An official review of the speeding laws is underway and if Britain’s Road Policing Chief for the National Police Chiefs’ Council gets his way, motorists will face penalties for going just one mile per hour over the speed limit.

Chief Constable Anthony Bangham hit the headlines early this year after his comments in favour of a zero-tolerance approach to speeding received fierce backlash from other police leaders and motoring organisations who say this approach is unworkable.

The ‘buffer’ zone

As the law stands, motorists face prosecution if they break the speed limit by any amount.

While most drivers know about the current ‘buffer’ of 10% plus 2 mph, any decision to issue a speeding penalty remains at the discretion of the police officer and the individual police force, with police and fixed speed cameras both able to enforce the speed limits and issue speeding penalties.

Motorists who hit the top of the buffer zone can expect to receive either a fixed penalty notice or take the Speed Awareness Course, which, depending on where you live and whether you’ve taken the course before, will cost you £75-£100. Over a certain amount above the speed limit and drivers will receive a court summons.

Chief Constable Anthony Bangham, who is also the chairman of charity Road Safety Trust says the public overuse speed awareness courses and those who break the law should instead receive fines and points on their licences.

The minimum penalty for speeding is a £100 fine, plus three penalty points. The maximum speeding fine is £1,000, but this increases to a maximum of £2,500 for exceeding the motorway speed limit. of 70 mph where no further evidence except a police officer’s opinion suffices for a prosecution.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) speeding penalty guidelines

Speed limit: 20 mph
24 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
35 mph: summoning

Speed limit: 30 mph
35 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
50 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 40 mph
46 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
66 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 50 mph
57 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
76 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 60 mph
68 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
86 mph: court summons

Speed limit: 70 mph
79 mph: a fixed penalty or a Speed Awareness course
96 mph: court summons

Don’t ‘whinge’ when you’re caught

Anthony Bangham, Chief Constable for West Mercia Police, caused a stir in January when he said the current 10% plus 2 mph speed allowance leads drivers to think it’s fine to speed. He said the message should change to show that the police were proud to enforce the law, and it’s neither unfair nor should come as a surprise to drivers who get caught and booked for breaking the law, driving at 33 mph in a 30 mph zone—these drivers should feel embarrassed.

Mr Bangham stated that speeding motorists shouldn’t come ‘whinging’ to the police when the law has established speed limits for a reason.

“We need to change our messaging and ensure greater consistency of approach when dealing with those who exceed the speed limit.

“The existing speed enforcement guidance could, in fact, be encouraging driving at these more dangerous higher speeds rather than the actual speed limits.”

The Chief Constable said if the current guidance receives the proper understanding and application, it may offer forces with the flexibility that’s necessary, but that over time drivers often misunderstand its rigid application and understanding, with an expectation that “the ‘norm’ is ‘it is OK to speed'”.

We’re all aware that speeding is both illegal, has the potential to be dangerous, and that we should all do our best not to exceed speed limits. Becoming fixated with our speedometers is dangerous, too, but we now have the technology to help. From mobile apps and Sat Nav devices with audible speed limit alerts, together with devices to warn drivers of speed cameras, there’s plenty to keep us all on the right side of the law.

Neil at Drivesmart, a company who provide speed camera detectors to help people to drive safer, commented: “I think if [it] was just 1mph over the limit it would be unenforceable due to speedometer inaccuracy. Also, the appeals process would be backlogged as there would be a massive increase in people contesting their tickets. I personally think people just need to slow down and having a detector in the car actually makes you more aware of what is around you.”

For those who want to be extra careful and want to know when any speed cameras are around, Drivesmart have an exclusive offer for PetrolPrices members of 30% off their Alpha Speed Camera Detector which tells you when any speed camera is nearby and warns you in enough time to allow you to check that you’re driving at a safe limit. If you’re interested, have a look here: https://www.drivesmartdirect.com/product/drivesmart-alpha/

Should drivers fear zero-tolerance?

There is always a split public reaction to speeding. One camp will say there’s no excuse for speeding and therefore no reason for good drivers to fear a speeding fine or penalty points. Others will ask for leniency and common sense, not a world where motorists trying to keep within the speed limit while watching the road into criminals.

While it’s true that the current police speed enforcement guidelines—set in 2011—are under review, reassurance comes from a spokesperson for the National Police Chiefs’ Council, who said no action will take place until ALL police chiefs review the findings. The representative also expressed that it wouldn’t be realistic to prosecute people for driving one mile per hour above the speed limit, which will bring comfort to many motorists.

What’s your opinion on the potential for a ‘zero-tolerance’ law? Would you welcome this approach to policing or is this approach unfair? Tell us in the comments.

Birmingham is the latest UK city to announce that it is creating a clean air zone in the city centre to reduce pollution levels. The city council revealed the plans at the end of June to heated debate but look set to go ahead with them, offering a template for other cities around the country. So will all city centres soon become clean air zones?

What are clean air zones?

Back in 2015, the government announced plans to improve the air quality in the cities and announced five new Clean Air Zones that it wanted to be operational by 2020. A Clean Air Zone is an area where the local authority introduces measures aimed at improving the air quality. At first, the plans involved the most polluting vehicles such as buses, taxies and HGVs but following a legal challenge, ‘non-compliant private vehicles’ were also included in the zone.

