The future of electric vehicle maintenance

[8ob]

Apparently they are not in the "People Pleasing Business".......

Over here Fred leased vehicles make tax efficient sense for companies doing well, not so sure its a good move for an individual. That said if Joe public cant take a joke they shouldnt join in.

Bob

 

[premmington]

Over here Fred leased vehicles make tax efficient sense for companies doing well, not so sure its a good move for an individual. That said if Joe public cant take a joke they shouldnt join in.

Bob

@8ob

Got there @8ob - it makes sense if you paying all the tax - "leased vehicles make tax efficient sense for companies doing well" - I would agree 100% with his comment...

It makes sense - if you paying no tax - Motab.....


If you on PAYE - "salary sacfrice" - it only makes sence if you working for the Govt'

Read the small print on the deal - you are signing up for....

 

[daleyd]

The thing is....I can see that a lot of people who might well have been s/h buyers in the past - are going new on lease.... because buying used is getting to be a far more risky proposition DUE to the reliability/repair cost of even relatively young cars now.

I get it (to a point) that Mfrs are happy that the situation is pushing new unit sales - but both they and the Lease Co's NEED a thriving used market - as the trade-in / resale of vehicles to 2nd owners is a big part of new sales.

Super-high depreciation, unattractive used cars (due to fears of reliability coupled with massive repair bills as well as what seems very much to be a poorer after-sales parts and support FOR a used car - with the huge complexity of electronics coupled with more fragile everything) .... is putting off used buyers. That has to adversely impact new vehicle sales sooner or later.

Apparently the average age of cars in the UK is the oldest it has ever been. One has to speculate that this is a reaction to used buyers both not trusting newer used car offerings, while not able or willing to join the new car lease/buy (with again the significant costs of same being prohibitive).

Works both ways though - an affordable used market also requires new sales. You can’t have one without the other.

If new sales shrink, less secondhand vehicles, prices go up…there will be a lag no doubt but it will be felt.

In terms of expensive repairs, I’m not sure any of this is entirely new - our pub landlord had a jeep something or other basically written off at no more than 4 years old back in early 2000,s due to the cost of a new ecu. Mid 2000’s Audis with piston ring failure. 80’s/90’s cars being effectively written off due to rust after 5-6 years.

 

[ajlelectronics]

Mid 2000’s Audis with piston ring failure. 80’s/90’s cars being effectively written off due to rust after 5-6 years.

Well it's not ALL bad then.

 

[brewdexta]

I use PCP for two reasons. The main one was the missus wanted a reliable car when I was working away 3 or more days a week. She needed it for work and kids. I didn't want the onus of maintenance to be on me.

Secondly, my investments were yielding higher interest than that being charged via PCP. Ok, there's depreciation, but my days of sodding around with sheds is over, my choice, I'm worth it I chose PCP over HP as the option to hand it back at the end is handy, which I've done.

My daily driver for 14 years was a Disco. It was only during Covid that it decided to be a complete PITA maintenance wise so traded it in for a Ranger. I've since traded that in for a 3 year old Kia EV6 that I've bought and loving it. I'm currently in Bristol after picking the daughter up from York to drop her at Uni, beers not too bad here for darn sarth

 

[GRW]

Works both ways though - an affordable used market also requires new sales. You can’t have one without the other.

If new sales shrink, less secondhand vehicles, prices go up…there will be a lag no doubt but it will be felt.

In terms of expensive repairs, I’m not sure any of this is entirely new - our pub landlord had a jeep something or other basically written off at no more than 4 years old back in early 2000,s due to the cost of a new ecu. Mid 2000’s Audis with piston ring failure. 80’s/90’s cars being effectively written off due to rust after 5-6 years.

Yes, but the "balance" is way off.
New cars too expensive and with too short & expensive a product life-cycle (Greed?) with plummeting residuals because the cars aren't trusted by the public.
That means the "gains" of new sales has a short-term life itself, as the industry finds it cannot shift those used units they take in, which will slow new sales, and you'll have the dichotomy of short supply of used units, that should attract higher prices.... but buyers don't want them anyway (because they're carp!).

