecessary action.

The bigger picture

It’s possible that this issue doesn’t just affect Volkswagen owners either, it’s believed that some Skoda, Seat and Porsche vehicles were also affected; the problem is so deep that the maker of the engine management system (Bosch GmbH) are ‘sponsoring’ some of the fines.

Volkswagen management has said that the Senior Management teams knew nothing of the cheating until 2015, that the decision to deliberately falsify the emissions was taken by middle-management and engineers, and if that was really the case, you’d have to wonder what other Quality Control procedures have been missed.

It’s this delay in reporting the scandal that has led to group litigation from investors – the share price lost 40% of its value in one day (approximately €25bn), and with record fines and compensation claims, Volkswagen has (to date) lost around $50bn, with yet more to lose when the UK legal action happens.

It’s worth noting that the U.S. has taken around $25bn in fines, penalties and compensation for the 580,000 diesels sold, whereas, in Europe, that number is closer to 8,000,000 diesel vehicles sold.

Further still, in December 2017, a Senior Engineer for Volkswagen USA was jailed for seven years for his part in the scandal, and the U.S. authorities are pushing to extradite Martin Winterkorn (Chief Executive Officer for Volkswagen) to face justice, but no extradition treaty exists between the USA and Germany so that’s unlikely to happen, however, it does send out a strong message to Volkswagen.

It seems that even three years later, Volkswagen is still paying the consequences for what’s become the biggest motoring scandal that we’ve seen, but it’s thanks (in part) to their action that new legislation in the form of the WLTP has been implemented, and that’s a good thing.

Are you part of the group litigation against Volkswagen? Do you think that Volkswagen’s CEO should face a prison sentence? Do you agree with the decision to compensate VW for unnecessary action? Let us know in the comments.

The head of Highways England, Jim O’Sullivan, said that the only reason the UK had not moved to an 80mph speed limit on motorways was due to social acceptability as well as condemning classic cars in a recent interview with the Telegraph.

The interview, released yesterday, showed overwhelming support from Mr O’Sullivan for higher speed limits on parts of the motorway network, especially in the move towards smart motorways and more autonomous motorways. He also showed a move towards restricting the roads that classic cars could go on in the future, as they pose a “hazard” to more autonomous vehicles that are not able to communicate with them.

Not a new plan

Back in 2011, Philip Hammond, who was Transport Secretary at the time, created a plan to increase the motorway speed limit to 80mph but lack of backing from the Coalition Government at the time meant that plans were shelved in June 2013.

Back then, the variety of Transport Ministers meant that mixed messaging was sent out to motorists. Some ministers, such as former Roads Minister Mike Penning who promised to set up trials of the 80mph limit. Later Patrick McLoughlin said the plans were “not a priority” while a source close to the ministry said it was more over safety concerns than anything else.

Alienating female drivers

At the time, the move pushed down by Downing Street as they felt it could ‘alienate female drivers.’ A survey conducted in 2013 by the AA showed that 41% of women thought that the idea wouldn’t work while 73% of men supported the change.

However, five years down the line it is highly likely that this will have changed with the increasing number of women driving, an estimated rise of 700,000 since 2013, and more and more confidence from women drivers.

Roll-out

As it currently stands, the scheme would have to be tested against a strict set of security measures. Raising the speed limit means deadlier crashes, and poses a much higher risk. However, surely some of this comes down to driver skill, as referenced by Mr O’Sullivan below.

Mr O’Sullivan speaking on the issue of safety in the interview said: “Dependant on driver skill which is a different issue, there are parts of the network that could probably be [updgraded to 80mph]. We have not done a formal safety analysis but there are parts of the network that subject to a safety analysis could probably operate at 80 miles an hour.”

One other thing noted by Mr O’Sullivan was the social norm of driving at 70mph and changing the social attitude towards driving at a higher speed. This is thought to be the harder aspect of moving to a 70mph motorway, rather than any technical parts. Mr O’Sullivan said on this matter “I think there is a technical argument about speed and safety of vehicles etc but I think 70 miles per hour is so socially embedded in this country that I think it is probably not going to change, in fact, it’s almost certainly not going to change. I think that has more to do with public opinion and social views than it has with the technology of vehicles.”

