Your opinion

Many police officers feel public confidence in them is being undermined by an over-concentration on camera enforcement. The RAC Foundation feels it is time for the Government to instigate an independent audit into the role of safety camera partnerships.

Edmund King
Executive director, RAC Foundation

Our challenge on fleet driver training

Sir – With reference to your article 'Trials and tribulations of fleet driver training' (Fleet NewsNet, May 13): the result achieved by the training was disappointing to us in that side of the business.
Given the very strong and supportive response my company is getting from its clients as a result of the training we are giving to the fleet industry, I would like to issue a challenge either to the same two drivers who went on the reported training or to two new people to attend the theory and practical fleet driver training programme that lasts eight hours that my company runs at no charge. We know they will come away with a very positive view, with many new skills and techniques to use on the road in their everyday job.
Our customers' feedback says exactly this so we know that it is true. We are a recently formed company that believes emphatically that good fleet driver training works wonders.

Drew Sturton
Director, The Driving Academy (South-West)
E-mail info@thedrivinglessonacdemy.co.uk www.thedrivinglessonacademy.co.uk

May 12, 2004

More views in 'apathy' row

Sir – I read with interest your reply to the letter from Steve Skelly (see below) in which he complains that fleet managers are being unfairly criticised. What he obviously fails to appreciate is that organisations such as Fleet News, the Institute of Car Fleet Management and the Association of Car Fleet Operators strive to raise fleet managers' levels of professional awareness to help them achieve the status that most of them aspire to. Fortunately, the views he expressed are, as you say, not correct, nor are they widely held in the industry.

Peter Moxon
Moxon Moore Vehicle Management, Sheffield

Sir – As an 'ego-massaging, self-important so-called consultant', I would like to respond to the apparent attack launched by Steve Skelly on fleet management training, and its importance within the industry.
Referring to my quote on the front page of Fleet News (April 22), I think I clearly identified the top echelons of the fleet industry (some of whom I have the great pleasure of working with and can call on as good personal friends) who are passionate about, and are exemplars of, best practice fleet management.
Many, like me, try to promote industry best practice and continual self-improvement through seminars and trade associations such as the Association of Car Fleet Operators.
Sadly, however, these fleet managers are in the minority. There are many thousands more who do not understand, or even attempt to address, many of the real issues facing the modern fleet/mobility manager.
Could this also in some way explain why, more often than not, the fleet manager is poorly paid and comes low down the corporate management hierarchy? It is noticeable that the hard-hitting non-apathetic fleet managers have both respect and clout within their organisations and company boards.
In defence of the 'dire' training courses you speak of, Fleet Audits has been running successful courses from basic to advanced levels since 1988. I would like to know which fleet management training courses he has attended that have been so 'dire', with tutors whose knowledge is outpaced by the 'average fleet manager'.
We have a long list of public and private sector clients who have sent their entire fleet departments on our courses, and come back for more.
I also have a filing cabinet full of letters from satisfied customers, many of whom have progressed through several of our courses at differing levels. It might even interest you to know that some had won, or have gone on to win, Fleet News Awards.
In an increasingly challenging marketplace, I would suggest that you can never have too much knowledge.

Chris Chandler
Director of Training, Fleet Audits

Sir – Readers might wonder if you protest just a teeny bit too much and whether we have touched a raw nerve here. Mind you, it was a little worrying from my point of view that you failed to detect the admittedly modest attempt at ironic humour in my first letter.
It is difficult to imagine how calling your readers apathetic beside a picture showing them asleep on the job is 'informing and helping them' (Fleet News April 8). And if you are going to say that you didn't call them apathetic but just reported someone else who did, then you need to watch out. That's how they got Gilligan!
But, of course, I should apologise to reputable fleet training providers for my outrageous generalisation.
Undoubtedly there is much valuable material out there. However, there is also some dross.

Steve Skelly
Rowley Ashworth Solicitors, Wolverhampton

Sir – I would strongly disagree with Peter Moxon (Fleet News, April 22). I have repeatedly requested training in fleet management but always come up against the lack of funding issue from our management team.
I try to train myself by taking an interest in publications and websites covering all aspects of fleet management, but I have little time to spare as running our small fleet is only part of my role. I feel frustrated that small fleet managers are being 'shot at' in this way. We are doing our best with little back-up.

Details supplied

BVRLA route to industry credibility

Sir – I back the idea put forward by Glasgow-based Fleet Alliance for a Kitemark (Fleet NewsNet, April 29). Regulation within our industry is long overdue and the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association has recently opened its doors to brokers who can comply with their strict procedures and adhere to their code of conduct. This accreditation gives any broker credibility in the market place today.

Kevin Harris
Managing Director, Total Fleet Services

May 7, 2004

Critical letter stirs up a readers' storm

We must beware of stating the obvious

Sir – Generally, I find a lot of Fleet News articles informative and useful during discussion with the directors. Others, you cannot believe such a basic question was raised.
If I have not mistaken Mr Skelly's point, the comment is perhaps illustrated by the article on page 22, in the same issue, regarding phone kit damage. Do you not agree that the message and photo in the article are a little obvious? Is this not the 'insult' at which Mr Skelly was directing his angst, suggesting you 'highlight and inform on the changes' at intelligent level rather than state the obvious?

Alan Manship
Fleet manager MICFM, Nuswift

Sir – The main body of last week's letter from Steve Skelly makes a number of points with which I would not disagree.
The coincidental publication of the letter from Chris Welsh (Chip & PIN: not all behind) on the same page simply adds weight to many of his points about 'covert advertising'.
However, on behalf of the Association of Car Fleet Operators, I simply cannot let his extremely negative and derogatory comments about fleet management training go unchallenged.
I have no idea what – if any – fleet training courses he has ever participated in, but all of the ones I know (and that's a lot) through ACFO and elsewhere simply bear no relationship whatsoever to his allegations.
I visited his company's website (www.rowley-ashworth.co.uk) and saw his organisation chooses to make a virtue out of the benefits it gets from 'education and training for all case handlers'. It seems that Mr Skelly is happy to be part of an organisation that believes in training its own staff for core activities, but despises anything remotely resembling training elsewhere. If trainers can be found to deal adequately with the demands of the legal profession, why should there not be equally well-equipped trainers for fleet management?
Across many years' fleet experience within ACFO, my consultancy work (yes, I'm one of those 'so-called consultants') and elsewhere, one thing stands out more than anything else. Fleets which exhibit the same self-satisfied smugness displayed so eloquently in his letter seldom turn out as the paragons of virtue they imagine themselves to be. In fact, their very introspection, and unwillingness to participate in wider fleet dialogue, means they are often pretty poor performers in peer reviews.
Training is not just about 'learning new techniques'. It is also about opening one's mind to different ideas, from people doing similar jobs, but in different circumstances. What price Investors in People, anyone?
Perhaps Mr Skelly would like to follow through on the expression of interest made of the ACFO membership secretariat last year, and participate with real people (and some 'consultants') in discussing and learning about fleets.

Stewart Whyte
Director & membership secretary, ACFO

Support is what we need now

Sir – Fleet managers are made, not born. It is a complex business managing and operating a fleet of high capital cost, yet rapidly depreciating company assets.
In the experience of the Institute of Car Fleet Management, there is no shortage of people with the desire to gain greater knowledge and a broader skill set in this demanding environment. This desire for self-improvement, with the support and assistance of their employer is the foundation for the future of the fleet industry. These are people at various stages of their career path who are gaining skills that are transportable and will, in all likelihood, stay within the industry.
Fortunately, we are making good progress in the area of fleet management training. The ICFM students who have achieved the Introductory, Certificate and Diploma levels are the people who are destined to set the standards in the years ahead.
Fleet News has championed this cause for as long as I can remember and certainly does not deserve the harsh words delivered by the reader in Wolverhampton.
Awareness, understanding and support are the watchwords for the future. Bombast and outrage are words for the past.

Tom Madden
Chairman, ICFM

PS ICFM is a non-profit making training organisation run by experienced industry volunteers. It survives and thrives with the support of suppliers to the industry. We don't have consultants and we don't sell anything – maybe your reader from Wolverhampton would approve.

April 7, 2004

There's no place for driving louts

Sir – Your article on health and safety is highly relevant and in good time (Fleet NewsNet, April 1).
It is not just initiatives from the top that are required – individual drivers ought to reassess their roadcraft. Having had a car licence for 25 years, I passed my bike test about a month ago.
In that short period, I've become very aware of how many lunatic drivers there are.
What is it about normal, sane, rational human beings that turns them into brainless morons when they get behind the wheel of a car, especially when there's a motorcycle about?
I've lost count of the times I've been cut up, hooted at furiously because I stick to the speed limit, given no room, followed at a distance so close that I could have reached out and touched the car behind, and so on.
It's not just about training drivers to use their vehicles properly – it requires a sea-change in attitude.
There is no place for aggressive and loutish behaviour towards any other road user, be they pedestrian, biker or in a truck.
Leave your frustrations where they belong – at home or in the office – and don't take them out on everyone else. I'm not surprised that your survey showed that hundreds of drivers had been killed or hospitalised. Aggressive and intimidatory driving is simply an accident waiting to happen.

Edward Austin
Company secretary, Wrekin Group, Telford

Tread depth and wheelspin in the wet

Sir – I write regarding your article on tyre replacements (Fleet NewsNet, March 25). Your correspondent need go no further than the seat of his pants for a realistic assessment of his tyres.
I can tell by an increased tendency to understeer and wheelspin in the wet when the tyres on the front of my car are getting low on tread.
From 8mm down to 3mm there is little difference but by the time they get down to 2mm I can tell that replacement is a matter of urgency.
I would think that any of the tyre manufacturers would have a graph of grip in the wet vs tread depth and I bet the drop-off is noticeable from about 3mm and alarming below 1.6mm (whether one of them will publish it or not is a different matter).
In terms of advice on policy, that is a difficult one. Certainly, replacing at between 2mm and 1.6mm keeps you within the law but in today's environment, if you did a risk assessment and could lay your hands on some facts, then you might find that the wet grip of a tyre at 1.8mm was 80% of that of the same tyre at 3mm and a duty of care might bring about a change in policy.
But where do you stop? A brand new 205 x 60 may well have 10% more wet grip than a 195 x 70 and provide extra safety for your drivers. Is this an argument for upgrading tyres on new vehicles?

Mike Newton
Logistics director, Britax

Can some 'plates avoid road tolls?

Sir – I wrote to you last month regarding problems with the London congestion charge (Fleet NewsNet, March 11).
I mentioned that where numberplates cannot be read by the cameras monitoring the congestion zone, they send a fine to the closest match – leading to us receiving a number of incorrect fines.
Amazingly, after receiving the latest statement from Transport for London (TfL) I just could not resist writing again.
Would you believe, exactly the same has happened this month, right down to the same vehicle and driver.
Obviously I have contacted them again, by phone – to be told to put it in an e-mail to their fleet team.
Why are we paying THEM money, but spending OUR time checking the statement, contacting the managers, the managers in turn calling drivers, if only to find that someone is driving into the zone 'sideways' so the computer cannot read their plates?
I put it to you that either their machinery is not good enough for the job it has to do, or someone (please give me their name and contact number if you have it to hand) has found a way of producing number plates which can somehow 'evade' recognition on these cameras.
I would be very interested to hear if any other fleet managers are suffering from this problem, as by the attitude of the person I spoke to today, I do not feel this is in any way an isolated case.

Ann Dukanovic
Fleet manager, Kaba Door Systems, Telford

Please support our organ donor register

Sir – We are appealing to your readers to help us to save lives. NHS UK Transplant and the Driver Vehicle Licensing Agency are offering drivers the opportunity to join the NHS Organ Donor Register by enclosing organ donor registration forms with all DVLA vehicle tax reminders for April.
While many thousands of motorists have responded since the 'Leave More Than Memories' campaign started in January, we need to ensure as many people as possible are given the opportunity – which is where we need the support of fleet managers.
You may not deal with DVLA reminders yourself but we would appeal for your help to ensure the donor leaflets reach your drivers or groups of drivers. We believe many more drivers would be willing to help others by joining the 11.1 million people who already have registered their wishes – we just need to reach them.

Penny Hallett
Director of Communication & Public Relations, NHS UK Transplant

Audi drivers are also victims of road rage

Sir – Your recent long-term test 'Our girl faces road rage' (Fleet NewsNet, March 11) brings to mind some of my own experiences from inconsiderate and intolerant car drivers.
I am fortunate to drive an Audi A4 and it never ceases to amaze me the number of VW Passat or Golf drivers who just want to have a 'go' at you on the motorway.
Probably in some way they feel they need to prove that the Passat/Golf is a better and quicker car.
There are a number of drivers of other brands who are a problem as well.
I am an advanced driver and am by no means a slouch when it comes to driving quickly and safely – but these drivers show an inadequacy of brain function that has to be seen to be believed. I just pull over and watch the total dismay on their faces, that I have in some way cheated them out of becoming another accident statistic.
Funnily enough, I never seem to get problems from BMW drivers. Probably, like me, they appreciate the standard and quality of their car, and courtesy on the road is extended each way – we pay enough for the opportunity to drive quality marques.

Audi A4 owner

March 31, 2004

Legal tread depth is an absolute minimum

Sir – In response to the letter 'Tread carefully on tyre replacements' (see below), may I offer the following advice.
The aspect of law relating to car and light van tyre tread depth (but not limited to this consideration) is based on there being a minimum tread depth of 1.6mm across the centre three-quarters of the breath of tread and in a continual band around the entire circumference.
This is a simple fact, with no tolerance being applied to the limit. It is thus left to the judgement of the driver, and others with vehicle responsibility, to decide if allowing a tyre to wear down to this limit is not just legal, but really a safe practice. Increasing this minimum figure is often debated but has at this moment yet to be changed.
As tyre, vehicle, road, weather and driving conditions all vary, the 1.6mm limit has to be considered, in terms of safety, as applicable to a 'best case scenario' whereby with all such matters being reasonable, the tyres employed should still perform safely at this minimal legal depth of tread.
With so many factors influencing the tyre performance and, equally, the tyres influencing so many aspects of a vehicle's performance, experts deciding the limit were faced with virtually an impossible task in satisfying every performance permutation.
We thus have to accept that by law 1.6mm is the absolute minimum but it is still anyone's prerogative to decide that, in further consideration of safety, they would prefer their tyres to always have more tread.
In fairness to the authors of the referenced publication, suggesting a greater depth is not just sensible practice but no doubt treading (no pun intended) on the side of caution, as in addition to good advice I suspect in this world of litigation they are also covering their rear end.
Argue as some will, but it is generally recognised that safety is much improved the greater the depth of tread. Yet I am amazed at the lack of guidance towards the method and tools needed to correctly evaluate tread depth in the first place – having personally witnessed a police officer using a gauge some half a millimetre in error (over 30% of the actual limit).
I feel this matter is crucial.
This variation makes a mockery of both law and safety as the cost of such error can be limb, licence or even life.
Digital depth gauges are available and are being issued to all Vehicle & Operator Service Agency inspectors.

Martin Weeks
Director, Mitutoyo Automotive Technology Division

Licence checking not the end of the story

Sir – Regarding your article 'Are all your drivers properly insured?' (Fleet NewsNet, March 4): It makes sense to ensure that all employees who will drive for your company as part of their job should automatically go through a regular licence check.
These days, the niceties of taking people at their word are overshadowed by the need for fleet managers and company directors to ensure they run a safe and law-abiding fleet.
But licence checking isn't the end of the story when it comes to risk management. It is important for fleets to ensure they have the right policies in place to encourage employees to drive safely and sensibly.
A mobile phone policy and clear guidelines on taking rest periods are examples of these, together with investment in driver training for those that need some extra support.
The recent media noise around health and safety and corporate manslaughter means companies can no longer claim ignorance about the risks they face on work-related driving. Start with licences, but make sure you do the whole job.

Phil Chapman
Managing director, RAC Claims Services

Company licences a brilliant concept

Sir – The Barnes initiative of introducing company car driving licences is breathtakingly brilliant (Fleet NewsNet, March 18). The scheme seems designed to cover the firm's legal obligations in every way possible.
It also seems to be a coagulation of what many other fleets already cover but with the added advantage of unequivocal company-wide backing. My only concern with a scheme like this is the lengthy administration and 'intrusion' into drivers' backgrounds.
I know of many companies that would turn pale at this approach and this idea may fast become a scheme for the already converted. As fleet decision makers, we need to be reaching out to those fleets that need to be dragged into the 21st century.

Mark Cole MICFM
Motability Operations

Cost of poor repairs

Sir – At last someone has recognised the old problem of poor repairs to fleet cars and vans: 'Redirect buying power, fleets told' (Fleet NewsNet, March 18). It is true that fleets are far more concerned with the hourly rate from bodyshops or accident management companies than the ultimate quality of the repairs carried out. All too often, the problems do not come to light until disposal time, when it is too late. A poorly repaired vehicle will lose significant money off its residual value.

D J Woods
Director, XBG Fleet Remarketing

March 23, 2004

'Bully' drivers may have their reasons

Sir – I read the article by Jo Fobbester 'Our girl faces road rage as jealous driver pitches in' (Fleet NewsNet, March 11) with dismay. The uncivilised and bullying behaviour exhibited by the other driver is inexcusable, but Ms Fobbester did contribute to the incident. If somebody makes it obvious they want to get past by 'repeatedly buzzing', then let them get past. You should never judge another person's priorities or urgencies.
From bitter personal experience, I can recall three experiences in my driving life when the actual speed limit did not matter to me while arriving safely at my destination in the earliest possible time was paramount.
The first was when my wife was brutally attacked when she answered the front door while heavily pregnant, the second was when she was giving birth to our first son and arriving late at the hospital was not an option that I could countenance and the third was when my son was severely burnt.
On each of these occasions, I drove as rapidly as I could to get where I needed to be. I stress that I drove as safely as possible and even under those circumstance I tried to drive (as I always drive) with care and consideration for other road users.
To the drivers who saw my haste and helped me by pulling over and letting me pass, I will be eternally grateful, and to the drivers who saw my haste and obstructed my passage, I pray that they are never in the same situation themselves – it is not a pleasant experience.
Just a further thought, why was Ms Fobbester stuck continuously in the offside lane? Was she actually following the highway code and pulling back to the nearside lane once she had passed slower-moving traffic or was she actively 'guarding' her place in the 'queue' and helping to promote this country's addiction to having a motorway system defined by a rolling road block mentality?
Having driven and owned luxury vehicles from BMW to Bentleys, I suspect that jealousy of a BMW 3-series had very little to do with this incident.

M. Cooper
Via e-mail

It's the car that's the problem, not you

Sir – Regarding the comments made by Jo Fobbester in her long-term road test about a road rage incident (Fleet NewsNet, March 11) – it is the BMW, not you. I had one for three years and lamented the decline in standards on the roads as people tried to kill themselves by swerving across my path. I then changed to another make and all of a sudden courtesy returned. People even wave me out at junctions.

Richard Walker
Via e-mail

Risk policies must be properly monitored

Sir – Regarding your article by John Lennox, of the British Standards Institute Group (BSI) (Fleet NewsNet, March 11), it is refreshing to see a wider business expert looking at one of the most important issues within the fleet industry at the moment.
I wonder how many articles like this will continue to be printed before firms start taking their risk management responsibilities seriously.
What my company is seeing is a lot of companies who are already aware of the fundamentals of creating a risk management strategy and, in many cases, even have one which – on paper at least – looks pretty good. But, as Lennox goes on to discuss, it is the implementation of that strategy that is all-important and this is unfortunately where most fleets fall down. There is no point creating a state-of-the-art risk management policy if you do not have the infrastructure to back it up. Acknowledging and identifying risk but failing to ensure it is properly implemented and monitored leaves the business just as vulnerable as it would be if nothing had been done, if not more so.

Stuart Donnelly
Sales director, Goodwood Fleet Management

Fleet managers must check fuel card use

Sir – I read with interest your article regarding fuel card abuse on the forecourt (Fleet News, February 26). From my previous experience as a manager of a large fleet, it is not only the misuse of fuel cards by the driver that needs to be considered, but that of forecourt operatives as well.
Our fleet was issued with fuel cards from a well-known supplier. Part of the card supplier function as the provider was to manage the use of the cards and identify 'exceptions' such as refuelling more than once a day, amounts of fuel used, correct fuel type to vehicle etc.
I was therefore more than a little concerned when carrying out management checks on fuel usage to find that one of our vehicles in the Midlands had been refuelled at a cost of more than £2,000 in one month.
The ensuing investigation identified several more similar card frauds, perpetrated by garage employees in several garages. It was a long-winded, time-consuming exercise to recoup our losses.
At the end of the day, it is still the responsibility of the fleet manager to manage his own risks and his suppliers properly. If they don't, the extra work involved negates the perceived benefits of paying a fuel card supplier to do it for you.
There are salutary lessons to be learnt as a result of this situation. Carry out your own risk management checks and ensure your suppliers are doing what they are paid to do.