The clean air zone plan was enforced after the Supreme Court ordered the UK to fix the emissions problem we have in the UK, as it is estimated 40,000 people nationally suffer as a by-product of emissions.

The step is part of the broader Air Quality Plan that the government released with the aim of reducing dangerous pollutants in the air, which is especially dangerous in the city centres. The Clean Air Zones can come in two kinds – non-charging and charging.

In a non-charging zone, the focus is on improving air quality but without charging drivers. Efforts will go to things like retrofitting vehicles to reduce pollution and to change traffic flow to spot areas where vehicles are stationary for extended periods. In a charging zone, like the one in London, drivers will have to pay to enter it with their vehicles if they meet a particular environmental standard.

Birmingham’s zone

The plan announced by the city council in Birmingham involves charging drivers of higher polluting vehicles to use the city centre within the A450 middle ring road. The charge will be introduced in January 2020 with the aim of discouraging drivers of the most polluting cars from driving around the city centre.

The move comes as an estimated 900 people a year die in the city prematurely due to the problems created by pollution. It also ties in with the government’s plans to develop these clean air zones in major cities.

Opposition to the plan

Opponents to the project were quick to point out that the move would likely hit the poorest the most – people who can’t afford to buy newer, less polluting cars. There is also concern about the impact for small businesses in and around the city centre who cannot afford to buy new, electric vehicles but need to access the area for their business.

Others point out that moving the pollution from the city centre to other areas simply moves the problem and doesn’t solve it. So while the city centre may be pollution free, surrounding areas could become much more polluted. Moving the pollution around does nothing for the environment. By merely taking the pollution and spreading it out over a wider area you are surely reducing the environmentally friendly plans aim to move it and make it someone else’s issue. Surely a better thought would be to reduce the cost of public transport and increase the efficiency to allow people to access the city centres for less money and reduce emissions.

Problems for businesses

As the government plans to roll out the scheme to more places around the country, it seems few of us, including companies, are aware of the changes that are coming. One poll by YouGov found that 40% of small and medium businesses that they spoke to have no idea that the Clean Air Zone scheme was being rolled out.

Also, 38% had no idea that their vehicles wouldn’t meet the new standards and could see them charged anywhere from £12.50 to £100 to drive within the clean air zones. The survey was carried out by the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVLRA) whose chief executive Gerry Keaney said that results showed more awareness is needed for people to understand what the new zones would mean for them.

Do clean air zones work?

The other big question with the idea is whether the clean air zones work at all. People are concerned about moving pollution from one area to other or just not solving the problem in the way that was expected.

However, there is evidence that the clean air zones do work. One study of a low emissions only zone in Germany found that there were significant reductions in the particular matter in the air in these zones – this is the stuff that causes health problems. Moreover, research in London after five years of the clean air zone found that levels had fallen 2.5-3.1% compared with just 1% outside the zone.

There is less evidence that levels of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are reduced inside the zones. These are also connected to health problems and are created particularly by diesel vehicles. However, experts believe this is more to do with the diesel emissions scandal than anything – the cars emitted more NOx than they thought when doing their testing.

Cleaning up the city

In Birmingham, the levels of pollutants are much higher in specific areas than the recommended 40 micrograms per cubic metre. The pollutants are particularly harsh on the lungs of children as they are still developing. So the clean air zones are seen as a way to reduce the pollution and help make us all healthier – but help may be needed for businesses who have to use these areas and could face extremely high costs.

Would you pay to enter a city? Apart from charging vehicles, what do you think could be done to help reduce emissions? Let us know in the comments below

There are diesels that create up to 25 times more pollution than official testing shows? Surely, that’s a mistake?

We’ve written about clean diesels, false emissions, and wayward fuel economy figures in the past, and while diesel emissions are always a hot topic; it seems that not one week goes by without another nail being placed in the coffin of diesels, but the manufacturers really aren’t helping themselves.

A recent headline by Which? states that nearly 80% of modern, Euro 6 compliant diesels aren’t reaching anywhere near the 0.08g/Km emissions standard to be Euro 6 compliant one model, in particular, is 25 times over that limit. Is this just ‘click-bait’ or a genuine bit of foul play by car manufacturers?

Witch? hunt?

Which? have tested 61 new car models (all diesel) since the beginning of 2017, with the intention of seeing just how close they are to the Euro 6 rate for emissions, specifically Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). 77% of the cars tested failed to meet the 0.08g per kilometre standard, with the Subaru Forester 2.0d Sport Lineartronic coming in at 2.022g, but on average, the NOx levels were at 0.27g/Km.

However, it must be pointed out that the testing wasn’t Euro 6 compliant testing, in fact, a spokesperson for the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said: “The non-official test employed by Which? is very different from the current EU testing, so it’s no surprise it delivers different results. Only the official tests accurately compare models on a like-for-like basis”.

The different test

Even under the new Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP), testing is mainly done under laboratory conditions, giving the manufacturer the ability to ‘optimise’ their test vehicle(s) settings, this can include switching to an ‘eco’ mode, tyre inflation, low fuel loads (reduced weight) and a number of other considerations.