Classic car condemnation

Along with statements about upgrading speed, he also revealed perhaps what could be come the future of motorway driving, fully autonomous with very little human engagement. The plan to remove classic cars from motorways initially but eventually all non-autonomous vehicles seems to be perhaps one of the most contentious points of the interview.

In a world that is fully reliant on vehicles, could it possibly be that in thirty years we would no longer be allowed to physically drive on a motorway but instead let a vehicle do the work for us?

This shocking idea shows the ideal way the government intends to send this country. Only on Tuesday did the government announce £100 million Research and Development funds for zero emissions development, along with other massive industry heads contributing millions. There are also plans to send a driverless vehicle on the roads by 2021, a mere three years ahead.

Mr O’Sullivan backed his point on removing classic cars by saying “Do you know what? Classic cars are not a lot of fun on a motorway if you have ever driven one.” Due to the lower speeds and the lack of technology in the car, in thirty years or so, it would be considered unsafe to have cars that cannot communicate with every other vehicle on the road, and while they may not be allowed on motorways in the not too distant future, there are no plans to ban them altogether, as “I [Mr O’Sullivan] think that classic cars are something people will continue to enjoy for many years to come. I can’t see a problem with continuing to operate classic cars.”

Do you think upping the speed limit will be good for the UK? Should classic cars be allowed on motorways? Let us know below

Motorists have been praying to the ‘Great God of Fossil Fuel’ for years to get car manufacturers to be a little more realistic about the emissions and MPG claims for their vehicles; we’ve always known that manufacturers massage the figures, but surely, we can work out for ourselves that a Range Rover won’t offer the same economy as a small Nissan, people just want honesty about it.

The Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), which came fully in to force on 1st September 2018, has forced the manufacturers hand in to doing just that – being more realistic with the claimed figures, and in conjunction with the Real Driving Emissions (RDE) test, we should see at least semi-accurate figures being released.

Vehicle Excise Duty

Vehicle Excise Duty (VED), commonly known as car or vehicle tax, is generally based upon emissions, although the full regulations are quite complicated (and we simply don’t have the space for an in-depth review here), a shift toward more realistic emissions or MPG figures could, in theory, have a detrimental effect on VED.

We know that motoring and motorists are seen as an easy target for revenue generation – the last swathe of VED changes came as a result of the government not generating the expected revenue thanks in part to electric and hybrid vehicles, and that manufacturers are complying with their legislation and making more economical vehicles (less fuel duty, lower VED).

Changes were made to include some of the greenest cars – even zero emission vehicles are taxable if the list price is more than £40,000; it’s not purchase price, but manufacturer price, this also includes cars that are less than £40,000 but are then specced up with any additions or items of value, including higher specification engines.

Current regulations

Currently, any new diesel vehicle that doesn’t comply with the RDE2 emissions (which don’t actually come in to force until 2020) is subject to being categorised as one band higher than the official rating for the first year– to ‘encourage’ manufacturers to produce cleaner diesels, you’ll also pay a further £310 ‘luxury’ surcharge on anything costing over £40,000. (Petrol, diesel, hybrid or electric).

The point we’re making here is that the government has basically introduced new rates and legislation as a ‘catch all’ exercise to recoup some of their lost revenue. Now with the introduction of more and more electric and zero emissions vehicles, surely the government may introduce more methods to increase their revenue on the motorist.

The older vehicles (registered before 1st April 2017) will continue to pay VED at the old rate, based purely on CO2 emissions, but could a retrospective re-categorisation be introduced? After all, it’s a long-known fact that car makers have been a little reluctant in being completely open about the emissions of their vehicles, all the government would be doing is effectively charging the actual rate, rather than one based on fiction. Perhaps ‘the motorist’ should be thankful that we’ve had it so cheap for so long?

Differences

It’s very unlikely that a retrospective change will be imposed, but it does mean that there is a high chance that a model bought after 1st April of this year will undoubtedly cost more to tax than one purchased before that date, for the exact same model, purely because the figures used are more representative of real-world conditions. Yes, there have been campaigns by numerous consumer groups to highlight the extent of the problem, but with little regard given to the longer-term implications for the motorist – another financial hammer blow.