A D Burkes
Fleet Consultancy Services

March 10, 2004

Play your cards right in the forecourt fuel lottery

Sir – Your letter entitled 'Time to get tough on fuel card abuse' (see below February 26) made interesting reading and highlighted a number of issues that should no longer represent a problem if you choose the right fuel card supplier.
Getting accurate mileage readings is indeed a major administration nightmare for any fleet manager and fraudulent drawings is an even bigger and more costly issue, but there are solutions out there.
It is, of course, a company policy issue to make sure that mileage is recorded as accurately as possible and to ensure the security of its fuel. However, this is often more difficult to achieve in reality.
To combat both problems, CH Jones offers the solution through its Keyfuels and Diesel Direct fuel cards. Both brands offer PIN protection and OASIS smart card technology – making them, we believe, the most secure fuel cards available.
With regards to combating fraud, each card has 'business rules' that are embedded within the smart chip, enabling the fleet manager to define refuelling criteria such as valid days and times to allow drawings, maximum single fill limits, daily and weekly maximum fuelling limits and limits on PIN entries.
These rules can be set for individual cards or vehicles and significantly reduce the opportunity for fraudulent fuel drawings.

Chris Welsh
Chief executive, CH Jones

Abuses exaggerated

Sir – The number of drivers who misuse fuel cards is actually tiny and it is simply untrue to say that 'fuel card abuse' costs businesses millions of pounds a year as stated in 'Time to get tough on fuel card abuse' (Fleet NewsNet, February 26).
In fact, fuel cards are still by far the most secure and controlled means of managing fleet fuel because they restrict purchases to fuel alone and provide fleet managers with a full audit trail of dates, locations, prices and volumes.
What is true is that fuel remains the Cinderella of purchasing in many organisations. They will cost-manage every other resource, from machinery to paperclips, down to fractions of a penny per item but rely entirely on employees to buy road fuels at £40 to £50 per transaction.
As we highlighted a few weeks ago, drivers who buy fuel on motorways typically pay £5 per tankful more than at low-cost sites such as supermarkets. It is this kind of unnecessary expense, not the frankly mythical problem of 'fuel card abuse', that costs businesses millions of pounds.
As for the letter-writer's specific allegation about forecourt cashiers not recording mileages, in our experience it is more often the case that drivers do not bother to provide their mileage when asked – however, the fleet manager only hears the driver's side of the story.
Enforcing the discipline of keeping full mileage records is an important fleet management responsibility, administratively, financially and from a safety perspective. Fuel cards are primarily a cost management tool, with a useful additional facility for recording mileages. However, they are not a substitute for proper mileage record-keeping.

Teresa Maynard,
Head of fuel, Castle Fuel Cards, Blackthorn, Oxfordshire

Why fuel cards work

Sir – I read with interest the letter 'Time to get tough on fuel card abuse' (Fleet NewsNet, February 26). The writer is correct in saying that fleets need a policy to prevent inaccurate vehicle mileage and registration capture. Drivers should take responsibility for checking registrations and mileages are keyed in correctly when they fill up, but in the absence of a clear company fuel policy, there is always the chance that they won't bother.
It is also true that there is a significant issue at stake here – accurate mileage capture is vital not just for fuel usage but also for cash-for-car schemes and to manage companies' duty-of-care responsibilities.
The industry is moving towards more sophisticated automated methods, such as onboard mileage readers and smart fuel cards that capture odometer readings. But for now fuel cards remain the best method of managing fuel costs and dealing with purchasing abuse. AllStar, for example, uses online authorisation to validate purchases at point of sale and exception reporting to crack down on misuse – such as drivers filling up a second car with the same card.
Fuel cards are far more effective than company credit cards and pay and reclaim systems in managing mileage counts and registration data.

Janet Eastwood
Head of product management (fuel), Arval PHH

Check congestion charge demands

Sir – Further to your correspondent's problems with the congestion charge (Fleet NewsNet, February 26), I hate paying bills, so when I receive the monthly paperwork from Transport for London (TfL), I always check it because they have had problems with their cameras.
This month I had quite a lot of contravention charges for vehicles entering the zone without notification.
As usual, I chased up the managers responsible for these alleged actions. Lo and behold, one of our drivers, who had no less than four contraventions against him, pointed out that he had not entered the area for over two months. In fact on one occasion he had been on holiday and on another the car was off the road in the local garage.
I immediately rang TfL and requested they check their records. I was asked what make, model and colour the vehicle was, and on looking at the image on the screen the lady informed me that the pictures taken were at an angle so the camera had taken a 'partial plate'.
Apparently, when this happens the computer scans its memory bank and applies the charge to the plate that resembles the partial one closest to it. Fleet managers beware.

Ann Dukanovic
Fleet manager, Kaba Door Systems, Telford

The right ratio

Sir – Bill Long's letter 'Modern cars aren't made to go slowly' (Fleet NewsNet, February 26) made me smile. No doubt he genuinely reflects the thoughts of many drivers when he says that 'a lot of modern cars are a struggle to keep below 30mph'. The problem is that drivers often feels they 'should' be in fourth gear. The answer is to use a lower gear.
Yes, modern cars do have different gear ratios and more powerful engines, but the concept of 'choose your speed first, then select the gear for that speed' remains valid.

Details provided

Charity thank you

Sir – I would like to thank you and your colleagues for their support and the donation of £100 you sent to Ben after your company did not send Christmas cards. Best wishes and many thanks once again to all our friends at Fleet News.

Judr Semadeni
Ben, Sunninghill, Berks

February 26, 2004

Time to get tough to stop fuel card abuse

Sir – As someone who inherited a badly run fleet, I have been working through various supply and service issues to try to improve safety and efficiency.
One area that I am continuing to struggle with is fuel cards. With only some 150 cards (comparatively small compared to the size of, say, any national courier service), this is something that remains a full-time job.
All our cards have the name and registration of the card owner. My gripe is that while we go to such lengths to sort cost centres and identification of individual cards, garages still fail to record registrations and mileages correctly, if at all.
Even when drivers offer mileages, I have even been made aware of garages claiming that they cannot enter the mileage as the transaction has gone too far.
Because fuel card suppliers don't own the garages, even if you kick up a fuss the appeal process is lengthy and usually results in nothing being done.
On the one hand, I see that this is a company policy issue. Drivers should be fined if they do not supply their mileages on all purchases, and this is something I am considering proposing.
Also, there have been cases in the past of people filling up a second car but telling the garage to use the registration detailed on the card. The only way I see to check such flaws is a lengthy process of working out average mileage per vehicle and watching for fluctuations. However, for privately-owned vehicles I have no way of checking whether this mileage adds up or not. In short, I am frustrated by the fact that some garage employees who can't be bothered to record such details correctly are causing fleet managers so much extra work and hassle.
Fuel card abuse costs businesses millions of pounds every year. I am astounded that I cannot find a smart card scheme on the market. I class fuel card misuse on a par with credit card fraud.
Or is the real issue here the fact that the fuel card companies make so much profit from such individuals exploiting the loopholes in the system that they are not prepared to offer us a secure service which would result in their sales drastically depleting overnight?
I live in hope that a company does or will exist that will see the huge potential in the market here.
Advice and recommendations welcome!

Details supplied

Modern cars aren't made to go slowly

Sir – I write regarding the recent speed camera debate. Isn't it time someone had a word with the car manufacturers? Cars are getting faster and faster. For example, a new 1.6-litre car is now as fast as an old Golf 2.0 GTi.
I remember a time when all cars would sit at 30mph in fourth gear. Some would even tootle along in fifth. Nowadays, a lot of modern cars are a struggle to keep below 30mph. Before you ask, I'm only 30 years old in May!

Bill Long
Customer services, LloydsTSB autolease

How to dispose of abandoned vehicles

Sir – The current confusion over who is ultimately responsible for the disposal of abandoned vehicles is not helpful.
A new report by the House of Commons Environment Select Committee criticises the Government's handling of the End of Life Vehicles Directive (ELV). We support the criticism levelled at the Government by the Environment Select Committee, and their call for a well-organised and funded local authority system for the collection and disposal of abandoned vehicles.
Without a scheme with some substance, this situation could degenerate further, leaving retail motor sector businesses to bear the cost of disposal alone. At the fringes of the market, we are already seeing the abandonment of vehicles at service and repair workshops, bodyshops and auctions. Vehicles that turn out to be too expensive to repair, or are not sold at auction, are never collected by their owners. The ability to track down vehicle owners depends on the accuracy of the records held by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). These details often get less accurate as cars age, so the last owner of any car is always the hardest to trace.

Matthew Carrington
Chief executive, Retail Motor Industry Federation (RMI)

Colourful way to stop fill-up errors

Sir – It was heartening to read your article in this week's Fleet News that petrol retailers are embarking upon standard nozzle colours for the delivery of petrol.
Certainly, car manufacturers should be involved in this scheme. A similar colour coded to the petrol tank pipe of cars would go far in eradicating the errors of differing fuel types being put into cars.
Surely a black filler tank pipe would match up to a similar black fuel type at the petrol station ie diesel engine to diesel fuel – et voila! problem solved. The cost implications for the car manufacturers, I suspect, would be minimal. Here's hoping.

Philip O'Mahoney
Financial controller, distinction-systems.co.uk

Motoring taxation: let's get it right

Sir – I enjoy nothing more than a good 'knock-about' and the debate about whether VED should be scrapped and included in the price of fuel at the pump seems to be shaping up nicely. However, we need to get a couple of points straight.
VED does not raise £42 billion per year – it raises slightly less than £5 billion. The figure of £42 billion is, or rather was, the official estimate of receipts from all motoring taxation and as of September 2003, the figure now stands at £43.8 billion, £23 billion of which is raised in fuel duty and a further £3.8 billion in VAT on fuel. Each and every litre of diesel or petrol we put into our tanks contributes 55.35 pence in fuel duty and VAT on the duty, which leaves just 21 pence per litre to cover all the costs from oil well to petrol station and makes a litre of unleaded at 76.9 pence seem something of a bargain.

Kevin Delaney
RAC Foundation

Help the Transport Plan find its wheels

Sir – The road network is the artery upon which economic life depends for adequate flow rates – yet its use produces pollution.
Tolls are about reducing pollution because they reduce the causes of pollution. Let us all co-operate to make city air cleaner by adopting Euro IV-compliant engines and seeking out options to rescue the 10-year Transport Plan that seems to have lost its wheels.
Why not start with rental companies providing pool cars that can be rented at evenings and weekends by staff?

David R. Williams
VRS Europe

Unnecessary stress of travel-to-work times

Sir – I am employed as a national accounts executive for a global, household brand company.
As a company car driver, I am concerned at the apparent lack of guidelines regarding hours spent and distances covered behind the wheel, as recently highlighted in Fleet News.
Most companies who employ sales-related company car drivers seem happy to allow their executives to be home-based and only see the need to visit the office for specific meetings or on an 'as required' basis.
I feel my company has an apparent disregard for the potential dangers such staff face when they have to attend the office regularly, irrespective of geographic location and to work 9am-5.30pm in the office. Personnel who live beyond a certain distance from the office are subject to extended driving times and additional stress.
I would be interested to hear if there are specific guidelines regarding employers' responsibilities to ensure the health and safety of company car drivers and if such guidelines limit the number of hours and distances executives are expected to travel within a given period.
I have to be in the office two to three times per week yet live more than 120 miles away. This constitutes a home start time of 6am, a driving time of two-and-a-half to three hours, an eight-hour day and a further two-and-a-half hours to return home at 7.30-8pm in the evening.
On a regular, weekly basis, I cover more than 1,000 miles, 50% of which are journeys to and from the office and for most of which there is no specific reason. On occasions, I have experienced excessive tiredness and stress but, like my colleagues, am strictly forbidden to 'work from home'.
I feel this is an unnecessary and dangerous practice on the part of the company and am keen to know if it is in breach of Government guidelines. Obviously, the company I work for has a grievance procedure in place but the line manager(s) to whom my concerns would be addressed are the people responsible for encouraging such an archaic and potentially hazardous practice.
I would be grateful if any readers could advise me on any further action I could take in regard to this matter.

Name and address supplied

'Corner shop' theory no longer a safe bet

Sir – Colin Tourick's letter about the deftness of smaller contract hire players winning deals from under the noses of bigger players (Fleet NewsNet, February 19) took me back to the times of corner shops and shopkeepers with folded arms taking the time to find out what we wanted.
But this type of business outlet hasn't shown strong signs of survival since the Second World War. The corner shop, and the mentality that went with it, started to disappear when the true costs of running it became apparent to proprietors and customers.
Bigger players now dominate the contract hire market. They are the Goliaths to local Davids. Tourick would have us believe the Davids are winning because they are fleet of foot (excuse the pun). Their managing directors get out there and win business rather than gaining the buying power to get costs down and service levels up.
Would it be fair to say that in the light of industry consolidation, having a fleet with a small player is a long-term safe bet?
The success of my own company has been through organic growth, not acquisition. Acquisitions are painful for all parties. Fleet managers who choose the small option should bear this in mind. Because we have 120,000 cars, we can get close to customers, invest in systems, invest in service and most of all invest in people.
Take another look at Goliath – you'll find he's not all bad.

Peter Knights
General Manager of Communications Lex Vehicle Leasing

No return route from car registration error

Sir – If you want to follow up your comment piece (Fleet News, February 26) with a real life case study about congestion charging, I am the victim of the charge organiser's customer service department.
I paid two days' charge but gave the wrong registration number in error. I was told at the time that the car wasn't registered with the DVLA but was asked if it was fairly new. I said it was, so we proceeded. When I got back to the office the next day, I received a receipt by email and replied, pointing out my error, offering to pay again. I got an automated response saying nothing could be changed or paid retrospectively. I was told to wait for the penalty and appeal. I wrote and faxed the company with an explanation and copies of the receipt but was told it could not action a fax.
I was then told as I wasn't the registered keeper I'd need a letter of authorisation from my leasing company. I asked if there was any way to pay this prior to lots of paperwork and penalties being generated and was told no. The upshot is a bill exceeding £120 for two days' charging and an admin fee from the leasing company.

Simon Howard
Commercial director, B2B, Emap Automotive

February 16, 2004

TfL staff no help at all

Sir – I would be interested to learn of other companies' dealings with Transport for London for the congestion charge.
As a company located just outside of London, with a fleet of vehicles within the zone every day, we have had to correspond with them regularly and I have to state that it is the most frustrating exercise I have ever had to undertake.
If you manage to contact them by phone, you will be told a different interpretation every time by their poorly-trained staff.
If you email a complaint, I am sure they do not read them, but just send a standard letter or mail basically saying no to anything. Is there a controlling authority that can be contacted to register these complaints – perhaps you can suggest anyone?
I believe wholeheartedly in the concept of controlling the influx of traffic within inner London to stem exhaust emissions, and that the only method of achieving this aim is to charge for entry. But as a company paying upwards of £15,000 a year for the privilege of driving within the zone, we feel we deserve an easier method of contact to air any complaints or queries. I would welcome any suggestions or comments.

Mick Holderness
Fleet manager, Apex Lifts

Don't always give juniors small cars

Sir – The article 'Drivers back company cars – at any tax cost' (Fleet NewsNet, January 29), about fleet drivers being reluctant to downgrade to smaller, cheaper vehicles, once again raises the question of how well employers manage occupational road risk.
If people are travelling long distances by car in their jobs, it may be highly inappropriate for them to be using small vehicles, which could possibly lead to fatigue.
Company vehicles should be chosen not for tax reasons but for how well they are suited to the driver and his or her work needs. Because someone is in a relatively junior post, it should not automatically mean that he/she is given the smallest car. A small car might even be dangerous if someone is expected to carry a lot of equipment. The car is a tool and for safety reasons it is vital that employees are given the correct tools for the job.
RoSPA's leaflet 'Choosing Safer Vehicles' can be downloaded from the advice and information area in the road safety section of Head of Driver and Fleet Solutions, Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA)

Smaller players beat big boys to win deals

Sir – I have done a lot of work with smaller contract hire companies recently. It is clear to me that, far from suffering at the hands of the bigger players, the smaller contract hire companies are continuing to win deals from under the noses of the big boys.
Partly this is because the small players tend to concentrate on small niches in the market and to serve these very well. It is also because the smaller players are more credible at the point of sale – usually their owners or managing directors pitch for new business, rather than a big-company salesman. But the main reason is that many fleet managers simply don't believe that they get a better service from a bigger contract hire company.

Colin Tourick
Management consultant

New FSA rules could affect your business

Sir – As I hope you are already aware, the Government has decided that the sale of general insurance products will be regulated from January 14, 2005. This is necessary for the UK to comply with European legislation, particularly the Insurance Mediation Directive (IMD). We believe many of your readers sell accidental damage, collision waiver and vehicle insurance and this important change to the law will therefore affect them.
In particular, they will need to comply with requirements laid down by the Financial Services Authority in order to continue doing this business – otherwise, they will be committing a criminal offence.
Reaching the thousands of businesses – such as your readers – that sell general insurance as an adjunct to their main business is a huge task. Anyone affected must be ready in time for the start of regulation on January 14, 2005. Find relevant, impartial information about forthcoming regulation on our website at Sarah Wilson
Director, High Street Firms, Financial Services Authority

February 11, 2004

Concern over takeovers in leasing world

Sir – I read with great interest your article 'Leasing moves will benefit small firms' (Fleet NewsNet, January 29). A little over 12 months ago I wrote to Fleet News expressing concern about what was happening in the fleet world.
At the time, CitiCapital had just exited and we were seeing the beginnings of a major consolidation phase spearheaded by HBOS merging its Godfrey Davis Fleet Management business with its Bank of Scotland Fleet Management operation.
Back then, I predicted an industry dominated by acquisitions and mergers and made some potentially worrying predictions about what this could mean for fleet customers in terms of fleet provider options and the dangers of a monopolised market.
A degree of mergers and acquisitions is never a bad thing – it is often the quickest and easiest way for a successful business to grow. But what we are seeing is in a whole other league and my concerns are starting to be realised. It won't be long now before the four largest fleet providers in the country handle over 50% of all vehicles managed (last year's FN50 already showed this figure at more than 35%).
As companies grow, it becomes harder to maintain that personal touch, though the largest fleet providers would argue, rightly, that growth does not mean a reduction in customer service.
But how many times have we heard this from rapidly-swelling UK companies, in all sectors, only to read a never-ending barrage of negative press where customers have been let down.
I think your article is quite right and we will start to see some quite large companies and many medium-sized businesses looking towards smaller fleet providers where they can expect a more personal service.
Although good news for smaller, customer-focused providers, what will this mean for the industry longer-term? The more successful, smaller providers may pick up clients as a result of consolidation but will this only witness further mergers and hostile takeovers once they get beyond a certain size?
Many markets are characterised by a small number of super-companies and a raft of smaller providers with no middle ground to speak of and we often see the ability of the super-company to keep smaller providers in their place.
Many of the largest fleet providers are owned and driven by huge financial institutions which already operate in a market that optimises this structure and constantly comes in for criticism from consumer associations and Government investigations. Let us hope the world of fleet has not already progressed too far along the same path.

Tony Donnelly
Managing director, Goodwood Fleet Management, Chichester, W Sussex

Not about speed – it's greed

Sir – I am totally disgusted at the way the police are extracting money from easy-target motorists.
The mobile camera units make my blood boil. In Nottingham, I've seen them hiding away between trees on London Road (January 12) and cunningly positioned in front of the QMC Hospital on Clifton Boulevard (January 24).
The police call them safety cameras and they like to call the areas in which they operate accident blackspots. They can dress it up how they like, but the truth is that they are speed cameras and revenue-collecting hotspots. This has nothing to do with safety.
If the ring road in front of the hospital is an accident blackspot, then why were the overhead speed cameras along the whole of the ring road not extended to there too?
One can only presume it was left like this so that mobile speed camera units can catch the unsuspecting motorist, who has had to endure a long tedious 40mph section and who starts to build up speed ready for the 70mph section a few hundred metres ahead.
Is it any wonder then that there was a person on the ring road (January 24) near the hospital holding up a large sign saying 'speed trap'? As I passed this person, people were beeping and applauding.
I now hear that speeding offence fixed-penalty points will reduce from three to two. Would that be to enable an extra 50% more revenue to be collected from the motorist before they lose their licence, I wonder?
And then of course there's this extra £5 that is going to be slapped on to every £60 speeding fine to pay for victims of crime. What about getting the real criminals to pay for the victims of crime?
The police are losing the respect of law-abiding citizens. If they want to go after motoring offences, then go for joy-riders, road tax dodgers, drunk drivers and people without a driving licence and insurance.
They are the real danger and menace on our roads, not the law-abiding motorists who happen to let their speed creep just over the limit.