Whereas the Which? test runs the vehicles in the standard mode that they start up in (no eco setting), with 200kg of weight (roughly the equivalent of two occupants and a full tank of fuel), with all systems – air conditioning, lights and radio in use and they include a motorway phase.

Clearly, it would seem that some manufacturers can optimise their vehicles better than others, but there were also a number of vehicles that fell way below the Euro 6 standard, even under the more arduous testing conditions, so what (if anything) does the test mean?

Legally speaking, the car makers aren’t breaking any law – they’re doing exactly as they’re allowed to do under the test procedures, this isn’t a ‘Dieselgate’ scandal, merely … an exercise in understanding and applying rules.

Comparisons

Targeting the consumer angle is a moot point – the WLTP tests (as the SMMT point out) are comparing like-for-like, which means the end result is a direct and truthful comparison between models or brands, so as long as you know that Car A has fewer emissions than Car B, you’re in possession of the relevant facts and figures.

Yes, understanding that in the real world, under strenuous conditions, Car A doesn’t actually get near the advertised figure is all well and good, but let’s be honest, if emissions and pollution levels drive your desire, you won’t be looking to buy a diesel, regardless of what the manufacturer claims.

The best and the worst

The top 5 dirtiest diesels:

1. Subaru Forester 2.0d Sport Lineartronic – 2.022g/km
2. Renault Grand Scenic Energy dCI 160 Bose Edition EDC – 0.896g/km
3. Renault Captur dCI 90 Intens – 0.725g/km
4. Peugeot 5008 BlueHDi 150 Allure – 0.700g/km
5. Ford Kuga 2.0 TDCi S/S Vignale 4×4 – 0.655g/km

And the top five cleanest:

1. BMW 2 Series 218d Active Tourer Steptronic – 0.014g/km
2. Mercedes-Benz E220d 9G-Tronic – 0.024g/km
3. Mercedes-Benz E220d 9G-Tronic Estate – 0.028g/km
4. BMW X2 xDrive 20d M Sport X Steptronic – 0.031g/km
5. Vauxhall Grandland X 2.0 Innovation Automoatic – 0.034g/km

Testing times

The WLTP testing has been in force (for new car types) since September 2017, with all new registrations being compliant by September 2018, but as we’ve pointed out, it will really only be useful for a comparison against different models or brands – not as a benchmark of what you can expect (especially in terms of MPG).

If you’re specifically looking to purchase a new vehicle, and it has to be diesel, then the figures will be relatable and perhaps a better indication than previous testing processes – the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) was introduced back in the eighties, and as such, it left a little to be desired as technology marched on, despite some flaws, the WLTP has to be better (and more accurate) than the NEDC, but whatever the process or procedure, there will always be an organisation willing to decry it as unrealistic.

Do you think better emissions tests should be introduced to reflect real-world driving? Is it a good thing that diesel will be banned from sale in 2040? Let us know below

Drivers have a lot to watch out from behind the wheel of the car. From crazy other drivers, pedestrians to cyclists, there is a lot to take in as well as road conditions, meaning that drivers have to be alert all the time to avoid collisions.

However, most don’t know that it isn’t just the collision or using a phone that could get you a fine – driving too close to a cyclist when overtaking could now cost you £100 and three penalty points under new laws introduced this year.

Minimum distance

According to the new law to protect cyclists, the driver needs to leave a minimum distance from a cyclist when overtaking or travelling alongside the bike or they could receive a fine. This would be £100 and three points on the licence for being too close to a bike on the road.

So, how close is too close? According to experts, the recommended distance between car and cyclist is 1.5 metres. If you are caught within this distance, then you face the potential of a fine and points on your licence, to the same value as speeding. This has replaced the previous recommendation in the Highway Code which merely said that drivers should leave ‘plenty of room’ when overtaking someone on a bike.

Rule 163 also adds that drivers should leave ‘as much room as when overtaking a car’ when they overtake a motorcyclist, cyclist or even a horse rider. Other reasons that drivers could receive the new penalty will be straying into cycle stop boxes at traffic lights and failing to give cyclists going straight ahead priority at left turns.

However, could this new regulation of defining a distance be hard to enforce and therefore catch? Whereas before ‘plenty of room’ was down to the individual driver and police officer, now having a set minimum distance means that the judgment of distance will require greater awareness from drivers of what exactly 1.5m is.

Encouraging cyclists

Cycling Minister Jesse Norman is pushing to show that there are enormous benefits for walking and cycling. He also wants more of a climate of ensuring drivers have the skills and knowledge to safely manage to be on the road with more cyclists, as opposed to just catching and punishing them.

The government wants to encourage more people to grab a bicycle and ride around town with some £500K in funding behind introduced for new safety schemes. This will encourage people to use bikes for short journeys and cut down on accidents and also car use. Learner drivers will also be given more training on being able to safely pass cyclists, as part of the current learning process.

Worrying figures

The law was introduced when the Department for Transport showed that 102 cyclists were killed on the UK roads in 2016. This was alongside 448 pedestrians, and another 8,500 cyclists received serious injuries. This video shows the danger of not overtaking cyclists safely, and while the vehicle in question was removed from the road for having no MOT, the damage is still shocking.

As they encourage the use of bikes, the government are also looking into bike safety. Compulsory bike helmets are something that is likely to be discussed going forward, even though campaigners have already dismissed the idea as counterproductive. They are conducting a review with cyclists’ groups that is due to end later this month.