The sector I CAN see (or could/would see if it wasn't for the Govt unfairly forcing them off the roads through Robbery VED and ULEZ etc)... is the much older, reliable cars... where people prefer to invest money in keeping an older car going (15+ years old now) or even buying a 15+ Yr old replacement - because the outlay and therefore the loss risk factor is WAY better, with a very good chance of better reliability, with better "repairability".

The car industry is getting it badly wrong. Greed sees vehicles built to the lowest possible quality, with a deliberate "consumer disposable" leaning instead of a "consumer durable". Our Govt with the OTT Climate Agenda is adding pain & penury, which hits the poorest by far the hardest to put the tin hat on it.

The costs of running a vehicle (& the draconian penalties for running a better, older one) are asphyxiating the car industry. The well-off don't notice or don't care.... but it WILL impact even those who CAN afford to buy/lease a new motor soon enough.... they will wake up too late.
(We see the same story with EV's, ASHP & Solar etc.... the Incentives get grabbed by the "middle-class, middle-income+ brigade" grabbing a freebie that the poorest partly pay for through their Taxes, that the poorest themselves cannot afford to have...... & those that profit short-term, cannot see the bigger picture until it smacks them in the face down the line). So it is with cars too now - basically EVERYONE gets to catch a cold - its just a question of when, not if.

The "Agenda" to force us all out of the car & the direction its going might please certain Factions..... but its doing no-one else any favours whatsoever.

Watch this space.

 

[addjunkie]

Yes, but the "balance" is way off.
New cars too expensive and with too short & expensive a product life-cycle (Greed?) with plummeting residuals because the cars aren't trusted by the public.
That means the "gains" of new sales has a short-term life itself, as the industry finds it cannot shift those used units they take in, which will slow new sales, and you'll have the dichotomy of short supply of used units, that should attract higher prices.... but buyers don't want them anyway (because they're carp!).

The sector I CAN see (or could/would see if it wasn't for the Govt unfairly forcing them off the roads through Robbery VED and ULEZ etc)... is the much older, reliable cars... where people prefer to invest money in keeping an older car going (15+ years old now) or even buying a 15+ Yr old replacement - because the outlay and therefore the loss risk factor is WAY better, with a very good chance of better reliability, with better "repairability".

The car industry is getting it badly wrong. Greed sees vehicles built to the lowest possible quality, with a deliberate "consumer disposable" leaning instead of a "consumer durable". Our Govt with the OTT Climate Agenda is adding pain & penury, which hits the poorest by far the hardest to put the tin hat on it.

The costs of running a vehicle (& the draconian penalties for running a better, older one) are asphyxiating the car industry. The well-off don't notice or don't care.... but it WILL impact even those who CAN afford to buy/lease a new motor soon enough.... they will wake up too late.
(We see the same story with EV's, ASHP & Solar etc.... the Incentives get grabbed by the "middle-class, middle-income+ brigade" grabbing a freebie that the poorest partly pay for through their Taxes, that the poorest themselves cannot afford to have...... & those that profit short-term, cannot see the bigger picture until it smacks them in the face down the line). So it is with cars too now - basically EVERYONE gets to catch a cold - its just a question of when, not if.

The "Agenda" to force us all out of the car & the direction its going might please certain Factions..... but its doing no-one else any favours whatsoever.

Watch this space.

Im inclined to agree, we will all end up on shanks pony wearing sack cloth or wool once they kill off oil.

Not all progress benefits the man in the street, but its still progress!

 

[GRW]

Im inclined to agree, we will all end up on shanks pony wearing sack cloth or wool once they kill off oil.

Not all progress benefits the man in the street, but its still progress!

Strong argument that its regression, not progress though!
A century ago, an immobile population had local goods & services.
The corner shop
The ironmongers
The Dairy
The Butcher
The Greengrocer
The Doctor
Local Employment & Trades
Etc......

Now - we've had decades where travel and centralisation of a goods & services (to benefit large Multiples and economise their Distribution) has seen large shopping areas out-of-town, as well as Employment - putting reliance upon the individual - needing to travel to the goods & services, not the other way around.

We still have that travel-dependent infrastructure..... but without correcting that situation, "the powers that be" choose to financially batter & hamstring the populace - for being dependent upon a transport situation that THEY created!