Alan Phillips
Armitages Pet Products

Rentals are the sure way to safe company driving

Sir – Having read your article 'Daily rental helps ease health and safety fears' (Fleet NewsNet, January 15), I am in no doubt that the best way to ensure employee safety while driving on company-related business is to use hire cars as opposed to privately-owned vehicles.
As an industry, we are aware of the apprehension fleet managers have about putting their employees in unfamiliar vehicles. And they are right to worry, as they can be held responsible if anything goes wrong.
Rental companies can give fleet managers peace of mind, as cars they rent comply with Government safety standards. Privately-owned vehicles carry no such guarantee. The responsibility of employer duty of care cannot be neglected. The potential dangers and liabilities are too great. Fleet managers want peace of mind that their employees are comfortable driving safe vehicles. Rental companies can offer that peace of mind to all parties.

Don Moore
Vice president sales, UK & Ireland, Enterprise Rent-A-Car

Cameras a cash cow

Sir – Speed cameras have become a cash cow for local authorities and the government and the majority are installed at sites which have had no fatalities or are not blackspots.
A recent survey published in a Sunday paper stated that 4,000 of the 5,000 cameras did not meet the installation criteria of three to four fatalities along that stretch. The Government also admitted they did not know where all the cameras were sited as local authorities are now managing their own cameras.
The British motorist is badgered to a point where their jobs are at stake due to losing their driving licences, stress levels are increased by road restrictions like speed cushions, road humps, speed tables, one-way roads, no entry roads, pedestrian crossings, bus lanes and contraflows.
The motorists in this country suffer the worst conditions of taxing, fines, congestion and poor public transport.
I personally do not use a camera detector and do not condone speeding, but do agree on their use. Anything that helps towards a safer journey is better than being fined and ending up losing one's licence and employment.
These organisations should also look at the repercussions of losing a licence, which could mean no job and even driving the vehicle without a license and insurance.

Michael Menezes
Assistant fleet manager, Wandsworth City Council

January 21, 2004

A simple solution to the problem of phone drivers

Sir – The fears expressed in your article 'Mobile ban sparks a new safety crisis' (Fleet NewsNet January 15) that the ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving is causing a safety crisis would be eradicated if drivers adopted the simple habit of switching off their mobile phones as soon as they get into their vehicles.
By doing this they would not be aware of incoming calls and would not be tempted to take them, either while on the move or, as suggested in the article, by pulling over suddenly to the side of the road and endangering other motorists.
This is an education issue and although it may take a while to persuade all private drivers to do this, there should be no excuse for the professionals.
Fleet managers have a duty of care to their drivers and a responsibility to other road users that their employees are not a danger on the roads.
All businesses and organisations should have a policy that drivers – whether using hand-held or hands-free sets – should switch off their phones before starting the engine and should not turn them on again until they are parked safely.
It should be a disciplinary offence to break this rule because, sadly, for many the threat of losing their job carries more weight than the risk of killing someone. Blaming the law is missing the point. It is bad driving by irresponsible motorists that is causing the problem, not the legislation. They seem to think that their phone call is more important than someone's life.
Fleet News quite rightly points out in its Comment column: 'the fleet manager has the ability to make a difference: to remind and educate their drivers and help to save lives'.
For those needing help with this, the subject will be addressed at RoSPA's Focusing on Performance Seminar in Mold on February 18.

Charles Davis
Head of driver and fleet solutions, The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA)

Sir – I agree that drivers stopping with little or no warning in order to answer a mobile phone can be at the very least annoying and, at worst, extremely dangerous. In order to counteract this new phenomenon, we have been advising all the drivers that attend our courses to take the precaution of consciously increasing their normal safety margins by a small amount until the new distances become more natural.
Thus, should the driver in front brake sharply in order to answer their mobile phone, there should be no need for the driver behind to take evasive action.
This not only has worked during the training, but it has also led to a more relaxed feeling among our drivers when they realise that not only has it made no difference to their journey times, but that the driver behind them normally responds by giving them a little bit of extra space and, to their surprise, nobody else rushes to fill the little bit of extra road space that they have created.
As with most matters, the solution is nearly always in our own hands.

Salvatore Cassar
Ceaser's Road Training, Cardiff

Road tax fines: clarification on law is needed

Sir – There should be a way of penalising people for the late renewal of road tax ('Preparation warning over new VED rules', Fleet NewsNet January 8). However, the £80 fine is excessive and is another way of getting the normally complying public to fund the relatively few, but intentional, law-breakers.
There is a need for a reliable method of notification of vehicle details to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, but such a heavy fine is not the way to go about it. Is the Government saying that this is also the fine for not completing a statutory off road notification (SORN) declaration? Currently it is £25, but how can they differentiate between not taxing the vehicle in time and not completing a SORN declaration in time?
I have a car in use for only the summer months of the year and submit a SORN declaration when the tax expires. If I don't renew the SORN after the 12 month duration limit, will I receive a fine of £25 or £80?

Andrew Titterton
Application engineer, Synatel Instrumentation

January 14, 2004

Many problems - but the solutions are not so easy

Sir – I believe 2004 will present another set of 'challenges' as does every year in fleet management. However, the last year was something of a wake-up call in respect of management responsibilities.
Although these responsibilities have always been there, not everyone seemed to realise this and a lot less (fortunately) actually became aware through legal proceedings.
Why should fleet managers have to 'call for stringent new safety laws' (Fleet News December 11, 2003) when it is obvious they are well aware there is a potential problem by this very act? On the positive side I don't think I would have too much trouble finding a few fleets with established procedures based on the seven 'new laws' mentioned.
And there might even be some that have incorporated them all.
The point is a good 'fleet manager' has to be increasingly pro-active in recognising and dealing with problems, ideally before they arise, because waiting until legislation makes it necessary reduces the job to a simple administration function.
However, if you think legislation helps define the fleet management position, think again.
Since the recent mobile phone regulations came into effect, a new driving danger has arisen. It cannot be a coincidence that the number of times I have had to take avoiding action because drivers have unexpectedly stopped at the side of the road to take a phone call has suddenly increased.
Although I don't doubt they were 'legally' parked, the fact is that any car stopped at the side of the road (and not actually off the carriageway) presents a hazard.
So should the fleet manager take things a bit further by introducing rules that say drivers must find a lay-by or other safe place to park before using the phone?
Sadly, there was a fatal accident I heard of that involved a car stopping in just such circumstances. The overtaking vehicles got into a muddle and the accident happened, even though the mobile phone user's vehicle was legally parked.
So there is a still a very real danger in using a mobile phone in apparently legal circumstances.
Another issue is where do we stop when considering health and safety? I was contacted recently by a company that we had helped. As a result, the company had chosen to pass on some of the benefits to its drivers in the form of upgrading the vehicle choice list.
This had enabled one driver to pick a very desirable model of car. Unfortunately he lived in an area with a lot of car crime and did not have a garage.
On the third attempted burglary at his house, the police said that having that particular type of car parked outside was 'asking for trouble'.
Apparently many people still leave their spare set of car keys in a drawer and that was probably what the thieves were after.
Then the driver heard of someone similar being confronted by an armed robber on the doorstep demanding the car keys. He now says having that vehicle is a dangerous liability and wants to hand it back (three months into the lease).
What should the fleet manager do? He has certainly been made aware of a safety issue concerning a company vehicle so should this danger have been pointed out to the driver at the time of choosing?

Bill Pinkney
Transport Consultancy Services, Lincolnshire

How fleets are coping with volatile times

Sir – I read with interest the results of your survey about the Top 10 issues facing fleet managers in 2004 (Fleet NewsNet January 2).
This reflected closely the results of our own internal research compiled from customer visit reports, which are completed during every visit by a cfc account manager to a potential or existing customer and are designed to allow us to track developing industry trends.
Our final survey for 2003 showed that risk management and congestion charging were the two subjects that most worried fleet managers. Other areas highlighted included fleet policy changes, data control, car allowance schemes and the involvement of other departments in running the fleet.
Different topics were highlighted by fleet managers on the visits over the course of 2003. For example, risk management grew consistently as a hot topic, while issues like vehicle acquisition and telematics fell off the list completely as the year progressed.
We believe that the past 12 months were another year of dramatic change for the fleet industry and that this year is likely to be at least as volatile, especially thanks to the huge increases in data which fleet managers are now having to cope with.

Jason Francis
Managing director, cfc solutions

January 7, 2004

New fines penalise law-abiding citizens

Sir – It is with great dismay that I have learned about the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency's latest style tactic to fleece the innocent, law-abiding motorist whose only crime is to perhaps be a little absent-minded.
As from the January 1 this year, a driver will be fined £80 if he or she is late in renewing a tax disc (not evading any duty I might add – just late) which apparently 'will help us to tackle vehicle crime'. What total utter rubbish. All the innocent law-abiding driver will be doing is subsidising those people who will continue to drive vehicles illegally. All fleet managers will see is a massive upsurge in the theft of number-plates, smashed windows and stolen tax discs – all at the expense of the law-abiding driver.
I have unfortunately had personal experience of this and have had to spend well over 12 months writing to various London Boroughs regarding parking fines incurred by an illegal 'clone' of one of our vehicles.
During December, I had two V11 forms on my desk for cars with tax discs that were due to expire on December 31.
All of the relevant documentation was in place, including the cheque, to tax these vehicles and the V11 form states 'the earliest date you can apply is the 15th day of the month of expiry'.
On the 15th, I dutifully went to my local post office to tax the cars, only to be told that they wouldn't have the new discs until the 18th – so I am already three days closer to receiving a fine due to the incompetence of somebody else.
With the Christmas break, I had booked a fortnight's holiday and therefore would not be able to visit the Post Office again until after the 31st. I have potentially earned, therefore, a £160 fine because the post office is incompetent and I wish to take a well-deserved holiday.

Andrew Pickering,
Fleet co-ordinator, T & S Stores

Van bulkheads should be fitted as standard

Sir – I read with interest your article in Fleet Van concerning health and safety issues for van fleet operators and, perhaps of more concern, the issue of liability. You are quite correct in your safety-related suggestions concerning specification levels on vans, but you have missed what is probably the most important item – bulkheads.
Many years ago, in the days of the old British Gas Corporation, we undertook trials at MIRA with a typical service engineer's van loaded with the normal consignment of tools. At a 30mph impact, the cab area became an extremely dangerous place to be with just a ply bulkhead fitted, with seemingly innocent items such as a vacuum cleaner becoming a missile. In fact, the cleaner came straight through the ply bulkhead and impaled itself into the nearside front bulkhead with such force, it had to be levered out in pieces after the impact. I have also seen many light vans involved in accidents where loads have ended up in the cab area. In terms of risk, this is probably the highest factor to consider in the event of an impact, as a likely cause of serious injury or even death to the occupants.
How much longer are we as a fleet industry going to have to wait before manufacturers include factory-fitted, metal bulkheads as standard in ALL vehicles? I am aware of the need for 'cab walk-through' for some fleet operators but by far the majority of users would welcome standard fit bulkheads to remove the concerns of employer liability in this area.
While they are at it, could manufacturers also fit a simple ply-lining to the rear load area of vans?
Such a low-cost item can have major cost benefits at disposal time, to avoid those hard to repair 'inside out dents' to vehicles. Such damage can mean the difference of up to £500 per vehicle loss in sale value at auction, as traders are extremely reluctant to buy hard-to-repair damage like this.
The light commercial vehicle user has for too long been the poor relation in terms of specification levels, when compared to cars. And considering many drivers spend their working lives in these vehicles, it is high time a minimum standard was established, taking account of such safety issues.

Dave Woods
Director, XBG Fleet Re-Marketing

Ed: We have covered the new emissions legislation in detail but for the official view, log on to the Vehicle Certification Authority website www.vca.gov.uk. If you look under emissions testing, there is a full explanation of Euro 111 and 1V standards.

Wednesday, September 3, 2003

Glovebox cameras save money

Sir – I have been with West Midlands Special Needs Transport for some three years now and during this time I have instigated many new procedures. One such procedure is the use of an accident box.
Contained within the box is a camera, along with other important items which assist the driver to deal with an accident.
The cameras are the disposable type with free processing and cost in the region of £6 each, although at this moment in time I am negotiating a deal where the camera costs only £4 with free processing.
The fleet is in the region of 230 vehicles, our insurance cost was very high and growing. Since the inception of the accident box and other procedures, our insurance bill has dropped dramatically.
I would say that we have managed to throw out all spurious claims and like your article suggests (£10 camera avoids £3,500 crash bill, Fleet NewsNet August 21), we have helped to reduce payouts from our insurance by proving that the damage was not as bad as described by the third party.
Not only that, but some of my drivers taken to court have been found not guilty because of the photographic evidence. We have also won claims cases in the county court.
I carry a camera in my own vehicle and can testify from personal knowledge that they do work and reduce time for payouts, etc.
I was stationary in a line of traffic when my car was hit in the rear, causing extensive damage to my car and injury to my wife and myself.
As I was carrying a camera in the car, the whole procedure took less than 10 months for our compensation and damage claims to be sorted.

Roy Steventon
Risk manager, West Midlands Special Needs Transport

Cameras a minimal cost

Sir – Regarding the article about glove box cameras. I would like to say they are an excellent idea and it forms part of our company's driving policy. Every vehicle in the fleet has one for just the very reasons outlined in the article. The cost is minimal but the potential savings could be huge.

Liz McCutcheon
Personnel department, Nevisprint

Driver eyesight testing 'essential'

Sir – Vanity, or denial that the years are catching up with us, frequently stand in the way of us accepting that the time has come for us to have our eyesight tested. For motorists, eyesight testing (and regular re-testing) is vitally important and although for most people there is a cost attached, surely it is a small price to pay to ensure that our own safety and the safety of others on the roads is not being unnecessarily compromised?
With the increasing focus on corporate responsibility, fleet operators should consider the introduction of a rolling programme of eyesight testing for their employed drivers. All responsible employers already validate the status of an employee's driving licence and previous driving record as part of their recruitment process.
It would appear to be a very small leap to extend that process to seeking confirmation from an optician that a driver's eyesight meets the required legal standards, thus ensuring they are allowed to drive on the road.

Jack Brownhill
Director of motor, Groupama Insurances

Tax benefits are being kept quiet

Sir – Following your article on the tax benefits of Euro IV-compliant diesels (Diesel drivers head for new car tax trap, Fleet NewsNet, August 28), I agree that car manufacturers are stangely quiet about what could translate to a 20% tax saving for company car drivers by moving into the 15% BIK tax band from 18%.
However, many providers of car tax calculators and information providers have been even slower to react.
We provide a list of all diesels meeting Euro IV standards, as well as vehicles likely to be, but I could name several calculators which still give the choice of petrol or diesel only, and the most popular consumer car magazine still uses 18% as the minimum level of CO2 tax on all diesels.

Rupert Russell
Director, www.Comcar.co.uk
Bristol

August 27, 2003

ECO concept is not a flawed option

Sir – Following your article on 'hastily conceived' car ownership schemes, I found myself agreeing with the sentiment of Tony Donnelly's comments, although I feel a number of his key points were questionable (Fleet NewsNet August 7).
Indeed, there have been a number of hastily conceived car ownership schemes rolled out, in most cases as a response to market forces that may have seen some lease suppliers lose ground to those who could provide alternative funding products.
However, if problems have arisen this is not because the concept is flawed, it stems from the haste that has resulted in poor implementation and processes that were not designed to support car ownership schemes.
Therefore, to say that accountants will be 'diving for cover' points an accusatory finger in the wrong direction. The fault lies squarely with the suppliers.
In addition, the architecture of these schemes only appears to exploit a 'tax loophole', because it avoids the payment of tax through an efficient use of tax-free payment mechanisms developed by the Inland Revenue.
But if we did not have the Approved Mileage Allowance Payments (AMAP) to assist us in calculating the tax-sheltering effect of business mileage, the alternative would have been a very complex calculation based on actual costs incurred when using a private car for business use.
The Government's recent update of AMAP rates suggests a commitment to support tax efficiency rather than attempting to close a loophole.
Tony Donnelly's comment that schemes are 'too complex and administratively cumbersome' is a generalisation. His accusation that these schemes are about 'exploitation for short-term gain' is also unfounded. The car ownership concept was devised 12 years ago by the original Whitechapel tax consultants and refined over the years by successive members of the team.
The original vision still has impact and, if anything, has more relevance than ever in today's tax environment. With organisations entering their third or fourth lifecycle, one can hardly claim that this alternative is short-term in nature.
Put simply – if your car ownership scheme isn't delivering the benefits you were promised then change to a supplier with the expertise and resources to make it work. A well-run car ownership scheme will save you money and strengthen the bond between employer and employee.
Tony Donnelly is right when he says people will be 'diving for cover' when this issue 'comes home to roost'. However, it will be the suppliers, not the accountants, looking for somewhere to hide.

Adam Trevaskus
Head of Whitechapel, Bury

Plate clampdown makes a mockery of the law

Sir – I was pleased to read in my local paper, the Kettering Evening Telegraph, that the police have at last got their priorities right in that they intend to prosecute the most evil of criminals – those who have altered their car number plates.
I'm sure the population of Northamptonshire is delighted. They would not want to see the police's meagre resources or taxpayers' money being wasted on trying to catch the hundreds, if not thousands, of drivers who drive without MoTs, without road tax, without insurance or without driving licences.
No, altered number plates are by far the most dangerous. I have written to Jimmy Tarbuck to warn him that if he drives through Northants in his Roller with 'COM1C' on his car rather than the correct 'COM 1C' then he is likely to be thrown in prison with all the other despicable, hardened criminals like him.
On a personal level, I would hate for these resources to be used to try to catch the thugs who mugged, beat up and hospitalised my son for £8 and a mobile phone. Or the villains who burgled and terrified my mother or the yobs who vandalised my car – no, those who have altered number plates should be caught first.
After all, the majority of these hideous people are law-abiding middle Englanders who move a letter or number one centimetre – how vile – it's a shame the death penalty has been repealed. It would also be totally unacceptable to use such resources to stop the decline in prosecutions for serious motoring offences such as dangerous driving. Those victims and families who have suffered following a death or serious injury as a result of altered number plates are at last able to sleep at night.
The police should stop listening to the politically correct vociferous minority inside and outside the service. The people of this country want two things and two things only – to feel safe in their homes and to feel safe in the street and they could not give a damn about 'altered number plates'.
I now know why the police tend to have large feet – it makes it easier for them to shoot themselves there.

B.R Matthews
Wilson Browne Solicitors, Kettering

Counting the cost of non-payment of fuel

Sir – I write in response to the letter from Richard Voyce asking why we don't scrap the tax disc and increase fuel duty instead (see below).
As a retailer of fuel, I have first-hand knowledge of the problems associated with pricing on fuel but, more importantly, there is a misconception that every member of the public actually pays for fuel.
It is ironic, but if customers are good enough to actually visit the shop to advise the cashier that they have no means of payment, they may be asked to leave their tax disc as collateral against payment. Inevitably, they have no valid road tax and rarely come back to pay.
The latest industry figures are not known to me, but to give you a sample across seven sites in the south east of England, the cost of fuel taken without payment is in excess of £30,000 per annum. If you average that across more than 10,000 sites in the UK, you can see the scale of the problem. Road licensing helps control testing on vehicles and keeps a tab on ownership. It is the only visible form of check for the police.

Details supplied
Via email

August 6, 2003

Why not get rid of tax discs and simply raise fuel duty instead?

SIR – I read with interest the article on purchasing three or four year tax discs (Fleet NewsNetJuly 31).
Forgive me if this has been covered before, but what I can't understand is why we bother with Vehicle Excise Duty at all. It seems such an antiquated system, an irritation for individuals and an administration nightmare for fleets.
Why not simply abolish VED and increase fuel duty?
If the duty were set to equate an average 10,000 miles per annum then at an average 30mpg this would be 1,500 litres of fuel a year, so an extra 10p duty per litre would give the Treasury the equivalent of a £150 tax disc.
Fleets and individuals driving more than 10,000 miles per annum would pay more duty, as they should, with light users paying a lot less. But surely the real benefit is that unlike road tax it cannot be avoided.
How much does it cost the Government to track down and prosecute people who don't purchase a tax disc?
I know at present you need to provide evidence of insurance (and MoT) to obtain a tax disc as some sort of check, but this hasn't stopped people driving around without insurance, MoT or a valid tax disc.
In addition, all road users would have to pay, not just British nationals, so all trucks and visitors to Britain would contribute to our roads as, at some point, they would have to fill up over here.