There is very little to be done – the first year’s VED is generally included in the OTR (On The Road) price of the vehicle, so with some negotiation, that can be negated to an extent, but going forward, it seems that the want for honest emission statements from the manufacturer will now be a need for further expenditure.

If you’re looking for a new car, then now is the right time to get yourself down to your favoured dealership as they try and clear the stockpile of cars that can’t be sold ‘as new’ due to the WLTP regulations – you’ll no doubt find a range of cars from all the main dealerships with significant discounts attached to the price.

It’s also worth noting that motorcycles don’t use the CO2 based taxation system, it’s based upon engine size, the most expensive being £88 for anything above 600cc, the cheapest being just £19 for the year (under 150cc) so if you’re looking for cheap VED vehicles, that are easy to park, cut a swathe through traffic and are generally congestion charge free, they are worth a consideration, if you are that way inclined.

What do you think about the new VED rate? Will the government retrospectively change categories? Are there any concerns for the future? Let us know in the comments.

If you drive a combustion vehicle in London, you could now receive a fine of £130 for driving on certain roads in the centre of London.

A new charge introduced yesterday in the centre of London means that any combustion engine, excluding hybrids, could face a £130 fine for driving in certain streets in London in peak times. This fine replaces the T-Charge to stop people altogether from driving in the streets, in an aim to reduce pollution and help improve air quality, in the already tightly packed centre of London.

A ‘pioneering’ scheme

The scheme has been hailed as a pioneering by Hackney and Islington Council, who are the first two to introduce the scheme. Councillor Claudia Webbe, of Islington Council, said: “We are proud to be leading from the front with Hackney in this pioneering scheme – the first of its kind in the UK.”

The aptly called “ultra-low emissions streets” are the first of their kind across the UK and with many more expected to grow as the government introduces methods to reduce emissions in city centres.

In this particular scenario, the restrictions only apply 7 am – 10 am and 4 pm – 7 pm, Monday to Friday in certain areas but it is expected to increase as time goes on. The scheme will be policed through Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) software, that detects the numberplates automatically and determines whether they are combustion or not through the vehicle database.

Historical issues

Complying with emissions standards has been a problem for many years with the UK government receiving a final warning from the European Commission in January this year. The warning gave them a period of time to implement a successful strategy before they are taken to the European Court of Justice and potentially imposed with large fines.

The UK has had dangerously high levels of nitrous oxide since 2011, leading to approximately 40,000 – 50,000 premature deaths a year. The shocking statistic shows why the European Commission is showing such an interest in bringing the UK to task, and while the UK is not alone in this, we are one in five of those under investigation. Alongside France, Germany, Hungary, Italy and Romania, we have been tasked with providing a suitable solution to the problem.

Two-tier motoring

Amanda Stretton, motoring editor at Confused.com, described the scheme as the introduction to what is becoming a ‘two-tier system of motoring,” splitting up those who can afford it, and those who can’t but need to drive around. If this becomes the case in cities and towns across the country, then motoring will take a massive U-turn and become something only the super-rich in society can afford, much like the early motoring times.

She also commented on the replacement of an electric or hybrid car and told the BBC: “Our own study has shown that many people would like to own an electric vehicle but are put off by the cost but also the lack of charging infrastructure.”

Motoring has become a pricier business recently, with the highest petrol prices in four years and people are having to choose between feeding their families and driving to work due to the high price of petrol.

How will it work?

Currently, nine streets are affected by the restrictions and are Blackall Street, Cowper Street, Paul Street, Tabernacle Street, Ravey Street, Singer Street, Willow Street, Charlotte Road and Rivington Street.
While this may seem like a small proportion of places, if this scheme works, and reduces congestion and pollution, then it likely becomes a template for other streets across the country especially in places of high pollution.

At the moment, any combustion vehicle entering the area, aside from residents and local businesses, will receive an instant £130 fine. This will be policed through ANPR cameras and while it is unknown about the contestation of the fine, it is thought that it will be fairly strict. The main aim is to reduce pollution at peak times, like the school run and commuter times, not only to encourage people to cycle or walk but to stop those who do cycle or walk from breathing in too much pollution.