As always - this whole screwing-over has nothing to do with "saving the planet" or creating a better environment for everyone - its a cynical cash-grab and social control exercise, wrapped in a transparent cloak of "Environmental Responsibility".... while the large global Corps make Billions by screwing the public over.

Progress? I don't think so - not for the ordinary working-class working person it's not.

 

[daleyd]

Yes, but the "balance" is way off.
New cars too expensive and with too short & expensive a product life-cycle (Greed?) with plummeting residuals because the cars aren't trusted by the public.
That means the "gains" of new sales has a short-term life itself, as the industry finds it cannot shift those used units they take in, which will slow new sales, and you'll have the dichotomy of short supply of used units, that should attract higher prices.... but buyers don't want them anyway (because they're carp!).

The sector I CAN see (or could/would see if it wasn't for the Govt unfairly forcing them off the roads through Robbery VED and ULEZ etc)... is the much older, reliable cars... where people prefer to invest money in keeping an older car going (15+ years old now) or even buying a 15+ Yr old replacement - because the outlay and therefore the loss risk factor is WAY better, with a very good chance of better reliability, with better "repairability".

The car industry is getting it badly wrong. Greed sees vehicles built to the lowest possible quality, with a deliberate "consumer disposable" leaning instead of a "consumer durable". Our Govt with the OTT Climate Agenda is adding pain & penury, which hits the poorest by far the hardest to put the tin hat on it.

The costs of running a vehicle (& the draconian penalties for running a better, older one) are asphyxiating the car industry. The well-off don't notice or don't care.... but it WILL impact even those who CAN afford to buy/lease a new motor soon enough.... they will wake up too late.
(We see the same story with EV's, ASHP & Solar etc.... the Incentives get grabbed by the "middle-class, middle-income+ brigade" grabbing a freebie that the poorest partly pay for through their Taxes, that the poorest themselves cannot afford to have...... & those that profit short-term, cannot see the bigger picture until it smacks them in the face down the line). So it is with cars too now - basically EVERYONE gets to catch a cold - its just a question of when, not if.

The "Agenda" to force us all out of the car & the direction its going might please certain Factions..... but its doing no-one else any favours whatsoever.

Watch this space.

I’m not sure I share your pessimism, I doubt they really want to force us out of cars, as it’s such a money spinner for them - what are they replacing that black hole with once you no longer have a car?

What they are doing is squeezing every Penny they can from the motorist…watch this space.

 

[Erie Fred]

"Cash for Klunkers" made serious ripples throughout our used/new car markets back in 2009.....
Not good ripples for sure.

 

[GRW]

"Cash for Klunkers" made serious ripples throughout our used/new car markets back in 2009.....
Not good ripples for sure.

We've had Govt "Scrappage Schemes" here.
Again, it sounds good if you just give it no thought - but the reality was that loads of "enterprising" people WITH money that could afford a new car.... went out & bought a "banger" so they could turn a fast buck getting the £2k Scrappage Scheme Money (more poor Taxpayer's money, naturally!).

Those schemes took thousands of cheap, serviceable cars out of the cheap runabout pool for the cash-strapped, & push up prices of those that were left.

Once again it was a scheme that hammered the poorest, and gifted to the better off.
They keep on doing these schemes that take from the poorest, & hand it to the better off. Its so stupid that it HAS to be deliberate.

 

[Erie Fred]

In our case, people that could NOT afford a new car, traded in a viable working car for IIRC $4k.
Bought a brand new car for $30k-$50k and then lost them to repo.

Couldn't find anything cheap to fall back upon, so filed bankruptcy.

 

[Moose McAlpine]

They keep on doing these schemes that take from the poorest, & hand it to the better off. Its so stupid that it HAS to be deliberate.

Well there aren't any poor politicians.

 

[GRW]

I’m not sure I share your pessimism, I doubt they really want to force us out of cars, as it’s such a money spinner for them - what are they replacing that black hole with once you no longer have a car?

What they are doing is squeezing every Penny they can from the motorist…watch this space.

Then it's a very short-sighted, short-termist policy.
You'd need to be very "hard-of-thinking" to see the current situation as a viable strategy for long-term vehicle sales.