Death by dangerous cycling

Another new cycling related law to be introduced is the new ‘death by dangerous cycling’ or ‘death by careless cycling’ which is undergoing a consultation period to see if it should be introduced. One campaigner, Matt Briggs, lost his wife to a cyclist and said the current ‘arcane laws’ need to be changed.

Causing death by driving under certain conditions has a maximum sentence of 14 years. Death by careless driving has a maximum sentence of five years. However, there is currently not a set law for if you are on a bike rather than in a car. The cyclist who killed Mr Brigg’s wife Kim received just 18 months. The cyclist was riding a fixed gear bike with no front brakes when he hit Mrs Briggs as she crossed the road.

The law used was causing bodily harm by ‘wanton or furious driving’ which was originally designed to handle Victorian-era horse-drawn carriages and had a maximum sentence of two years. This is the closest thing that a dangerous cyclist can currently be charged with. It is clear that as more people take to the road on a bike, there need to be clearer laws around their behaviour and how they cycle.

Costly mistakes

While drivers can face a £100 fine and three points, lorry drivers can face a lot more if they are caught driving too close to a cyclist. One lorry driver in the West Midlands was recently fined £1038 and had five points added to his license after being caught by police. He was caught under the GiveSpaceBeSafe campaign by West Midlands police to improve driver behaviour.

Road safety experts recommend drivers brush up on their Highway Code and also the latest advice on things like passing cyclists to reduce the risk of getting a fine. Police forces around the UK are already taking steps to start issuing the penalty when drivers are caught breaking the new law.

Do you think these new laws will help? Will these enocurage people to cycle rather than drive? Should cyclists have the same laws for injuring pedestrians as drivers? Let us know below

Social acceptance or anti-social behaviour plays a big part in how the world changes and evolves over time; there are many things that were once deemed acceptable, or at the very least, excusable, and drink driving was just something that many people did, despite it being illegal, but the law only came into force in January 1966.

Today, drink driving is about as heinous a crime as you can get when it comes to motoring, and rightly so. Despite the shift in social acceptance, there are still a number of drivers who believe that they make for better drivers when under the influence – over 70,000 motorists are convicted each year of drink driving related offences.

Statistical rise

The road safety charity Brake is calling for a significant cut to the blood alcohol limit for motorists after figures released by the Department for Transport (DfT) have shown an increase in the number of road traffic collisions in the last year, as a result from driving whilst drunk.

Comparing figures for the 1970s opposed to 2018, it’s clear that things have changed – in 1979, there were 1,640 deaths attributable to drink driving, in 2016, that figure was just 240, but that’s a 7 percent increase from 2015.

It could be argued that the rise is a statistical anomaly – figures have remained fairly static since 2010, but the bigger picture is that there were approximately 9,040 serious injuries or deaths due to drink driving, and whatever the figure, is there really any excuse for it?

Reduced blood alcohol

Currently, the law states that the ‘acceptable’ limit is 80mg of alcohol to 100ml of blood, and due to other factors such as weight, sex, metabolism, stress levels and even the amount of food eaten, there are no hard and fast rules as to what that constitutes in terms of actual drinks consumed.

It has been shown that drivers with a blood alcohol level of between 50 – 80mg are at least twice as likely to be involved in an accident as those with no alcohol, and up to six times more likely to be involved in a fatality. It’s for this reason that Brake are calling for the limit to be reduced to just 20mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood.

Joshua Harris, Director of Campaigns for Brake said: “Current regulations give a false impression that it’s safe to drink and drive, this couldn’t be further from the truth. The current laws lack clarity, are badly understood, and give the green light that mixing alcohol with driving is acceptable, it isn’t”.

Penalties

There are two separate charges relating to drink driving – being in charge of a vehicle while above the legal limit or unfit through drink, and driving or attempting to drive while above the legal limit or unfit through drink.

Being in charge of a vehicle while drunk could see you landed with up to three months imprisonment, a £2,500 fine and a potential ban, whereas actually driving (or attempting to) could get you up to six months imprisonment, a minimum one-year driving ban, and an unlimited fine. If you’re caught twice within a ten-year period, the driving ban will be for three years.

In 2010, Sir Peter North was commissioned by the Government to conduct a review of the drink and drug driving laws, and amongst many recommendations, one, in particular, stands out:

The North Review made the recommendation to lower the drink driving limit to 50mg of alcohol, believing that it could save ‘a significant number of lives’ – at least 43 per year. But the then Government concluded that “improving enforcement is likely to have more impact on the most dangerous drink-drivers than lowering the drink-drive limit”, and they didn’t believe that it would be cost-effective.

They did, however, make some minor changes to help stop drivers ‘getting away with it’ – removing the right for a blood test when the evidential breath test was lower than 40% over the legal limit. It was believed that the delay in getting the blood test could allow for time for the alcohol to leave the body.

No exceptions

There really is no acceptable excuse for drink driving, if you’re on a night out with friends, make sure there is a designated driver, or use alternative forms of transport. Equally, if you find yourself in an emergency situation, you should try and find someone else to drive, or again, find an alternative method of transportation.