Feryal Demirci, the deputy mayor of Hackney, said: “Failing to act on poor air quality, which causes nearly 10,000 premature deaths across London every year, is not an option, and that’s why we’re being bolder than ever in our efforts to tackle it. We’re thrilled to be launching our ultra-low emissions streets – the first of their kind in the UK – which will reclaim the streets from polluting petrol and diesel vehicles, and improve the area for thousands of people every day.”

Do you think that having electric only streets is a good idea? How easy do you think this will be to enforce? Let us know below

If you’re driving and you can’t read a number plate 20 metres ahead of you and the police stop you, there’s a chance you could lose your license. New measures to cut down on drivers with poor eyesight have been announced with the police now testing people at the roadside to stop dangerous or reckless driving.

On the spot test

So far, three forces have announced they are trying a new system where they check driver’s eyesight if they are stopped. Thames Valley, Hampshire and West Midlands police forces will ask drivers if they can read a number plate 20 metres away from the roadside. Drivers who cannot manage this could see their license revoked immediately.

The trial will take place over the course of September with the aim of ensuring everyone driving on the UK’s roads has the right level of vision. Police plan to stop drivers and put them through the test at strategic points across the road networks of the three areas. The data collected will be used to get a more complete picture of the poor driver eyesight issue in the UK, something that is currently underreported in government statistics.

Take vision seriously

According to the government and the police forces involved, the idea is to get drivers to take their eyesight seriously. Sergeant Rob Heard, speaking on behalf of the forces involves, said that everyone needs good vision to drive because not being able to see a hazard or react to a situation quickly enough can have catastrophic consequences.

Currently, the legal limit is being able to read a number plate at 20 metres, which is around five car lengths away. This is a minimum requirement, and there is talk that a regular eyesight test with an optician may also become compulsory for people wanting to drive.

Cassie’s Law

The move is part of the Cassie’s Law initiative that means driver licenses can be removed within hours if someone is found to be posing a threat to other road users. The changes took place in 2013 following a campaign by Jackie McCord, whose daughter Cassie was killed by an elderly motorist who had been told not to drive by the police.

Before the law, the police had to write or fax a request to have a license removed, but under Cassie’s Law, they could telephone or send an email to speed up the process. This means police can even email straight from their vehicles to a dedicated email address at the DVLA and the license will be immediately revoked. Police are then able to prevent the person from driving any further.

The new trial could also see drivers facing prosecution if they don’t manage to comply with the test. There is an estimated 1.5 million license holder on the roads who have never had an eye test and crashes involving drivers that are suffering with poor eyesight are thought to cause over 2,900 causalities a year.

Antiquated tests

Campaigners also say that the UK’s testing system is antiquated and not fit for purpose. Once motorists pass their test with good eyesight, there is nothing further that requires them to be checked during the course of their life.

Vision Express and Brake are two campaigners who want the government to tighten up driver vision laws and ensure that testing is compulsory before taking a test but also each time a photocard license is renewed.

Brake spokesperson Joshua Harris said that it ‘stands to reason’ that good eyesight is a fundament of driving. But the current system doesn’t do enough to protect people from drivers whose eyesight deteriorates. And that it is ‘madness’ that there is no requirement for drivers’ vision to be tested during the years of them driving.

Vision Express added that their recent survey showed 75% of people think a recent eye test should be mandatory when someone is renewing their driving license.

What happens if you lose your license?

What about for drivers who fail the test, often unaware that they were breaking the rules or how poor their eyesight was? The DVLA can revoke your license for a number of medical reasons and then you would have to apply for a new one including paying as if the licence was brand new. They will also give you a disqualification period during which you cannot reapply.

Once this is finished, you can reapply eight weeks before the end of the period. You may need to provide evidence that you are fit and well to drive and the DVLA will advise about this. After this, they then inform you if you are being granted a new license, but can refuse again.

Seeing the problem

For many drivers, they just aren’t aware that their vision isn’t up to the standard. Corrective glasses or contact lenses usually make a massive difference in the difference between looking and seeing. With the new crackdown, drivers are having to seriously consider their eyesight and how well they can see when driving.