1. Build poor-quality product
2. Make it a short-lifespan, too expensive product for a huge proportion of the market to afford, so
3. (Rather like the lunatic "self-certification" mortgages to maintain too-high property prices that were unaffordable) ... introduce a (still eye-wateringly expensive) PCP / Lease schemes to maintain too-high prices for inferior product.
4. The product quality affecting consumer confidence which hammers used and trade-in residuals, and depresses the used car market.
5. No3 above now means the Finance Co's lose money, as their reliance on the 2nd lease or Residual Value of the car - is way lower than predicted.
6. Used car buyers don't want them because a) they are stupidly costly to fix, b) because they are so complicated and poor quality that Garages don't want to take the work on anyway, & c) they have no trust in the reliability & cost of ownership.

"Build poor quality, expensive to own/rent, high-depreciating Products, that much of the market cannot afford, & that 2nd owners view as too high-risk to risk their hard-earned on, and that 3rd or 4th owners won't touch with a bargepole".
Who in their right mind views that as a sustainable market strategy???

 

[daleyd]

I’m not defending it as a policy (whatever “it” is) , I’m telling you that if their plan is to get rid of cars then there’s going to be a gaping hole in the countries finances. Already mentioned is the lack of local shops, amenities. Sounds like what’s needed is “15 minute cities”, but they don’t seem overly popular either. So what’s it to be?

You can argue that cars are now too expensive, too complex, hard to fix - but as someone said earlier, you can still buy simple cars. The fact no one buys them isn’t really the fault of all the other manufacturers selling the overly complicated ones that buyers seem to want. Is it right? I have no idea, but it is what it is.

If you want to change it, then you need to persuade people they need a cheap simple car (good luck with that), or buy a new one yourself.

 

[GRW]

I’m not defending it as a policy (whatever “it” is) , I’m telling you that if their plan is to get rid of cars then there’s going to be a gaping hole in the countries finances. Already mentioned is the lack of local shops, amenities. Sounds like what’s needed is “15 minute cities”, but they don’t seem overly popular either. So what’s it to be?

You can argue that cars are now too expensive, too complex, hard to fix - but as someone said earlier, you can still buy simple cars. The fact no one buys them isn’t really the fault of all the other manufacturers selling the overly complicated ones that buyers seem to want. Is it right? I have no idea, but it is what it is.

If you want to change it, then you need to persuade people they need a cheap simple car (good luck with that), or buy a new one yourself.

I'm happy with a cheap simple car.

The "simple" cars you can buy now - aren't that simple

 

[Erie Fred]

If cars are being phased out, start looking to transit & subway car shops for a job.
Some even have Ford engines installed underneath.....

 

[daleyd]

I'm happy with a cheap simple car.

The "simple" cars you can buy now - aren't that simple

That’s the point though, if you introduced a car with wind up windows, carburettors and so forth the market would be very niche.

Is it the fault of manufacturers, for making complex stuff, legislation for complicating emissions etc, or is the consumer for wanting more “stuff”? Or a combination?

I think Parker’s or similar did a comparison of cars now and 50 years ago, and came to the conclusion that, yes modern cars are, as a raw value, higher than previously - but wages are also similarly higher. So the actual % of wages you have to pay for a “new” car was very similar between now and then.

One thing I have noticed is that prices shot up during Covid, and never came back down.

 

[Moose McAlpine]

Is it the fault of manufacturers, for making complex stuff, legislation for complicating emissions etc, or is the consumer for wanting more “stuff”? Or a combination?

Combination.

Manufacturers want to add more features to sell more cars, consumers want more features, comforts, power and fuel economy, governments want more safety, more fuel economy and lower emissions.

So manufacturers juggle all those thing trying to satisfy everyone, resulting in expensive complex vehicles.

 

[daleyd]

Combination.

Manufacturers want to add more features to sell more cars, consumers want more features, comforts, power and fuel economy, governments want more safety, more fuel economy and lower emissions.

So manufacturers juggle all those thing trying to satisfy everyone, resulting in expensive complex vehicles.

I agree, it’s not one thing but a combination of the above and probably more, and for sure the genie probably isn’t going to be forced back in the bottle.