Richard Voyce
Via email

A&L report bears little resemblance to our experience

SIR – The report from the Alliance & Leicester 'Secondhand Car Market Collapses' certainly has headline grabbing content, but it bears little relation to our experience in 2003.
Demand has been exceptional throughout the year, from the nearly new market through to older, higher mileage vehicles.
Volume levels are ahead of 2002 and, if anything, prices are firming slightly against last year.
The Alliance & Leicester research, of course, is limited to price, as you might expect from a money-lender, and pays no attention to volume, model mix, condition or mileage which are actually the key price signifiers affecting the market place. We have reported a very buoyant half-year thanks to some exceptional demand from the motor trade. BCA has seen record conversion figures, unprecedented price levels and the fastest possible churn of 'cars to cash' for sellers.
The competition from professional buyers for stock resulted in vehicles routinely outperforming guide prices by some significant distance.
This high level of performance was most strongly seen in the two to four-year old fleet and contract hire sector, but even older higher mileage cars enjoyed a 'halo' effect when younger stock was not available at the 'right' price.
Our data – which represents a sample size of many tens of thousands of cars – shows that typical used prices are actually higher this year than last year. And remember, these are real cars sold for real money. Professional auction buyers in the wholesale market have been reflecting a consistent, strong retail demand for used cars, generated by low interest rates and a settled economy.
To say the used car market is collapsing is a misleading statement and it bears no relationship to what BCA, motor retailers and professional wholesalers have experienced over the last 18 months.

Tom Madden
Director, customer affairs, BCA

Cash savings are there for taking

SIR – Following your article 'Firms save cash' (Fleet NewsNet July 3), I felt further explanation of our product was needed.
With the ever-increasing number of companies ignoring this advice and offering a cash allowance in lieu of the company car and an increasing number of employees taking up the option, it makes sense that The Miles Consultancy has spent the last three years perfecting its unique 'Cash Allowance Scheme' (CAS).
Since April 2002, CAS has saved The Miles Consultancy's customers more than £8 million and offers an advance corporate manslaughter protection as part of the scheme. With an implementation timescale of under a month and return on investment within six weeks, our customer base is growing at a rate of knots. Now we are striving not only to increase our blue chip customer base but also to encourage more small cash fleets too.
Currently, if a company provides a higher rate tax-payer with a cash allowance of £5,000 per annum, the cost to the company after Class 1A National Insurance contributions is £5,640. The employee only receives £2,950 after tax and National Insurance. CAS enables the gap between these two figures to be reduced and in some cases eliminated completely.

Paul Evans
Commercial director, The Miles Consultancy

July 30, 2003

Little-known holiday extra

Sir – Having just read about VE103s forms in your Fleet Forum section (VE103 form is a necessity when driving abroad, I am writing to let you know of my experiences.
I manage a small fleet of 30 contract-hired cars that are all a benefit-in-kind. I had never heard of VE103s until I read an article a couple of months ago that highlighted the problem.
I made enquiries with my leasing company and my account manager was also unaware of the requirement to carry VE103s when driving abroad. He made further enquiries with his administration department and they were also in the dark.
It was eventually confirmed that the documentation that had been supplied by them – a letter of authority and a copy of the V5 – was just not good enough.
It then took nearly two months to supply a sufficient number of VE103s to cover my drivers taking their cars to Europe this summer as they were out of print.
P.S. I find Fleet News essential reading. Without it, I'm not sure where I would get up-to-date information on all the changes that are happening in fleet management and the shift in emphasis on health and safety issues. Keep up the good work.

Lesley Collins
Fleet administrator, Veritas DGC, Crawley

Impartiality can save hire costs

Sir – It was enlightening to learn of the contempt that Marjory Flynn had for brokers and her clients (Fleet NewsNet July 3). Could it be that she saw brokers as people who knew leasing rates varied considerably and were exposing the differences?
I'm not rushing to the defence of brokers, but Marjory's transformation from contract hire representative to broker stems from the demise of the fleet manager, coupled with an increase in the number of companies that are prepared to outsource the daily management of their fleet to the very company providing the finance.
The unquestionable advantage of fleet managers is their independence and impartiality which enables them to provide a 'battle line' between their employer and supplier. Eliminate this line and costs could escalate.
We regularly compare monthly lease costs provided by a range of finance companies on behalf of our clients and have identified differences exceeding £200 per month for the same vehicle. Differences of £25 to £50 per month are commonplace, with the uncertainty of residual values usually being the principal cause.
The implications are considerable, but running a cost-effective fleet does not stop at 'brokering' a good monthly rate.
If most of the major banks and contract hire companies have set up broker divisions, they can't be independent. If they're not independent, how can fleet operators be sure they are getting a good deal? By employing a fleet manager?
Some years ago a divestment rule was introduced preventing Lloyds insurance brokers from providing underwriting services. Shouldn't contract hire brokers divest themselves from providing contract hire?

John Tipper
Managing director, Tipper Fleet Services

Time for firms to take fleet control

Sir – I am writing in response to the comments from Tony Donnelly, managing director of Goodwood Fleet Management (see below).
He must be one of few people to have positively identified business issues in relation to the heavy costs of fuels, risk and environmental management, and insurance, while balancing the need to make money within business boundaries.
Of the issues identified, businesses both large and small should endeavour to create policy documents when trying to manage their day-to-day activities, in addition to providing adequate resources.
How many companies give clear policies to fleet drivers on insurance, driver training, alcohol and drugs, use of mobile phones and so on? Surely it is now time for the industry to take heed and manage the issues highlighted correctly in the interests of the company, employees, suppliers, the general public and the environment. They can be managed – it is just about strategy and development.

Warren Fothergill
Quality systems & safety, health, environmental manager, J&A (International), Spilsby

Incorrect fitting can fail MoT

Sir – Stewart Whyte writes in his Fleet Forum column about incorrect fitting of asymmetric tyres.
Additionally, this is grounds for failure of the MoT test. The regulations state: 'Reason for Rejection: (f) a tyre not fitted in compliance with the manufacturer's sidewall instruction – e.g, an asymmetric tyre with a sidewall marked 'outer' fitted with the marking to the inner side of the wheel'.

Alistair White
Vehicle workshop manager, Eastleigh Borough Council

A huge array of cost-cutting ideas

Sir – Dug Brown is spot on when he calls on fleet managers to look into all the options available for cutting costs (Fleet NewsNet July 17).
He says he employed a consultant who recommended restricting the choice of their fleet to two vehicle manufacturers. There is a huge array of other cost-saving areas for fleet managers to consider. For example, free private fuel is still provided by so many companies. The question is why?
Fleet managers need to choose the right financial product because contract hire might be the most widely-used offering but it is definitely the wrong one for some cars and for some companies.
Companies need to understand how tax affects fleet costs, allow cars to be chosen from a fixed list, only use properly-calculated wholelife costs to select vehicles, concentrate buying power on a limited number of suppliers (cars, servicing, repairs, fast-fits, tyres) and so on.
It is a shame that so many fleets have yet to strike the right balance between meeting the needs of both the business and employees at the lowest possible cost.

Colin Tourick
Fleet management consultant

July 23, 2003

Warnings galore - but where are the resources to cope with them?

Sir – Is it just me or do issues in the world of fleet seem to be forming into a rather obvious pattern, pointing towards some very hard lessons ahead?
Fleet decision-makers asked to crack down on the hidden drink-drive culture, fleets warned over lax record-keeping, fleets warned that testing times are ahead as mobile driving ban looms and, it comes as no surprise, the data handled by UK fleets has multiplied 30 times over in the past 10 years. All this in one issue (Fleet NewsNet July 10).
With a Bill on corporate killing looming on the horizon, it is not surprising that Fleet News' training campaign has had a massive response.
New issues that the fleet manager should be aware of seem to appear on a weekly basis, on top of all the other issues that the fleet manager should already be addressing but, by his or her own admission, lacks the expertise and experience to act on. Yes, training is vital and now the whole issue has been dragged out into the open we can start to address it.
However, all the training in the world will not make a bit of difference unless there is a fundamental change in attitude from the business community as a whole. Companies must realise the importance of managing their fleets effectively and the vital role their fleet manager has to perform.
This doesn't just mean making sure he/she is fully trained but providing the resources and support to allow him/her to put this training into good effect. Unless your fleet manager can work 24/7 without coming up for air, he or she is going to need help and support, and lots of it.
Fleet management is one of the most significant areas of a business in terms of cost, risk, employee satisfaction and customer perception. It is time that businesses devoted the resources to it which it deserves.

Tony Donnelly Managing director, Goodwood Fleet Management, Chichester

Phones on move: there's no excuse

Sir – I write regarding your recent question about whether companies have firm policies on the use of hand-held mobile phones (Fleet NewsNet July 10). We advise drivers not to use the phone on the move if possible.
I personally welcome the proposed ban on using hand-held mobiles while driving – there is no excuse for it. Hands-free kits are so cheap these days, I fail to understand why people can afford to buy Mercedes-Benz and BMW cars but do not have hands-free kits fitted. However, you see it all too often.
It is not necessary these days to drill holes in the dashboard to fit them and there is no comparison between the degree of control achieved by using a hands-free kit and using the mobile in the hand.
I feel that it is irresponsible to use a hand-held mobile while driving and I would throw the book at anyone who did so.

Paul Adey
By email

Stop the bickering over green fuels

Sir – I find myself in agreement with Warren Fothergill when he says that we should go beyond the current hustling for position between the proponents of various fuel alternatives (Fleet NewsNet 17 July).
Sadly, up to now, this has not been the characteristic tone of the more enthusiastic advocates of some other alternative fuels and technologies, most notably the Institute for Public Policy Research, whose report prompted the article to which he refers. Their tactic seems to be simply to knock liquefied petroleum gas.
We believe there is a clear argument for the Government to continue its support for established fuel alternatives, while encouraging the development of other technologies.
Surely the last thing the fleet sector needs is the uncertainty generated by a spurious 'either/or' argument. It is in this spirit that we are preparing compelling arguments to Government and I hope that advocates of other alternative fuels will do likewise in the interests of the fleet sector as a whole.

Andrew Ford Corporate affairs manager, Calor Gas, Warwick

July 10, 2003

Why biodiesel is the real alternative

SIR – Further to your story 'Green fuel may lose support of UK fleets (Fleet NewsNet July 3) I would like to point out the realism of biodiesel as an alternative green fuel.
There are many distinguishing factors relating to exposure to air pollution from transport and one needs to look beyond contradictions of the bodies hustling for position within a potentially volatile and lucrative market and complete a full risk assessment on traffic-induced air pollution and the risks to the individual.
Why should biodiesel be considered for tax breaks alongside LPG and be pushed to the forefront of alternative energy?
As a fuel, biodiesel contributes virtually zero carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere as plants, having absorbed carbon dioxide while growing, act as an annual carbon sink.
Due to the oxygen content it is a very clean fuel, producing 50% fewer particulates than petrodiesel, together with less nitrogen and carbon monoxide by-products such as glycerol (from the manufacture of it) can be used in other commodities.
Cost is a great driver in today's society and therefore a great emphasis needs to be placed on the position individuals and companies, in addition to local authorities and governments, must take to push such a plan forward.
We should also place a great emphasis on corporate social responsibility. Biodiesel would mean no new vehicle technology as current diesel engines can run on this fuel, utilisation of set-aside and under-utilised land by the UK's agricultural sector and small capital investment for production plants.
Overall this needs to be led by the Government but supported by us, the fleet providers, drivers and associated organisations.

Warren Fothergill
Manager, J&A (International)

Industry has a role to play

SIR – Further to your article of July 3, I offer support to the view that we, as a collective industry with a key role to play in reducing the environmental impact of our operations, need to play an active part in planning how we will deliver these reductions.
It is possible that a move to a hydrogen economy may be an answer to our desire for sustainable mobility.
However, as your article states, this is some way off and there are many technological issues to be managed before we get there.
More immediate solutions are in place. We at Petroplus have a bio-diesel blend, Bio-Plus, that meets the requirements of some motor manufacturers.
We are working with Newcastle University and other industry partners to ensure that the well-to-wheel benefits of using renewable fuels in diesel are fully understood and demonstrably beneficial to our environment. This includes a number of well-advanced projects using the bi-products from bio-diesel production to useful effect, for example to generate electricity and steam.
It is the Government's role to assess the real value and viability of such projects and support environmentally-beneficial sustainable mobility projects appropriately. To this end, it is up to industry to lead the drive and advise Government accurately, as we learn more and more in this exciting and challenging area.

Ian Waller
Technical services manager, Petroplus Refining and Marketing

Fleet chiefs worth their weight in gold

Sir – I unreservedly agree with Jeremy Hay's comments (Fleet NewsNet June 26) regarding the tunnel vision that belies numerous organisations when it comes to investment in fleet expertise.
Sadly I think that if businesses were on the fence regarding safety it would actually be a step forward, as I'm not sure they have even climbed up one side.
It is all too easy to see a tangible cost affecting profit. It is more difficult to illustrate a cost that has been prevented from occurring. Comparing the investment required against the potential expenditure saved is one exercise that needs to be understood and taken seriously by all businesses. This comparison is the largest single barrier to investment in training.
Were organisations to understand fleet issues fully, the role of the fleet manager would become a key one and not just the first expendable position when cost reduction exercises are performed or one that is burdened by ever increasing financial restrictions. A well-trained, well-informed fleet manager should be a coveted, highly regarded member of any organisation that relies on its transport for its success.

Alan Peace
Independent fleet professional, Norwich

July 3, 2003

Relying on licence checks is a Mickey Mouse way of training

Sir – I write regarding a recent article on giving advice in training drivers (Fleet NewsNet June 19).
It states that for many fleets, simply checking that employees who may be required to drive actually hold a valid driver's licence meets in full the risk assessment/risk management concept, especially if backed by a good record on the insurance claims front.
I cannot see how advocating a Mickey Mouse approach to risk assessment such as merely checking driving licences can be seen as being adequate.
When asked at a recent seminar of fleet managers how many were checking driving licences almost all hands went up out of about 100 people in the audience. When asked how many had incorporated the right to check licences in the employee's contract of employment only six hands went up.
There are many business reasons for a proper risk assessment including audit trails, cost reduction, best practice and focusing the business on saving lives. This takes a little more complexity than checking driving licences.
The professional risk assessment companies provide indemnity to their clients against a visit from the police, insurance company and press after an accident on the basis they have implemented an audit trail.
Would your author like to offer the same indemnity for a company that has merely checked driving licences? If so I will gladly provide him with a list of people prepared to take the risk.

Jeremy Hay
Director, Risk Answers

Part-used leasing is proving to be in demand

Sir – In response to a question in Helplines (Business has closed but my leased cars remain) it was suggested that 'most finance agreements explicitly prohibit any forms of contract assignment' (Fleet NewsNet June 12).
It was also said that 'the people interested in cheaper part-used lease cars are people the finance companies do not necessarily want to deal with'. We have been operating just such a reassignment service under the brand name Transfer Contracts for three years now and have found the contrary to be true in both cases.
Virtually all of the finance companies we have dealt with have a specific policy (and in some cases a department) to cover this aspect of business.
We only offer our service with the full co-operation of the finance companies and their underwriting teams and we have a 95% acceptance rate for this type of business.

Mike Lloyd
Managing director, Transfer Contracts

Ready, willing and still able to work

Sir – I was fascinated to read the Helpline 'Your first steps into fleet management' (Fleet NewsNet June 12).
At the end of last year the company for which I worked as fleet executive was bought by a competitor and all the office staff made redundant.
Since that date I have been actively seeking another post where my skills can be put to good effect and was surprised to see the author, Stewart Whyte, saying: 'A glance at the Fleet News recruitment pages, or on Fleet NewsNet, indicates that there is a steady churn for good people in this area'.
Every week I turn straight to the recruitment pages but have yet to find anything suitable. Perhaps the fact that I live in the south is an issue. I'm not out of work as I have been able to find a fleet administrative job with a large local organisation. However, I would love to be able to put all my skills and knowledge to work for a company that would appreciate what I have to offer.
So, here I am, still willing and able. If any one would like to take a look at my CV, perhaps you would let me have a contact name and number.

Name and address supplied
Ed – We will pass any enquiries on to the correspondent

More backing for Get Trained call

Sir – I am writing to add our voice to your call for a more structured approach to training in the fleet industry.
We can see the effects of training very clearly when it comes to our own products. Our research shows that users of fleet management software who have undertaken training programmes enjoy an improvement in productivity of about a third higher than those who have simply bought the package but use it on a largely self-taught basis.
If similar increases in performance are available through training in other areas of fleet management, then the potential savings across the industry must run into millions of pounds.

Jason Francis
Managing director, cfc solutions

June 25, 2003

Fleets will feel the pinch with road charging plans

Sir – Road tolls are yet another hefty straw to be placed upon the creaking back of the motoring camel.
Accompanied by the usual Governmental waffle about 'reducing taxes elsewhere', all it really means is they are going to ram-raid our wallets again. Much hot air was also expended by those advocating the abolishment of Vehicle Excise Licence, or road tax, with a corresponding increase in fuel tax.
What was never mentioned, but surely must have been thought of, was the opportunity to levy an 'administration' fee – just to keep track of all these vehicles, you understand – and the subsequent opportunity to increase such a fee on an annual basis in order that the Government might have sufficient funds to chuck at the next hare-brained scheme that one of its witch-doctors dreams up.
So, am I in favour of road tolls? Next time Satan complains of frostbite I am.

Alistair White
Vehicle workshop manager, Eastleigh Borough Council

Sir – I have just read your article 'Debate begins on road charge plans' (Fleet NewsNet June 19) and could not believe it.
Firstly, I thought we all paid the Road Fund Licence which covered use of highways. Secondly, how on earth can mileage-based tolls be enforced?
Could you imagine the logistical nightmare of proportioning miles to different cost centres for pool vehicles? Could you also imagine the nightmare that would be faced by hire companies? How would they make any money? People would not pay the additional fees for this.
The best way anything like this could be enforced is to focus taxes on fuel, as if we are not already paying too much tax here anyway.
Companies and individuals which keep their vehicles legal are, even in this day and age, still heavily supporting all those with no road fund licence and very often no insurance.
It makes my blood boil that yet again the motorist has to suffer – it is a no-win situation.

Ann Dukanovic
Kaba Door Systems, Telford

The fleet department needs to be integrated

Sir – The story 'Fuel card scam hits firm for £150,000' (Fleet NewsNet June 12) emphasises the need for fleet managers to be integrated more fully with other areas of their company.
It also highlights the time differential between a fuel card going missing and the reporting of the fact to the fuel card provider. While every effort can be made by the provider to combat fraud, it still relies on the ability of an organisation to recognise that a card has been lost or stolen.
The period of time over which this fraud occurred implies a lack of control involving various administrative functions. A regular analysis of fleet costings, of which fuel would be an integral part, would illustrate key indicators and variances from the norm.
Tools readily provided by some fuel card providers would facilitate such a process. These tools include e-billing which provides a downloadable analysis of periodic fuel spending using various parameters.
These parameters can be adapted using with simple spreadsheets. This then provides information not only for fraud issues but mpg, servicing, private mileage tracking ... the list is endless.
To appreciate the impact of these and other critical fleet indicators can require training. This will only prove fruitful when an employer will have the foresight to fund not only the training cost but the individual's time, improve communications and acknowledge that bottom line profit directly benefits from investment in training.

Alan Peace
Independent fleet professional

Government confusion over CO2 emissions

Sir – It troubles me greatly that members of the Government seem to think that CO2 emissions and pollution are synonymous.
It is almost universally accepted that a diesel car produces less CO2 but more particulates than a petrol car. Therefore it is extremely difficult to simply state that the diesel car is 'cleaner'. In fact most would argue the opposite. The Government seems oblivious to this when it announced the new lower triple-A VED band for the least polluting cars – those with carbon dioxide emissions of 100g/km or less.
While a certain level of 'amateur day' is inevitable whenever politicians discuss anything remotely scientific, this should surely be a fairly simple concept to grasp.

Noel Lock
Director, The Greenfuel Company, Bath

Training makes the country's roads much safer

Sir – I refer to Stewart Whyte's Fleet Forum comment entitled 'We need guidelines on training drivers' (Fleet NewsNet June 19).
To state as he does that 'simply checking that employees who may be required to drive actually hold a driving licence meets in full the risk assessment/risk management concept' is misleading at best and potentially dangerous at worst.
The Health & Safety Executive on its own website (www.hse.gov.uk) quite clearly states that, under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, employers are required to carry out an assessment of the risk to the health and safety of their employees, or themselves, while they are at work and to other people who may be affected by their work activities. This includes any driving activity on the road.
It goes on to say that employers should consider the risks to employees on the road in the same way as for those in a workplace. And they should review this risk assessment periodically to ensure it remains valid.
The acquisition of a driving licence at the age of 17 to 20 years old simply does not adequately equip or train drivers to be their own risk managers in relation to occupational driving.
It does not take into account current road pressures, congestion or over-crowding, or even the type of vehicle you may be driving or that you may be carrying heavy loads as part of your everyday activity.
It does not take into account previous accident history or attitude to risk, which can vary considerably with age and responsibility, nor does it assess suitability for the purpose required. It also ignores the generally low driving standards in this country.
Only a detailed risk assessment, which will enable the company to fully identify risks associated with its particular driving activities, will allow it to implement a range of appropriate interventions specifically designed to minimise the risks faced by its employees on the road. While accepting the accusation of vested interest, one such intervention may well be the introduction of targeted driving training.
We make no apologies for recommending a product that helps make Britain's road safer and may even save lives.