How’s your vision? Could you pass the 20 metres test if you were stopped? And do you think eye tests should be mandatory for drivers? Let us know below

Most of us drive around and use the sight of a police vehicle as a sign that we are being monitored. However, police in some parts of the UK are using unmarked HGVs to spy on drivers and to then send out fines for a whole range of minor traffic offences.

Caught out at the wheel

Highways England revealed that last year there were over 4,000 drivers who were caught out by just three unmarked HGVs that they operated while hundreds of unmarked police trucks have caught more. Police are filming and fining people not wearing their seatbelt, eating at the wheel or using their mobile phone.

The lorries don’t tow trailers and, the officers sit in the cab, one driving and the other with a video camera to record offences. Northamptonshire police are the latest to admit to using this tactic and caught 43 drivers committing over 50 offences in a recent session. The higher viewpoint means that officers can look into cars and see what drivers are doing, said PC David Lee of the force.

Nothing new

It turns out this isn’t a new practice – police have been using the tactic for three years. Last year there were 213 people stopped for a variety of offences including 12 who were found to be reading books or eating while driving. Highways England also use the tactic and caught one lorry driver with his foot on the dashboard while talking on his mobile phone while driving, a ridiculous and highly dangerous idea.

A total of 28 forces have used the HGV cab safety initiative since it was started in April 2015. Over 4,100 drivers have been pulled over in relation to over 5,000 offences during the first two years – almost two-thirds were driving and using a mobile phone at the same time. Other offences included drivers steering with their knees and even brushing their teeth while behind the wheel.

The Road Police Unit from Surrey Police enjoys showing some of the ridiculous – and dangerous – things they have spotted since using an HGV. Have a look here: https://twitter.com/i/moments/894570962364100608

Strange driving practices

The unmarked vehicles have caught people doing a range of strange things while driving. One woman with a young child in the rear seat was found applying lipstick and mascara while travelling at 40mph along a dual carriageway. She was using her rearview mirror to ensure her makeup was perfect, although her driving can’t have been!

Two delivery drivers were caught inhaling nitrous oxide, a substance that is illegal for human consumption, in their parked van in Birmingham. Another driver was seen driving along a London road eating cereal with a spoon and bowl, that car must’ve been quite messy! Other more common offences including not wearing seatbelts and not being in proper control of the vehicle.

Using a mobile phone while driving remains the top reason that the unmarked HGVs have stopped drivers. One sting in Kent in March operated for three days and stopped 44 drivers, 31 of which were using their mobile phones behind the wheel. This now carries six penalty points and a £200 fine if you are caught using a hand-held phone. Bluetooth headsets, voice command or dashboard holders are all acceptable alternatives.

Unmarked car rights

Some drivers are a little nervous about the concept of unmarked police cars, even if they are doing nothing wrong. Following stories of people being followed by fake unmarked police cars, some drivers are worried about stopping for a vehicle that doesn’t look like a police car. One driver was signalled to stop by an unmarked vehicle, but when the man in the car didn’t have a police uniform on, she drove away, and real police officers said she did the right thing.

Unmarked cars and vehicles do have the right to stop drivers but the officers driving the vehicles must have a police uniform on when they get out. They don’t have to have a reason to stop someone and can ask for your name, date of birth and to see documents such as driving license, insurance and MOT certificate. These can be delivered later to a police station if you don’t have them on you within seven days.

If you are unsure that the vehicle is a genuine unmarked police car, the official police advice is to drive to the nearest police station or a public place such as a petrol station. Even an occupied house could do in remote areas but don’t stop somewhere where no-one is around.

Signal to the car to show you have acknowledged them, and a real police vehicle will happily follow you. You can also use hands-free devices to call 999 if you are worried and they can check the details of the vehicle. Don’t drive off at high speed, however, or real police will think you are trying to get away!

Extra caution needed

The new tactic by police shows that just because you can’t see a police vehicle, doesn’t mean you can get away with dangerous driving behaviour. As more forces around the country start to use this approach, people will have to be even more cautious while driving.

Have you ever been stopped by an unmarked police vehicle? Or have you seen the unmarked HGV? Do you think that this is acceptable for the police to do? We’d love to hear about your experiences!