The penalties for driving while drunk are harsh, but they aren’t just legal – along with the inconvenience and large fine, there is a social stigma, increased insurance cost, perhaps even a threat to your livelihood – is it really worth it?

What do you think about reducing the limit? Should the penalties be harsher? Is it practical and fair to reduce the limit? How will it impact the pub trade? Let us know in the comments.

A recent survey says over a quarter of UK drivers feel trapped within their car finance agreements because they can’t afford the final balloon payment at the end of the term, resulting in them entering yet another—often more expensive contract.

Car subscription company Drover, surveyed 1,500 drivers and discovered that 65% of those who considered themselves entangled by their car finance agreements took out another Personal Contract Purchase (PCP) because they didn’t want to face losing the investment they’d made into the car.

Bad deals and confusion

With around 23% of UK motorists (8.7 million) signed up to a car finance agreement, the Drover survey shows 28% of people report being ‘trapped’ and full of regret about the contract they entered.

Of those people, 60% say they can’t afford to end the agreement early and just over a third of these drivers are in their third finance arrangement, with 54% saying the interest rate increases with each new contract. What’s shocking, is that 43% of the survey respondents couldn’t say what their current interest rate was.

Sixty-one per cent of the motorists who considered themselves trapped said they’d taken out a bad deal. Thirty-four per cent reported being confused by the various deals on offer. So, are dealers offering transparent information to would-be customers? That’s something the Financial Conduct Authority is looking into, and whether products are being mis-sold and if dealers are practising responsible lending based on the individual’s ability to repay their loan.

If this survey is a correct representation of most UK drivers this amounts to a huge number of people unhappy or confused about their contracts, so why did they sign up for PCP in the first place? Forty-three per cent said it was to end the stress of car-buying, with almost half of the 1,500 survey respondents admitting to not shopping around before signing their contracts.

‘Netflix’ for cars?

With the many strands of commitments required for the privilege of driving a vehicle, such as insurance, road tax, breakdown cover, servicing and maintenance, could it be time for motorists to look at an alternative option?

Subscription services are more popular than ever, to enjoy anything from television to food, to clothing. Is it any wonder that companies such as Wagonex and Drover have applied this model to car usage, too? A global 2017 study showed that 74% of car executives believe more than half of car owners today wouldn’t want to own cars in the future.

Customers of car subscription services pay a monthly amount that covers everything except fuel, and with no penalty fee if they cancel.

Founder and CEO of Drover, Felix Leuschner, said: “Buying a car is [a] daunting prospect for many drivers – not only is there so much choice, but car finance deals are hugely confusing. We are aiming to help drivers by providing a more flexible way to run a car without the commitment of car finance.”

Reduce your PCP costs

A Personal Contract Purchase is a loan to get a car. Unlike a personal loan, you don’t pay off the full value of the car and you don’t own it at the end of the deal unless you choose that route. The deposit is around 10% of the car’s price but certain car manufacturers’ finance arms offer ‘deposit contributions’ of £500-£2,000 or more if you’re buying a new car—if you take out their finance. The larger the deposit you pay, the less you need to borrow as a loan.

There are dealers who offer 0% but you should be wary of this, as costs often hide elsewhere, such as in an inflated balloon payment or a higher ticket price than you would’ve paid had you bought the car outright.

Only 20% of people with a PCP deal buy the car at the end of the term. If you don’t plan to buy the car, see if leasing is a better choice. You don’t own the car when you lease, but you pay less each month.

By lowering your annual mileage, you’ll lower your repayments, but don’t enter a low mileage amount on your agreement if you have concerns you’ll exceed it, or you may face expensive over-mileage charges. Understand, too, that the dealer will charge you for any damage to the car, such as scratches or dents, which you must pay for when you return the car.

The Automobile Association calculates that, on average, new cars lose 60% of their value within three years and because with a PCP you finance what the car depreciates, it’s wise to choose a car that’s more likely to keep its value. The best way to lower PCP repayments, though, is to opt for a cheaper car.

Have you ever signed a Personal Contract Purchase? Are you feeling trapped within your contract? What’s your opinion on car subscription services? Do you think they’re the future or will they cost drivers more money? Tell us in the comments.

As part of the government’s initiative to build a society that works for people of all abilities, the Blue Badge scheme will extend to people with ‘hidden’ disabilities.

In the biggest revamp of the system since the 1970s, the government will offer accessible parking for people who have difficulty travelling, including those with ‘hidden’ disabilities, such as autism and mental health conditions.

Inclusive travel

Beginning early next year, people with hidden or ‘invisible’ disabilities will become eligible to access the Blue Badge scheme, helping to reduce the obstacles many of these people and their carers face when travelling.

The government wants to make sure people with the greatest need have access to Blue Badges while ensuring the current scheme continues to be workable.

The Blue Badge scheme allows people with physical disabilities to park closer to their destination than other drivers, due to the difficulty they face from using public transport or walking long distances.

In an aim to make the UK transport network inclusive by 2030, the government aims to improve the accessibility of all transport modes across the UK.

These changes come after an eight-week consultation and as part of the government’s drive for more equality between physical and mental health conditions.

At present, people with non-physical disabilities may be eligible for a Blue Badge, but current rules don’t give clear guidelines, leaving eligibility open to interpretation.