James Sutherland
Managing director, Peak Performance

Don't tar us all with the same brush

Sir – I read with interest Stewart Whyte's Fleet Forum answer about third party insurance (Fleet NewsNet May 15).
In response to the question on whether a fleet should consider third party insurance, he stated: 'in my experience, the actual service level performance and delivery of some accident management companies leaves a lot to be desired.' Some accident management companies are clearly lacking service levels.
We have noted this in our own experience, having picked up contracts from fleet managers who have been dissatisfied with previous accident management arrangements.
However, not all accident management companies should be tarred with the same brush. Choosing an accident management company that is prepared to listen and implement each client's requirements can be of real benefit.

Trevor Cutts
Managing director, Elite Incident Management

11 June 2003

Mixed views over spare wheels

Sir – Manufacturers' plans to scrap spare wheels are a nonsense, something devised by an accountant rather than anyone living in the real world, one might suspect.
Although averages might suggest that punctures are rare, I still seem to get around one a year. Looking back at the times and places they occurred shows clearly that huge inconvenience would arise from not having a spare to hand. Having been in the tyre business in my past, I can certainly say that a good proportion of punctured tyres are beyond further safe use, even if sufficiently undamaged to allow temporary repair with a roadside repair kit.
Also, the proliferation of tyre brands and particularly sizes, means that immediate availability of the cover required cannot be assured. So roadside replacement will not always happen, leading to a costly period of the vehicle being off road.
A practical effect of this is that having looked at a BMW M Coupe a few years ago, when I found it didn't have a spare, I switched choice to a Mercedes.

Ed Hughes
Stanex Consultants

Sir – Years ago, it was necessary to carry spare spark plugs and other components together with a reasonably comprehensive tool kit.
This was due to the relatively high level of unreliability suffered by most vehicles. Over the years, mechanical reliability has improved dramatically and surely this has been matched by the great gains in tyre technology.
Most people will not remember when they last had to change a wheel and many of those will have used one of the breakdown organisations for the job when they did. Any sensible risk assessment of the cost of delay caused by a potential puncture is likely to suggest that the spare wheel can now be sensibly deleted.
Many a driver has been heard to say 'why do I need a spare wheel when I have mobile phone?'.

Les Greaves
Centaur Group

Sir – I would be happy if all car makers offered a full size spare wheel as an optional extra. Drivers could then choose themselves whether to order this extra or not. I would always try to secure a full size spare for any vehicle I used.

Dave Nock
Fleet driver, M J Gleeson

Firms must address drug/drive issue

Sir – The Department for Transport report on over-the-counter medicines makes interesting reading, especially in relation to a company's drug and alcohol workplace policy (Fleet NewsNet May 29).
We find many policies don't address this issue, or the use of prescribed drugs, in sufficient detail to protect directors from prosecution.
A DR80 'driving or attempting to drive while unfit through drugs' is still an offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988 and carries an obligatory ban of 12 months minimum, just the same as drink driving.

Roger Singer
AvOiDD – Occupational Drink/Drug-Driving

Mobile phone ban is not enough

Sir – I write regarding the article on the RSPCA taking a hard line on car phones (Fleet NewsNet May 29).
While I respect the decisions taken by both the RSPCA and RNIB and the fact that in these organisations they may well have the type of disciplined employee who will 'comply' it is my experience that rules will always be broken.
Although it is still not against the law to use the phone while driving, is it not true that exceeding the speed limit is?
Is it not true that driving an unroadworthy vehicle is also against the law, as is driving while impaired by drink or drugs?
My point is that making something a disciplinary offence will not necessarily cure it. Are the office-based employees at these two organisations also aware that they should not call field-based staff on their mobiles?
It is imperative that organisations have a complete strategy with regard to their fleet drivers, including all aspects of fleet risk management from the mobile phone policy to the suitability of vehicles for the job to how many hours they should be working/driving and when they qualify for an overnight stay.
Let's stop calling for the banning of everything and start educating ourselves. The carrot will beat the stick every time.

Andy Neale
Managing director, Drive & Survive

June 4 2003

Lack of proper fleet management training: it's a ticking timebomb

Sir – Your lead story entitled 'Untrained staff fail to cope with duties' (May 22) unfortunately came as no great surprise to me.
Despite the fact that cars usually rank in the top three of a businesses' cost hierarchy, along with people and property, many fleets continue to be managed by junior members of staff who have been given the honorary title of 'fleet manager' with little or no training.
Quite often, despite its status, the car fleet will be just a secondary responsibility of one or two individuals.
In the case of people and property, you have entire departments devoted to them – together with third-party support already in place should the need arise. Why is this? Because these are vital organs of a company and mismanagement can cost a fortune and a reputation.
A poorly-managed fleet can have similar consequences and leaving this complex responsibility in the hands of inexperienced individuals is nothing short of a ticking timebomb.
Fleet management is a full-time job. Why else would there be companies who specialise solely in providing this service? The problem is that everyone thinks they are a car expert, simply because they drive one.
As such, fleet decisions tend to be based on emotive issues such as lifestyle and status, i.e. getting the best car for an employee within a given price bracket. Looking at this from a risk management perspective, does this approach consider if that person is best suited to that car? No. What about considering licence points and why they were awarded?
What about ability, for example driving courses attended and knowledge of the Highway Code?
What about looking at the driver's past record to see how he/she has treated vehicles and kept on top of servicing? In other words, a system of audits, checks and record keeping is essential to match the right car to the right driver and proactively manage risk. With corporate manslaughter legislation looming large ('Fleets await impact of new corporate killing law, May 22), how can such important decisions be left in the hands of untrained staff?
Our industry has a duty to highlight this issue until standards rise across the board. Those of us who understand the skill of fleet management know the difference it can make to a business and how much there is to be gained by ensuring that there are people in place who are properly trained.

Tony Donnelly
Managing director, Goodwood Fleet Management

Safety: be prepared or face the consequences

Sir – I read with amazement the perceived panic that has beset fleet decision-makers due to the imminent arrival of the new corporate manslaughter legislation (Fleet NewsNet May 22).
This legislation has been five years in the making and all fleet decision-makers would have been aware of this had they been actively reviewing the issues surrounding fleet safety.
Even if this were not the case, it should be paramount for an individual responsible for running a fleet of vehicles to ensure basic health and safety guidelines within their organisations.
These guidelines should be tailored to the specific vehicles within their own fleet. The coupling of health and safety policies at work (relating to company vehicle use) and a well-thought-out company vehicle users' handbook would cover the majority of the requirements that such a new law would necessitate.
I constructed a framework for the reduction of operational road risk two years ago with just the help of some basic rules from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA).
This would cover all but the most detailed proposals that would be introduced. I urge fleet professionals to look further and wider than their own fleet when adopting policies, as I fear that again (as happened with the CO2 emissions tax) on the inception of new rules/laws, many will be ill-prepared.
It is unsurprising that we retain our lowly position in the eyes of the Government when even issues that have been presented as potential areas of concern previously are ignored until, ultimately, panic sets in.
I also believe that the new company van tax proposals may have been constructed by a fleet manager rather than an accountant had the legislators held more respect for the fleet professional who deals with these issues on a day-to-day basis. Preparation before legislation – it's not rocket science.

Alan Peace
Independent fleet professional

Automatic limiters: how daft can you get?

Sir – Regarding trials of a new vehicle that can limit your speed in Leeds (Fleet NewsNet April 17). How stupid can things get?
There are many reasons why you may need to exceed the speed limit. The system cannot take into consideration any of them, such as:
1) You are a female driver being hassled by another driver, you feel threatened, your first thought is to accelerate away. Oh dear, your brakes have been applied and your accelerator is useless.
2) There is a slow moving vehicle (farm tractor). You see an opportunity to pass. You begin to pass the slow moving vehicle and as you are committed to the manoeuvre the slow moving vehicle suddenly indicates an intention to turn right. You cannot brake as another car has followed you to overtake. You have to accelerate. Oh dear, your brakes have been applied and your accelerator is useless.
3) You are overtaking a stationary bus. As you are committed to the manoeuvre the bus driver puts on his right-hand indicator and sets off without looking in his mirror. You try to accelerate. Oh dear, your brakes have been applied and your accelerator is useless.
I am sure the £2 million the Government has allocated to a project they say will not be implemented could be put to better use.

Steve Bennett
Fleet driver

Home shopping eases the traffic congestion in UK

Sir – Following your article on the environmental benefits of home shopping, we have produced some additional figures (Fleet NewsNet May 22).
The latest figures we compiled were for last Christmas when 10 million miles of seasonal rush traffic were kept off Britain's roads by shoppers using Tesco's internet delivery service to stock up for the festive season. Tesco.com was delivering shopping somewhere in the UK every two seconds up to Christmas Eve.
The car journeys saved were enough to circle the globe 400 times or to make 22 return trips to the Moon. These figures graphically prove the value of online shopping as a traffic-buster with the 10 million miles saved clocked up in just one busy month.

Julie McGuckian
Tesco, Herts

May 29, 2003

Lack of training is an issue

Sir – I write regarding your article on the problem of untrained fleet managers (Fleet News May 22).
I believe the problem in many organisations is two-fold. The first is the lack of training of many fleet managers, which means they are unaware of many of the options available to them, and decisions are made based on advice from suppliers. They are subject to a never-ending barrage of information by mail, email, phone and fax and are the targets for many 'inducements', or 'bribes' as they used to be called, to use particular suppliers.
This circumstance is aggravated by the ignorance of company bosses, which is the second and, I think, equally important part of the problem. Many, and probably most, of these senior people are unaware of the culture surrounding the car trade and the fleet business.
They have little knowledge of the pressures on fleet decision-makers and the demands caused by the constantly shifting requirements of European and UK legislation, taxation and technology are unknown to them. They know nothing of the temptations to which their fleet people are subjected.
A few months ago I gave a presentation at the Employee Benefits conference and shared the platform with Professor Peter Cooke. The audience was mainly human resource or finance director types, who had indirect responsibility for their car fleets. A small part of my offering described the 'thinly disguised bribery' that flourishes in the business.
A few of the questions at the end were about this subject. However, one-to-one conversations immediately after the speech and several personal phone calls in the following days, were from these senior people seeking information and advice about the culture I described.
I cannot see companies giving proper training to their fleet managers without the fleet managers' superiors being educated first. Perhaps someone could offer a half-day course, or an instructive booklet, targeted at these superiors. These senior people would then be aware of the benefits of educating their fleet specialist. They would be able to communicate effectively and constructively with them, and spare their fleet manager the isolation many face.
Fleet NewsNet is an excellent vehicle for educating and informing the fleet trade. But to attack the problem of untrained fleet managers, we need first to catch the senior people's attention. If this could be done, I am sure a lot of fleet managers would benefit in professionalism, appreciation and status.

Dug Brown
Fleet Executive, Somerfield

Teach yourself fleet admin

Sir – I totally agree with the report last week's on training for fleet managers.
I run a fleet of about 60 vehicles. I am primarily a secretary who 'inherited' the running of the fleet when our financial director retired and his secretary, who ran it before me, was made redundant.
I did not have a clue what I was doing and was just thrown in at the deep end. My company does not consider this job needs any training, but believes it is a simple thing that only takes up a small portion of my time (I wish) – after all, I only order new cars and sell the old ones!
For example, I have tried to get across to my directors the implications of corporate manslaughter legislation, but I find them unwilling to consider it. They say it will never happen.
I have since had to teach myself about running a car fleet and I consider I have done a reasonable job. With regard to taxation, I have read as much as I can and keep my drivers updated constantly. The internet has been a godsend.
I find out so much by reading through Fleet News and then have a basis to move on and get more information on the various subjects.
I do not think of myself as a fleet manager, although one of my titles is fleet administrator. I am just a secretary helping the drivers and company to understand all aspects of running a fleet to the best of my ability.

Name and address supplied

May 21, 2003

Van tax change plans raise a host of issues for LCV fleets

Sir – Having just read your article on the proposed changes to van taxation, I am moved, for the first time ever, to respond to a newspaper article.
There are a number of critical points that must be considered:
Firstly, employers don't keep older vans just to save the average van driver £33 in annual taxes. Speaking for ourselves, we have older vans where we cannot afford to get new ones, exactly as we do with cars. Vehicles are an enormous part of our overheads and our big company customers do not accept that the phrase 'price rise' even exists.
Secondly, 95% of our commercial vans do 40,000 to 50,000 miles a year. Our drivers do not want to drive much in the evenings. Try driving 1,000 miles a week on our roads and then you will understand why.
Thirdly, does the Government have any idea how difficult it would be to get your average engineer to keep proper mileage records? This is not like asking someone who sits behind a desk all day to complete them, believe me. It's hard enough to get anything particularly literate from our well-paid sales force on that front!
Fourthly, the current rules are simple and take relatively little time to supervise.
This is not a bad thing. The fact that nearly everything else we administer has got more complicated and time-consuming is not a benefit to us.
My fifth point is that we are not arguing against the green issues – we welcomed the introduction of emission-based charging on company cars and were one of the first companies to embrace LPG in a big way, which is 15% of our fleet.
The sixth issue is that double-cabs are without doubt being used as a tax dodge. But just take them out of the equation and tax them as per the car rules. That's a simple solution that will catch a significant amount of the 'dodgers' without upsetting everyone else.
This list of ideas has taken me 20 minutes to compile. How long did some overpaid think-tank take to come up with this crazy scheme in the first place? Oh and how much did we, the taxpayers, pay for their ivory tower theories?
Is the Government completely out of touch? So much for the 'common touch' we were promised. This lot is as lacking in reality as the last bunch!
We run about 50 commercial vehicles, nearly all of which have little private use. We are a family-run small firm with about one quarter of the vehicles being more than four years old, not by choice but out of economic necessity. Perhaps they haven't noticed that it's getting a little tough out here in the real world. If anybody thinks they can justify the changes to me, I will happily make time to hear them.

Dave McCabe
Finance director, Walter-Broadley Machines, Northampton

Sir – Your story on van taxation certainly looks set to cause controversy as, yet again, the Government aims to get at the essential user by increasing their tax liability. Having done it to the company car driver, it is now out for the van driver.
Obviously (to me), the true reason behind the change is the double-cab brigade who have changed purely for the purpose of saving tax, but still effectively have a car. But the Government's solution is, as usual, to hit everybody, while pointing the finger of blame at a very small minority. I understood from something I read recently that the problem to the taxman of changing to a van was very small, as the number of commercials sold for this purpose is relatively tiny.

Obviously the downside to all this is that the extra cost to the white van man in the street will be passed on to his customers and the whole thing reverts back to an inflationary vicious circle.
I hope you're satisfied, Mr Blair, but you should remember what happened to the last Prime Minister who cheated society long-term – she is still reviled throughout the country and will never be forgiven by the voters.

Mike Wilkinson
Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham

Sir – I must say I agree wholeheartedly with Trevor Gelken and his views on the taxing of van drivers and indeed with Nigel Bannister (Fleet NewsNet, May 8).
I fully sympathise with the potential problem of the parking of vans in the backlash of drivers handing back their vehicles at the end of the day if they are hit with a big hike in taxable benefit.
I too, in a much smaller way, would have a severe problem in parking our 48 vans. I suspect that 90% of other van-using companies would encounter the same problem too.
It is easy to foresee industrial estates and surrounding areas cluttered with vans parked all over the place, including nearby residential areas, due to lack of parking places. These same places would then be cluttered with private cars every day by the van drivers collecting their vehicles, having driven to work in probably not very environmentally-friendly cars. All in all this would have a detrimental effect on the environment, particularly at a localised level – in fact the exact opposite effect of what the alleged aims of the Government are with its taxing policy on company vehicles.
If we were to take this scenario even further, we would encounter what I perceive to be the worst problem of all – security.
The parking up of vans at and around business premises would create a thieves' paradise where they could walk around at leisure and pick whatever they wanted in the way of contents of the vans or parts from the vans or indeed the vans themselves. I speak from experience on this matter as the only times I have left a van outside our premises at night (an ordinary industrial estate) I have had all three of the above happen.
The thought of having even 50% of my vans handed back and left outside unattended every night scares me. We all know that even if the police were interested, they would not have the resources to police all such areas constantly throughout the night.
The upshot of all this would be higher insurance premiums or the employing of a full-time security guard to watch over the vehicles at nights and weekends.
Either way it would end up as yet another extra cost burden to businesses courtesy of this Government, while increasing environmental damage.

Steve Borrett,
Director Town & Country Flooring, Huntingdon, Cambs

Sir – Since the implementation of the current tax on company car drivers, it has become even more evident that we are the 'cash cows' or 'golden geese'.
How can the Government use emissions as a measure for van taxation? I consider myself fortunate that my company allows me to drive a car of my choice which is serviced regularly and will be replaced after covering 70,000 miles.
For the job I do I could not use public transport due to the equipment I have to carry and a car is the only alternative. I choose to tow a caravan all year round holidaying in the UK (yes I also contribute to the UK economy in other ways) and as such want the comfort of knowing I have the benefit of part-time four-wheel drive. If I could not have a 4x4 as a company car I would buy one for private use.
There must be thousands of vehicles on the road that are not classed as company cars or are privately owned, many of which may or may not be serviced regularly. I do not see the Government taxing them, even though they make a considerable contribution to emissions.

Steve Bennett
Details supplied

ACFO should add fuel to list of fleet issues

Sir – I was pleased to see that the Association of Car Fleet Operators (ACFO) is opening dialogue with Transport Minister John Spellar regarding key fleet issues.
There can be little doubt that real action is needed to improve the lot of Britain's business motorists and the organisations that employ them.
ACFO's concern that fleet drivers are currently treated as 'cash cows' is a valid one – all the more so when looking at one area that was not mentioned in the article: fuel costs.
Forecourt prices may be slipping but they still form a significant part of every fleet's operational costs. This gives fleet decision-makers yet another headache, while the competitiveness of UK companies in Europe is being eroded by fuel duties that remain punitively high.
An effective fuel management system is vital because without one fleets cannot hope to reduce those costs. However, it would be good if such a system were supplemented by a more business-minded approach to taxation.
The next time ACFO speaks with John Spellar, it would be worth adding fuel costs to the list of issues. British business would be a lot better off with lower prices at the pumps.

Danny Clenaghan
Managing director of Fuel and Business Mobility, Arval PHH

April 30, 2003

Show loss a shame

Sir – Along with many smaller companies in the fleet sector I would like to say how sorry we are to hear that the Fleet Show has been cancelled. The show has long been the best business and networking event in the fleet calendar and it is a shame that the industry cannot support it.
Many smaller companies have made the show central to their marketing plans, picking up valuable leads which can take them through the year.
And it is sad that an industry as big as the fleet market which boasts three million vehicles and has hundreds of manufacturer, service and support companies within it, cannot get together to stage one major event. The fleet sector is poorer without it.

Jim Kerr
Managing director, JTK Automotive

April 23, 2003

Fuel providers must offer more

Sir – As fleet manager for a fleet of 620 vehicles, I must admit I too have found our current fuel provider rather lacking in the amount of information offered and in the general time it takes to get a query or a problem resolved.
While I understand the pressures of business and the limits to which everyone is stretched in these days of personnel resources and the cost of technology, the way forward is definitely by offering better and more proactive ways for the fleet manager to manage fuel costs.
The internet is of great benefit in this regard and as long as the internet products being offered by the fuel provider work, it can streamline processes and make a fleet manager's job much easier.
Some fuel companies seem rather limited in what they can offer and the fleet manager has to rely on constant emails, requesting ad hoc reports for details that really should be made available to him or her as a matter of course. All we as fleet managers want to do is manage and analyse our own information and in so doing, proactively manage an enormous expense to the point of reducing costs, which is after all, our end intention.

Sue MacNicol
Fleet manager, Pitney Bowes

Camera solution

Sir – We accept speed cameras as being necessary in some places but it is interesting that I have not seen any protests about cameras at traffic lights. Perhaps the route forward is for those sited at accident blackspots to be highly visible. If we make these units so obvious to see, then if drivers are caught, they should be punished.
Cameras do work in slowing traffic, but they only work completely if they are visible. If they are continually catching speeding drivers, their role as a speed reduction measure has not worked.

Martin Savage Director, Mid-Kent Electrical Engineering Co Ltd, Maidstone

Let's hear it for the small firms

Sir – Orbit Vehicle Contracts is a small independent contract hire broker. On behalf of all other small companies, I must take issue with your Fleet Forum comment that being a small company means offering a 'dodgy' service unmatched by the 'excellence' of the big boys.
Your answer gives the impression that the small company is operating vehicles totally on its own book. This might have been true 10 years or so ago but with the increase in funding and operating costs, together with the staggering falls in used car values, the majority of one-man bands are now acting as introducers to the more mainstream companies. Those of us who keep our businesses small can offer a better overall product at a lower cost.
My customers give one of the main reasons for using us as the fact that we treat them as individuals and are interested in their specific requirements – not often the case with the big boys.

Mike Crawley
Orbit Vehicle Contracts

April 9, 2003

New car discounts: nothing changes

Sir – I am in the market for a new car and read with interest your recent article on discounts and European prices. In the past I have personally imported five new cars from Germany and in every case have saved substantial amounts of money.
So now, according to your article, I don't need to go to the trouble of importing and I can even forget the car supermarkets.
What I want is a BMW 320d SE. The BMW UK list price is £22,675. Drivethedeal's price is £21,668, Springwell Imports quotes £19,721 and Tradesales in Slough £19,499.
On this basis nothing seems to have changed, or is it just that you can get discounts on less popular cars that the UK dealers can't sell?

David Higham
Details supplied

Uninsured drivers must be stopped

Sir – We would like to thank Nigel Underdown of the Bank of Scotland for continuing to raise the serious issues around uninsured drivers.
This was one of the key findings of this year's RAC Report on Motoring, Driving on Company Business, released in January. It found that only 2% of fleet managers check to see if private cars used by company employees for work journeys are safe to drive and more than 50% believe that insurance policies for private cars cover work trips – more often than not, they do not.
The most practical response to the problem is for businesses to take steps now to formulate health and safety policies for their fleets, and to take steps to effectively communicate and implement those policies.
The penalties attached to health and safety legislation will only ever increase in severity and amount, and the longer a company delays with such policies, the bigger their potential exposure to harsh legislation becomes.

Simon Cashmore
Managing director, RAC Corporate Services

Fuel advice

Sir – Stewart Whyte talks in his Helplines in detail about the need to have the right fuel economy figures as well as fuel prices and mentions the regional/local variation when calculating mileage reimbursement. However, he doesn't suggest any sources. Our 'petrolbusters' section of www.theAA.com uses information from every fuel card in the UK and is updated every minute. We know that many fleet managers rely on the AA monthly fuel price report, produced by the petrolbusters team.

Nick Garton,
AA Business Services

March 2, 2003

I was a victim of tax code errors

Sir – I read with interest your article 'Tax code errors to cost drivers dear', as I was very nearly a victim of the Inland Revenue.
As the HR manager and responsible for payroll, I see all the tax codings come in and saw my own, which was quite shocking.
I was fortunate enough to be issued with a new car last week and quickly called the Inland Revenue to advise them of the list price and CO2 emissions, knowing that I would have a reduction in tax payable due to the lower rating.
To my horror, the coding notice arrived and was almost twice as high as the previous one, so I immediately called them. I was fortunate to speak to someone who knew what they were doing and they amended their records.
They told me that somebody previously had incorrectly entered the taxable value at about three times what it should have been. I am now awaiting a revised coding for the new tax year.
I was fortunate as I knew how to check my coding notice. I dare say that many company car drivers do not do so and could, as was almost my case, pay far too much tax.
I don't know what the answer is as it is difficult to stop input error. Maybe the Inland Revenue should have systems in place where each person's work gets checked as a matter of course.

Philip Silver,
Human resources manager, Comshare

More hassle with MID website

Sir – We have been trying since we got our passwords to load our data on to the Motor Insurance Database. In the end, after trying three or four times a day, we handed it all over to our insurance company which finally managed to load the data very recently.
Now that our fleet is 'legal and loaded' we have today spent an hour-and-a-quarter trying to load eight cars manually on to the system and put in end dates for eight cars. Each time we have completed one transaction for a car, we have received the message that the database 'is very busy and to try later' – therefore having to log in from scratch again.
I had been under the illusion that getting the data downloaded on to the system would be the hardest part of the process. I hadn't banked on the system not being able to cope with me also trying to make changes. If it carries on at the above rate, I will need to spend one day a week just trying to get changes made.
Our insurance details are already held by the local police, therefore any vehicle registered in our name can be matched with records they hold – so what there is to be gained by accommodating the database is a complete mystery.

Andy Bemment
Fleet manager, via email

Let's have some driver self-discipline

Sir – With regard to the proposals to introduce so-called 'annoyance fines ,there is a simple answer. If drivers exercised rather more self-discipline, had more regard for the rules of the road and demonstrated more courtesy to other road users, such fines and other penalties would not be necessary. The answer lies in your own hands. Don't blame others for having to legislate for your own failings.

Andy Robson
Robins & Day Leasing

March 19, 2003

Why a ban on private cars should not be necessary

Sir – I write in response to your article 'Call to ban private cars used for work' (Fleet News March 13).
I very much agree with the sentiments of Nigel Underdown relating to the duty of care issues when using a private car for company use, but if the correct opt-out scheme is implemented, none of these issues will be a problem.
Within the scheme there should be an appropriate monthly allowance which will allow for business class insurance and a full maintenance package. There should also be guidelines that ensure the appropriate vehicle is chosen for use. When a person decides to opt-out his chosen car should be signed off as being suitable for use.

Nigel Cowles
Total Fleet Solutions

Sir – The health and safety issues surrounding duty of care and corporate responsibility are far too important to be trivialised in an argument over car ownership.
Quite frankly the suggestion that employees should leap into an unfamiliar rental, pool or colleague's company car instead of using their own is madness and completely misses the point – safety.
Furthermore, while employees should clearly be properly insured with a suitable and comprehensively maintained car, surely the real issue for the employer is to ensure that they understand their individual responsibilities and that adequate controls are in place to ensure compliance.
It is simply not sufficient to assume that because the car is company owned and maintained that the employee will therefore be a better and more responsible driver. For example, even though our own online managed schemes include insurance, maintenance, mileage tracking and spot checks, there is no guarantee that an employee is regularly checking tyre pressures or wear, or that he/she is driving responsibly all the time.
For this reason we are working with a leading health and safety consultant to produce clear guidelines and training materials for our clients and all their employees, including company car drivers.

Jim Salkeld
Managing director, Opticar

MID a good red tape example

Sir – We have a fleet of 110 cars and 45 commercial vehicles. I have to say that we think the Motor Industry Database is a terrific example of pointless red tape. It's just another burden on business that adds no value.

John Manson
Amalgamated Metal Corporation

SIR – I am not surprised that companies have ignored the registration deadlines for the Motor Industry Database. There are enough issues to be dealt with in the effort to stay ahead in the market than to worry about registration.
I recently sold my company where I was chairman and CEO and the new owners have stripped out as many of the senior management as they could to keep going – this included the fleet manager who looked after about 45 cars and vans. The job of fleet manager has been given to a lesser qualified and experienced person who probably knows nothing about the new requirements of registration.

Andre Blond
Senior partner, AG Consultancies

March 12, 2003

What about illegal drivers?

Sir – I really did have to check upon reading your article on annoyance fines that it was not April 1. When are the police going to wake up to the number of uninsured drivers currently on our roads? When are the police going to take up the issue of vehicles with no MoT or Road Fund Tax?
If I am to be involved in a shunt with a 'annoying driver', then at least I would like to think that he or she was insured. I write from painful past experience. Give me the 'annoying driver' every time, you can always pull over and let them pass.

Advanced Driver
Swansea

Speed and safety on the motorway

Sir – How many accidents are caused on the motorway by going too slowly? I am in favour of increasing the speed limit to 80mph, but we should also introduce a minimum speed. It is not unusual to see car drivers going at about 40mph or less, totally oblivious to the problems it causes.
Perhaps the minimum speed should be set at 55mph, or even higher for cars.

Martin Savage
Company director, Mid-Kent Electrical Engineering, Maidstone

Sir – I find an increasing number of drivers on our motorways using only the middle lane even if the inside lane is empty. This is a hazard, as if a car is travelling on the inside lane faster than the driver on the middle lane, they have to cross all lanes to overtake and then cross all lanes to get back into the inside lane. Surely this could be one for the police?

Jan Dewey
Sales administration supervisor, Chas A Blatchford & Sons, Basingstoke

Sir – I note with interest comments from Spencer King regarding the administrative burden of the EU Fourth Insurance Directive. He feels this is justified by a reduction in uninsured driving. In the UK it is theoretically necessary to be properly insured before being able to obtain a road tax disc, which is displayed on the windscreen in a very easy-to-check format.
In southern Ireland this is taken even further with the requirement that an insurance disc is also displayed on the screen.
But neither country has dealt with the problems of uninsured drivers, so it is not readily apparent what a further less direct system will add. We then look at the excessive bureaucratic paperwork involved in having properly insured vehicles while at the same time proving no deterrent whatsoever.
Perhaps I am taking too simplistic a view, but where might anyone derive any benefit from the new regulations?

Mike Madden
Insurance claims manager, John Menzies Distribution

February 19, 2003

More on Fourth Directive 'fiasco'

Sir - I read with increasing frustration about the fleets and fleet managers who have failed to make the recent deadline for the EU Fourth Insurance Directive. I for one have been aware of this for some time through the Association of Car Fleet Operators and initially discussed this with our brokers – who had no information – as far back as March 2000.

On pursuing our insurers ever since, we were continually told that we would be receiving some information on how they wanted the information presented and the ready-made excuse that the final legislation regarding hire and demo cars was still not in place.

This was chased almost weekly via brokers and insurers until suddenly in early January 2003 they sent through the information needed, yet still the deadline for registering was January 20 with the threat of a fine if you were late.

I have no doubt there are numerous fleets out there which have experienced the same attitude of insurers and the Government to this issue.

Having completed that exercise we then need to look at congestion charging, changes to fuel scale rate taxing and we are all too well aware that a Fifth Insurance Directive is already winging its way towards us. Fleet managers do a very good job and work long hours – it's about time they got some credit for what they do instead of being continually blamed because civil servants are failing in their duty.

Mick Donovan
Group fleet manager, Bowmer & Kirkland

Sir – I write in response to the letters under the heading 'MID system is a fiasco' (see below), regarding the problems readers have experienced when supplying data to the Motor Insurance Database (MID).

The Motor Insurance Information Centre (MIIC) fully acknowledges that over the past two to three weeks, many users will have experienced difficulties using the MID update site and we would like to apologise to all those affected. We would, however, like to allay any concerns and clarify some points about supplying vehicle data to the MID:

Ed - Fleet NewsNet raised the issue of technical problems with the database when it went live. Its organisers say it is now working properly, but you need to have an up-to-date internet browser to log on. Check www.miic.org.uk for details.

Over-estimating mileage can cause problems

Sir – Regarding the guest opinion piece from Ken Davis of Auto Management. His assertion was that 'employees should over-estimate rather than under-estimate the total mileage because additional mileage will incur penalty charges per mile'.

I would offer a word of caution to companies which seek to promote or encourage the inflation of employees' contract mileage for an aim of avoiding excess mileage charges.

As an employee, if your allowance is static (i.e equal monthly gross sums) and you inflate your contract mileage, you will find the vehicle running costs will be higher and therefore your monthly vehicle payment will be higher.

Admittedly, a miscalculation of mileage may lead to a nominal penalty upon return of the vehicle, but don't forget this is only payable if you return the vehicle. You could simply extend the contract to cover a greater mileage.

Simon Berger
Director, Seed Corporation
'Innovative Fleet Concepts'

January 29, 2003

Training through the fleet maze

Sir – Further to the letter regarding fleet management training needing recognition and resourcing (see below) I can only wholeheartedly agree.

The fleet decision-maker's job is becoming increasingly more complex with managing corporate road risk, the Fourth EU Insurance Directive, alternative fuels, congestion charging, speed cameras, etc, etc. Add to this even more complex issues such as cash alternatives and the potential risks associated with this (cost, business insurance and maintenance issues) and it is obvious the fleet decision-maker's life is not simple.

Fleet executives must highlight to senior management the high business cost of fleet operations and the requirement for skilled and professional fleet personnel. Without this, even a small fleet can become a massive corporate risk, as well as a financial millstone.

How do we increase professionalism? Training and promoting industry best practice.

Chris Chandler
Director of training, Fleet Audits

Drink-driving: not just a Christmas problem

Sir – The latest drink-drive figures hide the issue for fleet decision-makers and others responsible for fleet safety.

Summer drink-driving is a much bigger problem than it is in the winter.

Now is the time for those responsible for fleet safety to get out their drug and alcohol workplace policy and check how it is being implemented before the prime risk time arrives.

However, our experience is that many companies either don't have a policy, or if they do, have not reviewed it recently. When the unthinkable happens, they will at best lose a valued member of the team and could be facing court proceedings for sending drivers out on the road without having assessed a foreseeable hazard.

Drug driving is also on the increase. A Scottish study recently found that one in 10 drivers under 40 years old have driven under the effects of drugs. Do you know how long to leave it after smoking cannabis before driving? Surprisingly, some of your staff need to know!

A large proportion of those convicted of drink driving were 'morning after' drivers and were driving company vehicles at the time. This clearly makes it the company's business.

Roger Singer
Avoidd Training and Education

Car test praised

Sir – This is just a quick note to say thanks for the group test about estates which I saw featured on your website, Fleet NewsNet. I am in the process of choosing a new company car and this feature has given me all the information I need.

Top stuff.

Tony Gwenin
Management development consultant, via email

January 22, 2003

Keep a tight rein on repairs

Sir - I read with interest the letter from Alan Bird of the Vehicle Builders and Repairers Association (VBRA) regarding the length of time it is taking to get insurance company-approved repairers to carry out accident repairs to cars (see below).

I believe no fleet with more than 500 cars needs to carry comprehensive insurance - it is now uneconomic. The answer is to use an accident management company to administer repairs and lay down a specification as to the standards of repair. Pay the accident management company a fair fee and do not pressurise selected repairers for unrealistic labour rates and discounts.

By doing this, you will find that a loyalty is built up by the repairer to your fleet, as a customer, and quality repairs will result, which in turn will result in higher resale values.

Over the years it has been my misfortune to see some horrific repair jobs and I am sorry to say some of them by repairers proudly displaying the VBRA logo.

Malcolm H Hartley
Former fleet manager, Northampton

Training essential

Sir – Regarding your fleet panel on what the year holds for fleet decision-makers (January 6) – yes, I do expect the fleet professional role to become more difficult. But I have a hope that with the greater burden will come a recognition that effective fleet management requires appropriate resourcing – particularly the requirement for training.

Carol Green
Transport co-ordinator, AWG

BMW offer may tempt user-choosers

Sir – I read the news that BMW is offering free servicing on its 3 and 5-series diesels over three years/60,000 miles to business customers. Presumably this will tip the scales for many user choosers to select such vehicles on contract hire as it must surely lead to a reduction in with-maintenance contract hire quotes of maybe £20 per month.

Steve Danby
Corporate services manager, Mazars

What makes a good fleet manager?

Sir - Further to the letter regarding drivers keeping cars roadworthy (see below), it just goes to show - there are fleet managers and there are fleet managers.

David Carter
Fleet manager, Microtechs

January 15, 2003

Solution to long body repair delays

Sir - Further to the issue of the time, inconvenience and cost it can now take to get accident-damaged vehicles back on the road.

Stewart Whyte as usual gave a most comprehensive answer, highlighting some of the concerns policyholders are now experiencing which have been brought about by the actions of the insurers themselves.

From the Vehicle Builders and Repairers Association's (VBRA) point of view and the repair industry as a whole, we would like to offer alternatives in getting vehicles back on the road as quickly and professionally as possible.

The vehicle repair industry has contracted dramatically over the past 10 years and is continuing to do so to such a point where it can now be said that the market is in balance with capacity.

But in the future, due to continuing business closures, there will be a significant shortfall in repair capacity.

Under the influence of insurer approval schemes, a disproportionate amount of work is being directed into insurer-approved repairer networks where the repairer has little or no option but to accept the work. This is a condition of the approval contract, even when at certain times of the year their lead-time can be many weeks.

However, this is where policyholders can assert their rights. It is the policyholders' right to be able to select a repairer of their choice to carry out their repairs. They need not be one of the insurer's approved repairers but one that could be local to the operator. They will be able to provide an estimate (only one estimate is required) and carry out the work in much reduced time while providing, in the vast majority of cases, at least the same level of services and in many cases even greater service, being the repairer of your choice.

However, some insurers are well known for trying to make it difficult and putting obstacles in the way of obtaining authorisation. But a phone call from your repairer with your backing will obtain rapid authorisation for the work to start as your future business with that insurer will certainly concentrate their minds.

Next time you are given unacceptable completion times, just give your local repairer a call and see what they can do for you. The names and addresses of VBRA members who operate to known standards incorporating the industries consumer code of practice are on our website www.vbra.co.uk

Alan Bird
VBRA

Donation thanks

Sir – Thank you for your donation representing the money you collected instead of sending Christmas cards this year. I thank you on behalf of Ben for supporting our work in this way. Can I also ask you to pass on our thanks to everyone involved in raising this sum.

Judy Semadeni
Donor services assistant, Ben

January 8, 2002

E-commerce is a valuable tool

Sir – Following recent debate about using the internet in fleet management my company is more than familiar with the benefits of e-commerce with regard to contract hiring. I operate 50 company cars through two suppliers. Our most recent supplier is Tuskerdirect, which enables us not only to choose and order our cars online, but also manage our entire fleet on our own personal internet site.

It is company policy for us to retain two suppliers so we also have another competitive supplier. This not only gives us a choice of who to order from but also gives us a good measure of how competitive the pricing is.

Although both my suppliers' prices are consistently low, I gain an extra advantage from Tusker's system in terms of time and efficiency savings.

With the online service we can do all our research on all makes and models in one place. We don't have to wait for someone in a call centre to get back to us and have to chase them while struggling to speak to the same person as the last time we rang. I think a lot of the misgivings people have are related to their own fear of the internet.

I myself am not the world's greatest computer expert but I always find the system easier to manage than lots of bits of paper and computer files, which I have to continually cross-refer to. The drivers also spend far less time looking for the car they want as the system automatically allows them to only view the vehicles that are in accordance with company policy and within their band allowance.

The good thing about using an online package is that we can easily keep track of every detail of every car, right down to the radio code, all in one place, which makes maintaining records simple. As you can imagine, this is easier on the memory as well as the administration.

My experience of e-commerce fleet solutions is that they deliver all the benefits that the internet originally promised.

Roger Bishop
Managing director, Bishops Move

Ed: Increasing fleet efficiency is one of the key issues to be addressed at a forthcoming Fleet News event. Move Your Fleet Online, organised by Fleet News and sister online title FleetNewsNet, offers fleet decision-makers an in-depth briefing on what the internet can do. The event takes place on January 28 at the Heritage Motor Industry Centre, Gaydon, Warwickshire.

Fleets should demand action on tyre pricing

Sir – I read the Fleet Forum comment on tyre pricing (Fleet management December 12) with a great deal of interest.

For some time, we have been calling on the tyre industry to adopt a more transparent approach to pricing, believing that many current practices are questionable.

The most common is the 'top 20' method. If an account manager from a fast-fit company visits a fleet manager with the intention of forging a solus deal, the chances are he will start the ball rolling by compiling a list of the 20 most often bought tyre sizes and types on the fleet in the previous 12 months.

He will quote what appear to be good prices on them.

However, what the fleet manager is actually doing is giving this supplier leeway to charge almost what they like on every other tyre bought – and because a third of the fleet is replaced by new vehicles every year, a third of that list is probably already no longer applicable.

It is very easy for your total tyre bill to actually rise.

We believe that fleet managers stand to gain the best pricing by asking their suppliers to work on a fixed margin and by demanding a price guarantee designed to match or beat the lowest.

David Goodyear
General manager, AA Tyre Fitting

Ignorance of insurance move is rife

SIR – I am gravely concerned about how few fleet decision-makers know anything about the effect of the Fourth EU Motor Insurance Directive.

Recent research states that of those fleet executives questioned, 76% had heard of the Fourth Directive and that 67% of them knew the implications of non-compliance. In addition, 36% of them were ready to supply the data.

However, our experience seems to differ somewhat from this. In the past 10 sales demonstrations Chevin has given to potential new customers, only one knew anything about it. Even at our annual client networking and workshop day in October only four customers out of the 50 who attended had heard of it.