A Blue Badge allows drivers or their carers to park close to their destination and is only for on-street parking. Off-street car parks, such as supermarket car parks, hospitals, or car parks provided by the local authority fall under separate rules. The charge for a Blue Badge is £10, and it’s valid for three years.

A lifeline for the disabled

The Department for Transport reports that around three out of four people say they would go out less often if they did not have a Blue Badge, so the extension to the Blue Badge scheme to autistic people and any necessary carers will make a distressing—sometimes impossible—experience of travelling, easier.

Transport Minister Jesse Norman said Blue Badges are “a lifeline for disabled people”, giving them the freedom and confidence to get to work and visit friends and that the changes will make sure the scheme extends to people with hidden disabilities so they can “enjoy the freedoms that many of us take for granted.”

The new criteria will increase eligibility of the scheme to people unable to make a journey without risk of serious harm to their health or safety—or that of any other person.

Jane Harris, Director of External Affairs at the National Autistic Society, said the changes to the Blue Badge scheme will “make a massive difference to the lives of many of the 600,000 autistic people in England, and their families.”

She added: “Just leaving the house is a challenge for many autistic people, involving detailed preparation – and sometimes overwhelming anxiety about plans going wrong.” and explained that certain autistic people might not know of the dangers of the road, that the person may become overwhelmed by busy or loud environments, and the possibility of not being able to find a parking space near where you’re going can mean people with autism “can’t contemplate leaving the house at all.”

The scheme will also help people with mental illness or dementia, who can’t embark on a journey without this causing them considerable psychological distress—the person with the badge need not be the driver.

Misuse and judgment

While off-street car park operators should offer parking spaces for disabled people, don’t assume those with a Blue Badge can always park for free. The car park owner to decide this.

The Blue Badge isn’t a licence to park anywhere. Like other road users, badge holders must obey the road rules outlined in the Highway Code. For instance, Blue Badge holders cannot park where a ban on loading or unloading is in place and Central London has areas where the Blue Badge doesn’t apply. If the badge holder or their driver parks anywhere they may cause an obstruction, or are a danger to other road users, they can receive a fine, a Penalty Charge Notice, or have their vehicle removed.

It’s a criminal offence for a Blue Badge holder, or anyone else, to misuse the badge and could cause a £1,000 fine and the badge being confiscated. While the misuse of Blue Badges happens, the person we observe walking back to the supermarket car park—with what appears to be ease—might be a carer, sent to get something the badge holder needed.

What’s also plausible is that the person suffers one of the many ‘hidden’ illnesses, such as Cystic Fibrosis, yet are experiencing a day where they’re able to walk a short distance without obvious difficulty.

Speak to a person with an invisible illness, who has no outward signs of disability or ill health, and it’s unusual if they don’t have at least one experience of being challenged (or even threatened) by a complete stranger, for using disabled facilities—be that a toilet or a parking space.

Disabled parking spaces get used not only by those with a genuine need but also by healthy and able-bodied people who disregard the rules about parking in disabled spaces, just to have a shorter distance to walk—something they may find an expensive move to make.

There are many Blue Badge holders who have concerns about the changes to the scheme who say they already struggle to find an unoccupied disabled space. They’re concerned next year’s changes will make the situation even more difficult. We shall have to see whether places such as supermarkets will react by offering more designated spaces.

Apply for or renew a Blue Badge.

What’s your view on the eligibility of the Blue Badge scheme for people with ‘hidden’ disabilities? Are you aware of someone whose life may be easier after the changes government will make to travel accessibility? Are you concerned about changes to the scheme? Let us know in the comments.

Many years ago, owning a car was as much about pleasure as it was a means of transport, whole families went out for a ‘Sunday drive’, with no particular destination in mind, and with a timescale that was set to leisurely rather than efficient, but with more demands made on our time, increasing motoring costs and congested roads, the social aspect of motoring is falling down the list of recreational activities.

Perhaps it’s the modern world to blame for everyone being in a hurry, or just that society as a whole is becoming more … self-important, but one thing’s for sure – driving standards, or more correctly, driver etiquette, is in short supply.

A recent study by Lexham Insurance found that tailgating is the UKs number one annoyance for British drivers, with over 30% of drivers picking that above lane hogging (15.9%) or lane swerving (14.3%).

Tailgating

Tailgating is the act of driving too close to the car in front, without leaving enough of a safety gap (a general rule of thumb is two seconds in the dry), it’s extremely dangerous and could lead to a prosecution of careless driving, although in August of 2013, the Police were given extra powers to deal with it by the roadside with the use of a Fixed Penalty Notice – up to £100 fine and 3-points on a licence.

Whilst that could be an excellent measure in deterring drivers who insist on tailgating, the reality is that just 8,000 tickets have been issued since the introduction, mainly thanks to the dwindling numbers of traffic police. But with over 13% of all drivers blaming tailgating as a contributing factor to a serious accident, and the Highways Agency stating that tailgating is responsible for over one-third of all accidents on the UK roads, the problem is perhaps more significant than we realise.

Passive Aggressive

Experts say that there are two types of tailgaters – the passive and the aggressive, and whilst the term ‘aggressive’ would lead you think they’re the worst kind, it’s the passive tailgater that you should watch out for.

The aggressive tailgater will do all that they can to pass you, chivvy you along or just plain harass you in to moving out of their way, it’s annoying and dangerous, but at least they’re generally aware of the situation, whereas the passive tailgater won’t even recognise what it is that they’re doing, which means that it’s unlikely they’re paying attention, so you now need to be aware of what’s happening in front of you, and behind you.

Any kind of tailgater is dangerous; ‘thinking distance’ (aka reaction time) at 70 mph is 21 metres, nearly 69 feet in old money, and at 70 mph, the car is travelling 31.5 metres per second – it’s easy to see how accidents occur.

What can you do?

Should you find yourself in the situation of being tailgated, advice is straightforward:

Remember that it isn’t your job to police the roads, regardless of how annoying any driver is, you shouldn’t try to antagonise them, but equally, a court of law won’t recognise the argument of tailgating for increasing your speed, nor should you slow down unnecessarily.

Assess your own driving – are you driving particularly slowly? Or is the other driver genuinely at fault?
Do not speed up, but try and keep to a constant speed where possible and should there be an opportunity to let the driver pass, do so, providing it’s safe and legal. Give the other driver plenty of notice with your indicators – they may not be aware of your intention, and could equally be totally unaware of their own driving.

Don’t be tempted to ‘brake test’ the driver.

Bad habits?

The survey doesn’t list the demographics of the respondents, and there were only just over 400 in total, but it would seem a fair representation of bad driving habits, the complete list is as follows:

1. Tailgating 30.1%
2. Middle or fast-lane hogging 15.9%
3. Lane swerving 14.3%
4. Driving under the speed limit 12.4%
5. Undertaking 10.2%
6. Getting cut up 9.1%
7. Being squeezed out on merging lanes 8.1%

It could be that being tailgated is seen as much more of a threatening behaviour, whereas the other habits are just discourteous, although undertaking inparticular is perhaps one of the most dangerous habits, right alongside tailgating.

Unfortunately, there does seem to be a decline in driving standards, patience and forgiveness – whatever happened to raising your hand to say thanks, or even to apologise if you’ve accidentally made a mistake?

Do you think this survey is right? Are driving standards falling below an acceptable level? Would driving on the congested roads feel just that bit better with a little more courtesy? Let us know in the comments.

A radical new transport plan is currently being outlined by the government. It could see vans banned from city centres under measures to improve air quality and reduce emissions. The Department of Transport is also looking to replace vans in city centres with micro-electric vehicles including cargo bikes, electric vans and minor vehicles.

Changing the city centre

Currently, there are said to be some 300,000 HGVs on UK roads alongside over 4,000,000 vans. Being major contributors to the air pollution, this is causing big problems in major cities. This number is ever-growing as the demand for delivery services rises in-line with the soaring popularity of online shopping.

The government’s idea is to see ‘last mile deliveries’ use low emission vehicles within city centres with the aim of reducing emissions and helping ease congestion around city centres. The changes are referenced in a new document called Last Mile and the Future of Mobility.

The paper works on principles currently being implemented by Cambridge City Council, they announced at the end of last year that certain vehicles would be banned. Oxford City Council are also set to follow suit within the next two years.

New funding

Also referenced was £12.1 million of funding for six projects working on simulation and modelling to help with the development of connected and autonomous vehicles. Transport Minister Jesse Norman said “The UK had a long and proud history of leading the transport innovation and that the new Future of Mobility Grand Challenge will continue this.”

Not only could the new scheme change how people and goods are moved around the UK, but there are also significant benefits and economic opportunities. The autonomous vehicle industry would be worth over $50 billion by 2035 experts say.

Changing the transport network

Overall, the idea is to improve the country’s transportation system to make it safer, more accessible and greener. The government foresee things like the widespread use of self-drive cars and even flying vehicles.

With the idea of self-drive cars, the government say there would be less need for parking spaces in the city centres. These could be repurposed into new urban homes to help with the growing demand for new houses, especially as people move back into the city centres.

Changing demands

The government has a good basis for the changes – because we are already changing how we use the transport network. For example, people are driving less and fewer workers are commuting as more people work from home or have flexible working contracts.

The aging population and the number of people returning to live in urban areas also reduces demand on the road network.

In earlier plans, the move away from fossil-fuelled powered cars and towards zero emissions has been outlined. This means by 2040, the government want all new cars and vans to be zero emission, and improvements in electric vehicle technology make this more viable.

The use of automation in vehicles also has the potential to make road travel safer. Improved sensors, better computing power within vehicles and the potential of artificial intelligence are slowly taking some of the emphasis from the driver. Experts expect fully self-driving cars to be on UK roads by 2021, improving safety, accessibility and allowing better use of urban space.

Electric vans

The electric van is one of the more popular ways to fulfil the growing demand for deliveries in the city without adding to the pollution problem. Currently, the electric van is dominated by Renault and Nissan who have expanded and improved their ranges in the last two years, although mostly still for smaller vans.

However, other big names are getting involved, creating large electric vans for release over the next few years including Mercedes, Renault and Volkswagen. So far, these vans can be lower in cost to run than a diesel version with fewer serviceable parts and obviously lower fuel costs.