I find this quite concerning. Does this not make the UK unprepared? After all, the January 20 deadline (by which all company car, van and truck details will have to be logged with the Motor Insurance Database) is only a matter of days away. Considering that non-compliance on this date is not an option and will be a criminal offence, I find this alarming.

Ashley Sowerby
Director, Chevin Fleet Solutions

Cyclists must act on road safety too

Sir – I read the letter from Alastair King ('Training for safer roads' see below) and believe that it's not the sole duty of the poor motorist to be re-trained.

The vast majority of cyclists pay little or no attention to the Highway Code and indeed a drive through a large city will highlight the way the laws are flouted by cyclists, who incidentally pay absolutely nothing to use the highway.

With regard to pedestrian safety, a lot of the responsibility still lies in educating people to be more aware of their surroundings.

Finally, would he be equally happy to apply the same serious legislation to cyclists and pedestrians who act without due care?

Tim Heneghan-White
General sales manager, Haymill Saab

Drivers should be trusted to keep cars roadworthy

Sir – Regarding the idea that as a fleet decision-maker I should be making compulsory winter checks on drivers' cars. Don't you think I have got enough to do coping with London congestion charging, hands-free phone kits, providing fleet information to the insurance company and whatever other information a million and one people seem to want to know about our fleet?

'Fleet manager' is merely a task I carry out, not my job title. I do not even see most of the cars on our fleet from one month to another. Surely if we cannot trust people to keep their own cars roadworthy, be it winter or summer, then they should not have a company car.

If you start doing compulsory winter checks then why not do the same for the summer holidays when maybe cars are going to be taken abroad? It is just not practical. The onus must be on the driver. It is in their own interest to keep their vehicle roadworthy and safe to drive in.

Surely if a car is serviced regularly, it should not need a special winter check.

Name and address supplied

December 18, 2002

Road do-gooders are so misguided
Sir – So the 'do-gooders' are up in arms about proposals to widen the M6 and M1 (environmental damage, etc).

Presumably some of these are the same people who are against the proposals to widen the West Coast Mainline, etc. Surely that is just as environmentally damaging on a local scale.

Reducing congestion hot-spots will reduce long-term environmental damage as cars work more efficiently when moving at a reasonable speed, rather than in a stop-start driving conditions.

Surely road improvements are part of an integrated transport policy, the aim of which is not to force people on to public transport at any cost, but to make all journeys more efficient and to provide realistic options for travel other than by road. While I agree that there are many unnecessary vehicle journeys, the vast majority are undertaken due to the alternative transport (including car sharing) options being totally impractical and not cost-effective to businesses and individuals alike.

Ian Smith
group accountant, CPiO Ltd

Great LPG idea
Sir – Liquefied petroleum gas-only auction sales would be a good idea. LPG conversions range massively in terms of quality and support, from back street conversions through to quality conversions warranted by manufacturers.

An auction would enable buyers to purchase good quality LPG units at the right price without having to worry.

Stuart Chamberlain, Interleasing (UK)

Flexibility is becoming more important
Sir – It came as no great surprise to read Nigel Underdown's comments on how company car drivers will be affected by the lowering emissions-based tax bands every year.

This is one of the many changes that are affecting the traditional three- or four-year company car leasing cycle.

Drivers, and hence fleets, are looking more closely at packages that are more flexible than standard contract hire, because only then can they change their vehicles and thus improve their own tax positions as the emission bands tighten.

However, I feel that this is indicative of a much wider trend. 'Flexibility' is becoming a key watchword in HR departments up and down the country, both in terms of work-life balance and employee benefits.

The time when employees stayed with the same company for their entire career is over, and fleets will have to adapt to this sea change in working practices. There is still a place for contract hire and similar leasing products, but this is the time for companies with fleets to keep an eagle eye on the changes in British working culture. It will pay to be proactive.

Ken Needham
Commercial manager – Mini Lease Arval PHH

Mobile phones: the wrangle goes on
Sir – To add to the debate regarding mobile telephones, we all agree that to use a hand-held mobile phone while driving a motor vehicle is not a wise thing to do.

Certainly, it can be dangerous because the driver is not concentrating on the road, but perhaps it will help to clarify matters with regard to the current position if I quote Regulation 104 of the (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986.

This states: 'No person shall drive or cause or permit to be driven a motor vehicle on a road if the driver is in such a position that he cannot have proper control of the vehicle or have a full view of the road and traffic ahead.'

As far as the use of hand-help phones is concerned, the operative words are 'cannot have proper control of the vehicle'.

What is proper control? How is this defined? The matter of proper control is subjective and relies upon supportive evidence in order to prove the offence. The prosecutor must show evidence additional to the fact that the driver was using his hand-held phone.

It is not sufficient to say that the driver was holding his phone to his ear, therefore he was not in proper control.' Evidence, such as the vehicle weaving from side to side, would also be necessary.

Failing to have proper control could be almost anything – holding a passenger's hand, drinking from a can and so on. But in all cases there must be supporting evidence. A new offence of 'using a hand-held mobile phone while in control of a motor vehicle on the public road' would be an absolute offence and not need supportive evidence. That would make it an offence for which a ticket could be issued, the same as for speeding offences.

Michael Tarling,
Director, Drive Alive UK

Sir – I note with interest the varying thoughts of readers regarding a ban on mobile phone use while driving in the past few weeks. Peter Stockdale (see below) says ban all mobiles, except for taxi drivers and essential users.

Can you tell me who is an essential user? Somebody doing business getting work for his/her company ranks alongside any taxi driver in my book.

Essential users can be the police, fire service, ambulance drivers and so on, but surely they are just as unsafe when using a phone, hand-held phones or even hand-held radios while driving.

I am not in favour of banning the use of hand-held phones while driving unless smoking, using the radio or talking to passengers in the same circumstances is also banned.

Trevor Howard
Operations manager, FMC FoodTech

December 11, 2002

Darling's plan to ring the changes
Sir – Transport Secretary Alistair Darling's proposal to ask business drivers to assist with reducing road congestion by contacting specified offices when they encounter traffic problems is an interesting concept.

Certainly, we need some form of help in reducing traffic congestion nationally. However, I can only assume that such contact would be expected to be made by the driver using a mobile phone, since this would afford the most immediate provision of information.

That being so, how does he square such phone use with the guidelines posted on the Department for Transport's own website, which makes it perfectly clear how the DfT views the use of mobile phones – 'never use a hand-held phone while driving and it is best not to use even a hands-free phone while driving'.

Also, how does it affect proposals already under consideration for banning the use of phones by drivers while their vehicle is in motion or even stopped with the engine running?

Please don't anyone suggest that drivers would be expected to pull over and stop in order to use their phones, because we all know that isn't going to happen, especially on motorways.

Andy Robson
Robins & Day Leasing

Advice needed on congestion charging
Sir – As you may be aware, London is set to introduce a congestion charging scheme from February next year.

As transport manager with City Refrigeration Limited I am wondering if you can supply me with any information on how the congestion charging system is to be administered.

How will charges be levied are there any exemptions for company vehicles working within the city of London?

Any information you can supply will be greatly appreciated.

Tom McInulty
Transport manager
City Refrigeration Ltd

Ed – Full details of the congestion charging scheme are available on the Transport for London website, www.tfl.gov.uk

Bioethanol duty cut is 'little help'
Sir – Gordon Brown's pre-Budget statement has left a number of major issues unanswered for the UK's fleets when it comes to their fuel.

Petrol and diesel together still make up more than 99% of the UK's road fuel consumption, and yet there was no sign of any relief to the high fuel duties that are weighing down British businesses.

The promotion of alternative fuels is a laudable goal, but even here the picture remains unclear. The 20 pence per litre duty cut announced on bioethanol is of little help to those companies trying to reduce their fuel costs and increase their competitiveness in a tightening European market.

Instead, much like the biodiesel duty cut announced last year, it seems to be nothing more than a sop to the environmental lobby. Although increasing use of bioethanol may benefit some users of tractors and similar vehicles, it does nothing for British fleets.

Danny Clenaghan
Managing director of fuel and business solutions
Arval PHH

December 4, 2002

Confusion over phone ban

Sir – The arguments against phone use by drivers have been put forward repeatedly by road safety organisations, but for fleets these have to be weighed against the need to contact staff when they are out of the office.

There is, however, a lot of confusion still to be cleared up, particularly with regard to how any new ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving would be enforced.

For example, different police forces currently have varying views on the use of hands-free kits. Therefore fleets would benefit from a consistent approach from the authorities.

This is why companies with fleets must examine this issue now. On the one hand, it makes sense to determine the cost and feasibility of using the 'wired in' hands-free kits that are likely to escape the suggested ban.

On the other, if a fleet is planning to ban any phone use while driving, then it must have a policy in place so that drivers are clearly educated and aware of what to do if they have to make or receive a call.

Without a clear policy and audit trail in place, a ban on phone use could lead to big problems for fleets. A consistent approach from the authorities must be combined with clear guidance from employers.

Lorraine Wright
Director
Arval PHH Accident Management

Simple solution is to ban mobiles at the wheel

Sir – Does the Government really think it can justify a policy of not allowing the use of cheap hands-free mobile telephone sets, but happily allow the use of expensive factory-fitted items?

. What sort of risk assessment does this involve? The risk of losing favour with the motor industry?

I am managing director of a company which has carried out the risk assessments and banned the use of all mobile phones while driving.

The real source of risk while being on the phone while driving is the loss of concentration involved and that will occur whatever phone set- up is involved.

Is there any jusification for the absurd proposal being put forward? Just ban the use of mobile phones while driving, produce a list of exceptions for emergency services, taxi drivers and whoever else is thought necessary and have done with the job.

Pete Stockdale
Managing director
O Elliott

More education needed to eradicate poor drivers

Sir – I am a professional driver and cover on average 35,000 miles a year. I am a member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists and have a qualification in anti-hijack and close protection driving.

Admittedly, I am more qualified than most but my experiences of day-to-day driving and the sheer laziness of other drivers is astonishing.

The number of drivers who seem to have forgotten what directional indicators are for or how they work never ceases to amaze me. Even drivers of 40-foot HGVs, who one would think are at the pinnacle of driving skill, fail to use indicators on many occasions.

As for the normal domestic and pleasure driver, well say no more. You only have to drive on any motorway at the weekend to see the difference.

A simple way to stop congestion on motorways would be to have another driving test just to be allowed to go on them. It may be impractical, but it would perhaps improve the driving standard on motorways.

Also here we are again at the time of year when fog is common. This coincides with drivers turning on the most incorrectly used car fitment, the rear fog lamp.

There should be more information given to the driving public about the correct use of these lamps, as for days after any fog has disappeared you can see the idiots still driving round with their rear fog lights on, blinding any following drivers, even when there is a big amber light shining on the dash board to remind them that they are on.

Whatever happened to the public information films that used to be shown in the dim and distant past on TV?

We need to remind people about fog lights and their correct use, remind drivers to use indicators and the correct use of them and tell them the correct positioning when approaching a roundabout and actions when making directional turns.

Nick Welch
Pinnacle Insurance

Training for safer roads

Sir – Your article on crash test safety acknowledges that little progress is being made on pedestrian safety

. As one who cycles to work and whose children walk or cycle to school, I am more concerned with the safety of those outside the car.

More than 90% of accidents are caused by driver error. The more drivers are made to feel safe with crumple zones, airbags, side impact bars et al the more they feel comfortable with taking risks.

I think that increasing driver safety probably itself reduces pedestrian and cyclist safety even further. People start to use cars even for short journeys, creating more congestion, increasing the risk of accidents and making walking and cycling even less attractive.

Of course I want our employees who drive for work purposes to be safe.

But avoiding accidents by defensive driving techniques, and some serious action by legislators and courts to deal with drivers who behave as if they own the road (and that the rest of us have no right to be on it), would be much more effective.

Alastair King
Personnel manager
Church Pastoral Aid Society

LPG move is a viable option

Sir – I assure Peter Connah ('Why my fleet rejected a move to LPG see below') that his reasons for rejection of gas as an alternative fuel are wildly inaccurate and do not bear close scrutiny with the actual facts.

I should know, having managed a fleet which used LPG-powered Volvos as pool cars. The savings were considerable and I have purchased one for my partner, such was the impression made.

Also, try speaking to the London Borough of Merton which has all its vans, dustcarts etc fuelled by gas.

Geoffrey Aswani
Former commercial director TLG

Excellent move for Fleet Show

Sir – It was great to read the 2003 Fleet Show will be going back to the Silverstone venue.

The recent beneficial changes to the Silverstone location (car parking, access and so on) plus the ability to drive the cars on both road and track will make this again a truly important event – which few if any can afford to ignore.

I have already booked the dates in my diary. Congratulations to the Fleet News team.

Well done.

Nicholas J M Bennett
Head of the compensation & HR practice
Buck Consultants, London

November 28, 2002

Merry Christmas, you're redundant

Sir – We refer to the question raised in Fleet Forum, 'I'm worried my fleet job will simply disappear' (Fleet Management section).

This article could have been ghost-written for our exact predicament.

The advice given in the article we followed five years ago when our company was formed by the amalgamation of two competitors, and in fact secured our roles within the combined organisation.

However, now we find ourselves in a similar situation following the sale of our company to another in our industry. To quote Stewart Whyte, despite all our expertise the 'parent company knows best' and there are definitely 'no guarantees'.

Between the two of us we have more than 20 years' experience in managing a large car fleet operation – so are not strangers to change – in fact we relish the challenge. This time round, however, we were not given the opportunity to embrace the new company, as roles that capitalise on our skills and competencies did not exist within the new structure.

We have been advised that there is no plan to have a full-time dedicated fleet manager, despite a substantial fleet size.

So, our Christmas present is redundancy, but who knows what's around the corner? As so often happens a New Year brings with it new opportunities.

We would both be interested to hear from anyone in a similar situation or a company with a position that needs filling.

Name and address supplied

Setting the record straight on switching to LPG power

Sir – In response to the letter from Lancaster Partners ('Why my fleet rejected a move to LPG' see below) the factors on which Lancaster Partners based its decision are incorrect.

Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) vehicles emit approximately 12% less carbon dioxide (CO2) than petrol vehicles when running on LPG, even though they may have lower fuel economy.

Also, the drop in fuel economy is no different to carrying a passenger in the car. The new Vectra LPG, in fact, has a lower CO2 figure than the 2.0-litre diesel variant. LPG vehicles emit lower oxides of nitrogen and particulates that are blamed for damaging air quality in urban areas.

On the issue of safety, all Vauxhall LPG vehicles are fully validated and crash tested to ensure that safety standards are met, as well as meeting European regulations for equipment.

Within the aftermarket, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association (LPGA) approved installers have to comply with stringent codes of practice for their installations. Approved LPG vehicles do not incur a premium on insurance costs and are inspected in the same way as any other damaged vehicle.

I agree that having the spare wheel in the boot to make way for an LPG tank in the spare wheel well can reduce storage space. But the move to emergency tyre repair kits is now being evaluated by most of the major vehicle manufacturers not only for LPG but also for standard petrol and diesel vehicles. Some well-known vehicle manufacturers have already replaced spare wheels.

I would disagree that sites where gas is available are the most expensive for purchasing petrol.

Furthermore, with LPG priced at 38p/litre on average, the savings are at least 30% over petrol vehicles and large fleets have made substantial annual savings. When using LPG, the aim would be to drive at least 90% of the time on this fuel, which is how the savings accrue.

The range of most LPG vehicles is at least 300 miles, some 18% lower than a petrol vehicle, but a full tank of LPG would cost about £17 compared to £35-40 for petrol. The savings can be easily calculated.

There are advantages within the company car tax system. LPG vehicles qualify for an extra 1% reduction in their tax band based on their CO2 emissions, which is not available for petrol vehicles. Also, diesel vehicles that do not meet Euro IV emission standards incur a 3% penalty on their charge.

It is true that gas cars are not allowed through the Channel Tunnel but we are hopeful that in the future this will be changed. The decision is one for Eurotunnel to resolve. Of course, cross channel ferries have no such restriction.

The latest information from CAP is that the residual values for LPG vehicles may well carry a small premium and, at worse, will be equal to those of petrol vehicles, so this should negate the argument about higher holding costs, particularly when Government grants are included.

In our experience, fleets that have changed to LPG are achieving large savings as well as finding the vehicles safe to run and drive with no noticeable difference in performance.

Based on this evidence, Lancaster Partners might like to reassess its calculations.

Ian Blinder
Manager, special vehicles,
Vauxhall Motors

Data guidance on 4th Directive

Sir – I write in response to the letter from Ian Witham of Motor Data Solutions (4th Directive debate hots up, see below) regarding supplying data to the new Motor Insurance Database for the 4th EU Motor Insurance Directive.

I can confirm that the open nature of data in cfc software means that the information can easily be exported in any known format in use by motor insurers.

Although the formats used are very simple and most customers will be able to configure the files themselves, it is our intention to provide this service as part of a routine product service pack.

Jason Francis
Managing director
cfc solutions

Congratulations on the FN50

Sir – Congratulations on producing the FN50 again. As always you have provided an interesting and informative view of our industry that continues to go through rapid change.

I am always intrigued by the significant number of companies which either refuse to provide you with any financial information, or give you the results of their parent companies, frequently much larger organisations that operate in many varied businesses, often unrelated to contract hire.

Do these companies not know what returns they are making from their business? Or do they have something to hide?

Jon Walden
Managing director
Lex Vehicle Leasing

November 21, 2002

Why my fleet rejected a move to LPG

Sir - I have followed the debate over alternatively-fuelled cars for some time and in fact investigated changing some cars in our fleet to LPG.

We rejected it for the following reasons:

1. I believe the cars emit more CO2 while running on gas due to their poor fuel economy.
2. Safety. How can we be confident that the installer has performed a 100% perfect conversion? I also understand that following an accident, the gas installation has to be examined by a qualified engineer, leading to a longer period off road.
3. The loss of storage space having the spare wheel in the boot (we do not go along with the idea of an aerosol to fix a puncture).
4. Driving 700 miles per week (my weekly average), the driver would run both tanks dry before filling up, thus negating the cash advantage. A tank of LPG would only last two days, compared to currently four days on petrol.
5. Where gas is available, it is often at sites where petrol is the most expensive. I am currently paying 71.9 for unleaded, the LPG station is charging 77.9 for the same fuel.
6. Gas cars are not allowed to use the Channel Tunnel – an issue for about one third of our cars.
7. Residual values. Due to low secondhand demand I agree with Martin Ward of CAP that these vehicles are a blip.

At the moment I can see only one advantage and that is if the London charging scheme allows LPG cars to be allowed in free.

However, as we are based in Stockport thankfully very few journeys are made into the charging area.

I would be delighted if any of my above points could be disproved but judging by the recent report on attitudes to alternative fuels among leasing companies in the FN50 survey, it would appear that I am not alone in my thinking, especially in view of the low numbers of LPG vehicles on the road.

Peter Connah
PA to MD
Lancaster Partners
Stockport

Sir - I think that Barry Smoothey ('4th Directive debate hots up', Fleet NewsNet letters, November 8 below) is unnecessarily harsh in criticising your coverage of the 4th Directive.

He is, of course, right to point out the importance of this new legislation. But whether or not he is aware of it, fleets and insurers are still waiting – with only nine weeks to go before the legislation comes into force – for full details.

Both through Fleet Audits and my work with the Association of Car Fleet Operators, I have been involved in discussions with Department for Transport and the MIIC/ABI. But the fact remains that as I write, there is still no clean draft of the Statutory Instrument which will enable the legislation, no proper clarity on any exemption period for vehicles brought under a fleet policy on a short- term basis and not even any idea of what the penalties for non-compliance will be.

In fairness, Fleet NewsNet has tried to advise readers of at least the broad implications, at the earliest opportunity.

No-one should blame Fleet NewsNet (or other publications) for failing to provide details of the legislation, when that detailed legislation has not yet been put before the fleet market – or even the insurers!

Stewart Whyte
Director
Association of Car Fleet Operators

November 8, 2002

4th directive debate hots up

Sir – Having read the article 'Legal threat over EU insurance law', I feel that Fleet NewsNet has failed in its responsibility in getting across the impact and implications of the 4th EU Insurance Directive.

As a site dedicated to the fleet market, your duty is to keep fleet operators abreast with all elements that affect their role.

I recall writing to you six months ago congratulating you on your efforts in getting across the change in company car taxation but pointing out that you were not giving out any information with regard to the 4th Directive, which I felt you should be as the cost in administration and the potential breach of legislation would have a greater impact than change in company car taxation in relation to determining whether or not an employer maintained company cars or considered further changing to cash for car.

Barry Smoothey,
Commercial motor manager
Sutton Winson

Editor's reply – Fleet NewsNet first raised the issue of the compliance procedures of the 4th EU Insurance Directive in April 2001, and since then has published several articles, features, analyses and guest opinions on the subject. Research we conducted on behalf of the Motor Insurance Database indicates that 75% of the fleet decision makers who use Fleet NewsNet are aware of the Directive.