Moreover, their virtually silent running means that there is the possibility of deliveries at times outside the regular hours as there is no engine noise to cause a nuisance. Talk of buying incentives will also catch the eye of business owners too while the ‘green’ credentials from running such vans is an ever-increasing extra benefit.

Transport revolution

There’s no doubt that a transport revolution is underway with how we get around being forever changed, from silent vans to flying cars, the future is indeed near. It has the potential to make city centres much more pleasant places to visit and free up much-needed space for other purposes.

What do YOU think about this proposed van ban in cities? Is it practical for business and retailers? More importantly, will it make a difference to road congestion and pollution where there are still buses and HGVs on city roads? Let us know in the comments below please.

Whether you view service stations as wellsprings of relaxation and rejuvenation—or an expensive last resort—may depend on which services you’re visiting.

Transport Focus has carried out their Motorway Services User Survey on over 9,000 motorists, to find out how England’s 111 motorway service stations are performing.

The independent transport user watchdog carried out the first large-scale survey, in 2017 and have compared this year’s results with those findings, identifying which service stations listened to their customers, and made improvements.

The best and the worst

Motorway service stations—love them or hate them, most of us use them at least sometimes. Whether you’re on your way back from a weekend away, needing to grab a coffee or you’re a lorry driver using the showers, service stations differ in their range of facilities and level of service.

Across the country, investment by operators appears to have made a genuine difference to the experience drivers have from service stations. Last year, Stafford South scored only 70% on the customer satisfaction rating and ranked second to last. This year, the services ranked second place with a 99% satisfaction rating—a vast improvement. In 2017, Wetherby also shot from 93rd place, last year, to third place, in 2017.

The survey showed an overall 92% of motorists felt satisfied with their visit to motorway service area, with 94% rating customer service as ‘good’, and 89% of people who say they are happy with the toilet cleanliness.

Sixty-six per cent of people also thought the service station food and drink establishments gave value for money. Whether this includes items such as bottled water and packed sandwiches isn’t clear, but seems doubtful. We’re all aware of the huge markup on these products.

Those who make a living from driving a vehicle score the lowest on customer satisfaction, at only 88%, yet this driver group experienced the largest increase in satisfaction ratings since surveyed in 2017.

While 90% of visitors with a disability reported high levels of customer satisfaction from using a motorway service station, only 70% said the facilities catered well for their needs—motorway service station operators, take note.

Highest ranked motorway services (Customer satisfaction rating as a percentage.)

1. Norton Canes (M6 toll) Roadchef – 100%
2. Stafford Southbound (M6) Roadchef – 99%
3. Wetherby (A1 (M)) Moto – 99%
4. Hilton Park Southbound (M6) Moto – 99%
5. Corley Southbound (M6) Welcome Break – 99%

Lowest ranked motorway services

1. Thurrock (M25) Moto – 68% (services undergoing refurbishment at the time of the survey.)
2. Toddington Southbound (M1) Moto – 72%
3. Southwaite Northbound (M6) Moto – 80%
4. Newport Pagnell South (M1) Welcome Break – 81%
5. Bridgwater (M5) Moto – 81%

Drivers leave in a better mood

Motorway services are crucial for road safety, combatting tiredness by allowing road users to rest. Transport Focus wanted to assess the effect that visiting a service station had on the mood of drivers. Twenty-four per cent of motorists stated they were in a frustrated, stressed, or tired state of mind when entering the service station, compared to only 5% in a similar state, on departure—an even lower number than last year.

Anthony Smith, Chief Executive of Transport Focus, said: “As the summer holiday getaway gets into full swing it’s good to see motorway services customers feel they get a good experience.

“Motorway services play an important role in providing the break motorists need. Drivers tell us they feel less stressed and more awake.”

With motorway services known as expensive places—for fuel, in particular—many drivers will push on with their journeys, hoping to make it to an alternative stop for refuelling or a rest.

RAC Foundation Director, Steve Gooding said: “No-one expects motorway service areas to be five-star attractions but they do serve an important safety role for those on long journeys, particularly drivers who need to take a break.

“When a service area gets a reputation for being unattractive, the risk is that people put off the stop they ought to make, and that can have serious consequences if they then run out of fuel or fall asleep.

“What we need is a basic, minimum standard for all our motorway service areas: an easy-to-navigate layout, clean facilities and fairly priced fuel. It’s a simple formula but one that some stop-off places still don’t seem able to get right.”

Avoiding those motorway fuel prices

No matter where the next motorway service station you visit is, one thing’s for sure—the price of petrol and diesel will be much more expensive than other filling stations.

In April, we wrote how Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling wanted an official investigation into why motorway services charge so much more for fuel than standard filling stations.

For years drivers have complained that motorway fuel prices are overpriced and, according to surveys, one in five drivers buy only enough petrol or diesel ‘to get by’, waiting for a cheaper filling station, later.

If you’re looking to avoid paying the high service station fuel prices, then plan for your journeys whenever you can and fill up at a cheaper petrol station beforehand.

If you believe you’ll run out of fuel along the way, consider making a small detour from the motorway and locate cheaper fuel forecourts. One way to make it easier is by downloading the PetrolPrices app or visiting the website.

Are you surprised with the results of the Transport Focus survey? How often do you visit motorway service areas? What has been your experience? Do you enjoy them or avoid them? Let us know in the comments.