I agree that it is an important issue, but there is a fundamental difference with the change to company car tax where ignorance might have led to employees being stranded in tax-inefficient cars for the next three years.

The Directive is an area where action by either a fleet decision-maker within an organisation or their insurer can ensure corporate compliance – and the clock is ticking down to the January 20, 2003 deadline.

Sir – I read with interest the articles from Derek Mason of Zenith Vehicle Contracts, and the earlier article quoting Jason Francis, of cfc, concerning the 4th EU Motor Insurance Directive.

Fleet managers may like to know that the practical methods for supplying data to the Motor Insurance Database all rely upon the insurer concerned providing their own specific approach.

Unless fleet software providers are prepared to adapt their systems to send data in any one of 20 or more formats to the various fleet motor insurers, their customers will not be guaranteed that a new version will necessarily be compatible with their insurers' requirements. Many fleet managers will find that the most cost-effective way to address this issue is to use their fleet management software system as the source for the information, but to actually transfer it as a spreadsheet to their insurer.

If either fleet managers or fleet software providers would like to receive our free fact sheet on the issues of connecting their systems to the MID, we would be very happy to oblige. Log on to Ian Witham
Director
Motor Data Solutions

Free fuel no longer a benefit

Sir – I much appreciated Simon Harris' article, 'Dual strategy needed for free fuel rules'.

He gave us a clear illustration of driver break-even points for private fuel benefit. I wish to take the illustration further and consider the overall costs, being those of the employee and employer.

We need to add together the tax payable by the driver on his or her benefit-in-kind charge to the cost of the fuel and Class 1A National Insurance (NI) paid by the employer. More often than not, the whole of the costs equate to more than twice the pump price.

Our advice to the vast majority of employers, is to implement a private fuel buy-out which ensures that drivers are no worse off. Cash allowances in lieu of private fuel may be subsidised by drivers' notional tax savings.

Employers may make very healthy savings where the gross cash allowances are less than their current private fuel and Class 1A NI costs. These savings may in turn be shared with the drivers.

Clearly, the provision of fuel for private motoring is, in most cases, no longer cost effective and employers must be advised to take a serious look at withdrawing this 'benefit'.

Mark Allen
Senior Consultant
KPMG – carWISE Team

Realising the downside of diesel

Sir – How refreshing to read a letter on the inherent dangers of diesel emissions ('Dangerous diesel needs prosecuting').

The particulates and ultra fine particles emitted by all diesel engine exhausts have been scientifically proven by our American cousins to be rich in the carcinogens responsible for lung cancer and also a major contributor to the cause of asthma.

It is no coincidence that the rapid increase in the number of asthma sufferers in the UK, especially children, has occurred over the same 10-15 year period as the rise in popularity in the diesel powered car. Diesel's lower carbon dioxide emissions offset global warming but this is won at the expense of major damage to the air. Why do car makers and motoring journalists continue to promote the financial economies of diesel engines without telling us that the cost is paid for by the damage to our health?

Les Greaves
Centaur Group

Count up those illegal cyclists

Sir – Further to recent debate regarding whether or not motorists should be made automatically liable for any accidents involving cyclists, now that the clocks have gone back an hour just make a note of how many cyclists you see who are riding in the dark without any form of lighting on their bikes, and then decide if motorists should be liable. I'm already into double figures.

Andy Robson
Robins & Day Leasing

November 3, 2002

Sir - In response to Transport 2000's attempt to force a Judicial Review of painting speed cameras yellow, allowing drivers to slow down. Perhaps it should look at the less conspicuous camera sites, many of which have long skid marks close by, indicating panic braking by drivers on seeing the cameras.

Is this not more dangerous?

Transport 2000 states that speed is a 'contributory' factor in a third of fatal incidents. Just how many are attributable to excessive speed or more importantly, lack of driving ability?

Adrian Don
Keyfleets Stockton on Tees

October 31, 2002

Driver record warning

Sir – I write with a warning to all dealerships (franchised or not) who run company vehicles.

We regularly receive speeding/parking tickets for courtesy cars, rental vehicles and demonstration vehicles. Our company policy and procedure is to ensure a loan car form, rental agreements or unaccompanied test drive form is duly filled in on each occasion.

This enables us to comply with current legislation and communicate the details of the person in charge of the vehicle at the time to the authorities.

However, we recently received a fixed penalty speeding ticket.

Upon investigation the person in charge of the vehicle at the time (it was 'his' demonstrator) was unable to produce a form for the date and time in question and nothing was on our files.

We therefore gave this salesman's details as being the person who had charge of the vehicle at the time.

He subsequently denied this and the ticket came back to our company. A summons was issued to the company and, despite accompanying our plea with reams of internal paperwork, copies of company policy and procedures and the staff contract, we received a fine of £280 plus £35 costs for 'failing to name the driver.'

Has anyone else found their company in the same situation? I would be interested to hear their opinion.

Paul Clist
managing director, Clist & Rattle
(MG Rover, Skoda and Renault franchise holders)

Parts problem is an old one

Sir – In response to your Fleet Panel question last week, regarding any deterioration in parts' supply times, there have always been manufacturers who have experienced difficulties with parts supply but in real terms this has not altered a great deal over the past few years.

There are however three factors that should be considered, the first being that it would seem logical to assume that as manufacturers strive to 'share' design with their competitors, then the parts supply situation will directly improve as a result.

The less positive view could be that as pressure has mounted to fit only original parts to vehicles within their ever increasing warranty periods, then the loss of support from the non OE parts sector could be increasing the demands on the manufacturers to supply original parts to a level that they cannot always sustain?

The last point worth considering is that with the increase in imported vehicles into the UK then the likelihood of parts shortages will increase, particularly where the design of the vehicle was originally geared to specialist overseas use.

Peter Eldridge
fleet manager
Motorcare Holdings

What a pickle we seem to be in

Sir – What a pickle the country seems to be in. On the one hand we have the Government trying to tax people out of new model, low-polluting and mostly well-maintained company cars and perhaps pushing many of them into vehicles which will be maintained according to when the driver thinks he can afford it.

On the other hand we have MPs calling for fleets to adopt speed limiters – soon there won't be any fleets left for them to be installed on – or hadn't they noticed?

Recent reports on Fleet NewsNet state that more than half of all vehicles on the motorway break the 70mph limit, 18% exceed 80mph and 65% exceed the 30mph. I would suggest that it is more scientific than that. Anecdotal evidence suggests there are many who travel at 45mph in a 60mph area and continue at the same speed in a 30mph zone.

Conversely there are also plenty who ritually exceed the maximum national speed limits but observe much more faithfully the speed limits in urban areas. If there is any truth in this isn't it telling us that the majority of regular, and probably higher than average mileage drivers, have lost respect for the posted limits?

Rob Chisholm
AVC

October 28, 2002

Fleet management software can help with 4th directive

Sir - I read with interest the articles from Derek Mason, of Zenith Vehicle Contracts, (25/10), and the earlier article quoting Jason Francis, of Cfc, (15/10), concerning the 4th EU Motor Insurance Directive.

Fleet managers may like to know that the practical methods for supplying data to the Motor Insurance Database all rely upon the insurer concerned providing their own specific approach. Unless fleet software providers are prepared to adapt their systems to send data in any one of 20 or more formats to the various fleet motor insurers, their customers will not be guaranteed that a new version will necessarily be compatible with their insurers' requirements.

Many fleet managers will find that the most cost effective way to address this issue is to use their fleet management software system as the source for the information, but to actually transfer it as a spreadsheet to their insurer.

If either fleet managers or fleet software providers would like to receive our free fact sheet on the issues of connecting their systems to the MID, we would be very happy to oblige.

Ian Witham
Director
www.motordatasolutions.co.uk

October 24, 2002

New car sales: a false economy?

SIR – This year new car sales in the UK are predicted to break through the 2.5 million mark for the first time, thereby firmly establishing the country as the second largest car market in Europe.

But is the fact that the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders is estimating that new car sales this year will total 2.51 million – 2% or 50,000 units up on 2001's record figure – a cause for celebration?

I don't think it is. And the reason I say that is because I don't understand what is happening with all these cars.

The shiny new cars are certainly not all being driven away from franchised dealers' forecourts by happy private buyers or company car drivers.

Similarly, they are not being delivered in the quantities talked of by contract hire and leasing companies to end-user fleets.

Talk to industry insiders and it is not difficult to discover that row upon row of unsold – but registered – models are lined up in store in fields across the UK. Legislation passed by the Government following the 'rip-off' Britain campaign of a couple of years ago was partially aimed at ending the monthly fiasco of so-called 'false' registrations.

This was the practice where some manufacturers registered vehicles at the end of each month to boost market share in the knowledge that the cars had no home to go to – it was a policy, though, which at least one manufacturer was brave enough to criticise.

I'm afraid to say that I believe something similar is again taking place as manufacturers, through their actions, refuse to reduce production levels to meet real-world demands and are treating the Government's new legislation with contempt. Let's look at the facts. Industry figures reveal that in the first 10 days of September new car sales were about 17% down year-on-year. A week or so later sales were still 14% down.

However, when the final numbers for the month were announced they showed the market had dipped just 2.4% down from 443,265 units to 432,661 and, in fact, fleet business was up 7.2% with private sales taking the brunt of the drop.

Talking with manufacturer sales staff, franchised dealers and colleagues in the contract hire and leasing industry it has been clear for sometime that, amid global economic uncertainty, the new car market was becoming an increasingly tough market.

So how come the market turned so dramatically towards the end of September? Manufacturer incentives to dealers probably played a part and I'm sure some orders for October were pulled forward.

But I don't believe those two measures alone counted for the dramatic turnaround? What worries me is the 'wrong' signal such a buoyant market sends to the Government and that thousands of unsold cars scattered around the country will eventually be drip-fed into the new or nearly new used car market.

Is it not strange that cars just over the minimum three-months laid down by Government to avoid the new pre-registration rules are now hitting showrooms with 'delivery mileage' and at vastly reduced prices.

Such a development will clearly hit already fragile residual values as we move into a time of the year when retail demand for used cars traditionally reduces. What a way to win support from your existing customers who are seeing their valuable assets depreciate more quickly.

Manufacturers, dealers, contract hire and leasing companies and the motor industry at large are all striving to make money. But the economy that goes with a true 2.5 million new car market is simply not in place.

We must not be lulled into a false sense of security that a 2.5 million new car market provides. It is a hard market place and the buoyant picture painted by September's new car sales figures is not one I, or colleagues in the industry, recognise.

Nick Brown
Managing director
Black-I

October 16, 2002

Clean fuels make sense

Sir – Regarding the issue of 'should fleets invest in alternative fuel cars to avoid future congestion charges in Britain's major cities'? The answer has to be a resounding yes – it makes sound business and environmental sense.

The figures stack up. London congestion charging will cost at least £5 a day, five days a week for each vehicle entering the zone. On an annual basis a fleet of 100 vehicles entering London once a day will cost £130,000 per annum. Yet alternative fuel cars and vans will be exempt from the charges.

Moreover, the purchase of a clean fuel vehicle is easy and inexpensive. Although the vehicles might cost slightly more, grants are available through PowerShift to meet up to 75% of the additional cost. And if you are buying more than one car or van, block grants are available so the paperwork only needs to be filled in once.

When you consider these figures – combined with lower fuel costs – liquified petroleum gas (LPG) costs about 38 pence per litre as opposed to diesel which costs about 78p per litre – the savings really begin to add up.

With LPG vehicles readily available from manufacturers and LPG now available at more than 1,100 petrol stations and refuelling sites, there are great incentives for fleet decision-makers to make the change.

As well as making sound business sense, clean fuel vehicles make good environmental sense. They also have the advantage of being a straightforward way to improve a company's reputation for social responsibility. The benefits are immediate and clear – there is nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Jonathan Murray
Director, TransportEnergy

Vehicle safety is a two-way affair

Sir – Regarding your question about who should be responsible for ensuring company cars are safe to use, the driver or the employer.

Day-to-day maintenance is very definitely the responsibility of the driver. I have produced a monthly mileage return which asks the separate questions, 'have the oil/water/tyres been checked?, has the car had a service?, has there been any change to licence status?'

If nothing else, answering makes the driver think.

I try and 'sell' the idea of returning this form every month as a hard copy proof that they have reasonably maintained their vehicle if the worst ever happens. These checks are also mentioned in the driver health and safety part of my company car handbook.

Your headline was correct – safety is a two-way affair.

Lesley Longworth
McCann Healthcare

Questioning the congestion charge

Sir – I was very interested in your article 'Car rental faces fatal blow from road tolls' and it started me thinking beyond short-term car rental to fleet replacement cars/courtesy cars for accident and mechanical repairs.

My question is, if a London resident's car is off the road by reason of breakdown or accident for two weeks does Transport for London (TfL) allow free substitutions or does the resident have to pay £10 to register the hire car/courtesy car to benefit from the 90% discount and then have to pay another £10 to re-register their own car?

If TfL does not allow substitutions the resident registers the hire car/courtesy car and with all the normal pressures and commitments in life plus all the hassle involved in re-registering their car, forgets and doesn't re-register, then I presume they are going to get charged on the full rate until they do.

I imagine there will be a number of disgruntled residents who, if they are company car drivers, I presume, will try and pass these costs on to their employers as expenses etc, etc.

Geoffrey Timms
Diageo

What happened to all the ladies?

Sir – Regarding your article 'Real world driver training'.

You had a test group of six drivers. Drivers of the female persuasion were notably absent. Are the boys afraid of the competition, or of verifying the popular belief that women are much safer drivers? A female colleague has suggested an alternative reason; that the girls were getting on with the work while the boys were playing with their toys?

Dug Brown
'Equal Opportunities Ambassador', Somerfield

Get the facts before opting out

Sir – I read with interest the letter from Mr Tipper, 'Accountants do not always favour cash over car'. (see below).

Most reputable accountants now have a way of computing whether a company provided car is better than a cash allowance. In the case of the low business miles Mercedes-Benz CLK driver in Mr Tipper's example, the solution is clear.

A vehicle of this type would often cost say £8,000 per annum to run, taking into account depreciation, interest, maintenance and insurance.

The simplistic and accurate way of deciding on the car versus cash scenario is for the taxable benefit to be compared to the cost of the company providing the car.

With a list price of £32,000, a 25% benefit would be neutral at £8,000.

Under the old rules, the driver would have been taxed at 35% and should have opted out of the car scheme, whereas with a CLK 270CdI with low emissions would mean he or she should retain a company car under the new rules as the benefit would be 21% (£6,720).

The advice we give uses the tax calculations as a base but also considers the important factors such as the lack of control over reliability once staff opt out of a car scheme, the risk of employees driving cars which portray the wrong image (either way) and the loss of flexibility once the group insurance scheme is ended.

My message would be to collect the facts from the fleet manager and/or motor dealer and then consult your accountant. The accountant will stand by his advice - will the fleet manager do the same?

Mark Lane
Director - specialising in Motor Trade
Tenon Ltd

Just where is safe these days?

Sir - Every day I read some new evidence of a health hazard on some product or another (Lung cancer fear over diesel fumes, Fleet NewsNet September 12) – can anyone name anything that is not a risk to our health? I would stay at home but this is a risk in itself as most accidents happen in the home!

Keith Sinclair
Technical manager
H.C.E.Ltd

Dangerous diesel needs prosecuting

Sir - All diesel engines emit dangerous carcinogens including nitrobenzanthrone3 which is one of the most lethal substances known to man. They should be banned and the manufacturers prosecuted in a similar way to asbestos cases.

Roy Milnes, via email

Safety a two-way affair

SIR – Regarding the question of who should be responsible for ensuring company cars are safe to use – the fleet manager or the driver?

Ultimately, it should be the driver – how often does the fleet manager drive any of the cars that come under his/her wing? Having said that, it should be a two-way communication. In my case, I get notification of the MOT running out on a vehicle, pass this on via email to the driver and check that it has been carried out and the paperwork forwarded to the relevant person.

Tax discs come to me to be forwarded and accident report forms to be dealt with.

Day-to-day maintenance and services must be the responsibility of the driver. I can help with finding the right sort of garage but it is down to the driver to book the car in. They know the mileage they are doing and where they will be on a certain day, so it is easier for them to take ownership of servicing of their car.

When meetings are held at our head office, where I am based, I wander around the car park looking at cars I don't see very often, checking for damage, cleanliness etc. The drivers are spoken to if I have a concern.

Day-to-day maintenance, tyres, fluid level checks, must be the drivers' responsibility – they are driving the vehicle and surely want to check all is okay before they set off on a trip, maybe not every day, but once a week.

Of course, out here in the real world of fleet management, whilst most drivers do take responsibility, there are an awful lot who don't and these drivers cost their companies a lot of money in preventable repairs to vehicles. Or am I peculiar in the problems I encounter with my drivers?

Name and address supplied

Your accountant isn't always right

SIR – Why is it that accountants always seem to favour cash over car? I listened intently to David Rawlings (Fleet News Hit for Six Conference, September 24), for whom I have the greatest respect, stressing the importance of evaluating both options carefully before deciding which is most appropriate.

Clients frequently ask for advice on this subject and I recently received a call from a director who currently covers few business miles in his Mercedes-Benz CLK 230 Kompressor. His personal accountant had recommended that he took the cash (neutral) option offered by his company as under the new rules for calculating BIK he would be paying much more tax.

Under the old rules, this director was taxed at the highest rate of 35%, benefiting only recently from the over-four-years-old discount. With a CO2 reading of 237 g/km, he is currently taxed at 29%, increasing his BIK by £1,000. However, by replacing with a Mercedes CLK 270 CDi, he will be taxed at 21%, reducing his BIK by £5,040 when compared with the old rule before he received the discount.

Needless to say, we've been instructed to order the car, proving that where cars are concerned, it is important to obtain your advice from your fleet manager rather than your accountant.

John Tipper
Managing director
Tipper Fleet Services, London

Charging scheme disriminates against small fleets

Sir - Congestion charges are getting closer and operators have the chance to register vehicles on the Transport for London website (www.tfl.gov.uk) from 14th October. A previous article on Fleet NewsNet has made reference to the fleet schemes available. However, these are only of any use if the fleet size is 25 vehicles or more.

Whilst many companies may be able to achieve the 25 vehicle total by adding on the company cars they will not be able to benefit from the Automated Decrementing Scheme and will need to apply additional resource to collating daily lists of vehicle movements for the Notification Scheme.

Whilst, at first this may appear not to be too much of an arduous task, it could well be a resource that a small company cannot afford.

Can pressure be applied on TFL to allow the Automated Decrementing Scheme to address this, even if it attracts a slightly higher premium at the point of annual registration?

Martin Macklin
General manager operations
Leathams Plc London

Views on safety checks

Sir – I was interested in your article on the Inland Revenue introducing fortnightly safety checks on vehicles, but I am surprised that all large fleets don't already do it. Indeed, it should be encouraged by contract hire companies and everyone else in the industry.

Liverpool City Council vehicles generally cover low mileage annually but have had interim safety inspections since I was fleet manager in 1995. Under no circumstances should you put any driver to work in a vehicle and expect not to see it for a year irrespective of mileage.

John Carrington
Fleet Management Unit,
Liverpool City Council

Sir – I agree with regular health checks for pool cars because they are abused as no particular driver takes ownership. However, getting a third party in every fortnight I think is a little excessive and could become very expensive.

Why not try using a daily circle check sheet, similar to that used by HGV drivers? This way the fleet can be audited daily if necessary and because the driver puts their name to it, a little more care over the car is exercised.

Lee Goodall
Fleet Manager, Superdrug

Greatest threat to lease firms

Sir – Whilst I would not doubt the use of the web has made savings across all aspects of fleet management, John Maslen's article seems to imply it is only the rental companies' 'implants' that will suffer.

In fact, the greatest potential saving for many fleets will be to take back control and management of short-term vehicle hire from contract hire companies. One fleet I looked at recently was paying over £14,000 extra each year to a lease company for 'built-in' cover. Analysis of actual hire required came to half that figure. From this example it appears the greatest threat will be to the lease companies.

Bill Pinkney
Transport Consultancy Services

Tailor-made rental solutions

Sir – Regarding your article on the threat the internet poses to rental implants, the reality is that no one solution fits all customer requirements all of the time.

Our job as a vehicle rental solutions provider is to respond to the way our customers want to manage their rental needs and to give them a complete suite of integrated systems and services. It is not just different customers who have varying needs – different parts of the same organisation will often want to manage their rental requirements in an individual manner.

It will be interesting to see if Nick Brown's predictions come true. We will continue to work with our customers and recommend the optimum solution(s) they need – whether that is voice, e-business, specialist teams or fax.

Paul Brown
Marketing Director
National Car Rental