How much interference does a business really need? Just how much
external micromanagement does a business require? Selling
vehicles and the finance to support them is hardly rocket science –
well, it didn’t used to be. Doing the business would now appear to
many to be the easy part of the transaction.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Access deeper industry intelligence
Experience unmatched clarity with a single platform that combines unique data, AI, and human expertise.
The business challenge today is to stay the right side of the
law, obeying the plethora of ever more complex, intrusive and
sometimes contradictory rules and regulations with their associated
inflation-busting sanctions and external micromanagement that
appears to control the climate in which we conduct our
businesses.
Just look at some of the rules, directives and obligations
which have recently come into play – or are planned for earliest
introduction in the automotive and associated motor finance
industries.
In-car distractions targeted
Rules are to be tightened regarding the use of mobile phones,
texting and use of satellite navigation systems. Agreed – there are
still too many dangerous and anti-social drivers on the road – but,
realistically, how many arrests and court cases are we likely to
see? It has been reported elsewhere that fleet car drivers are
being asked to sign ‘safety pledges’ prior to the introduction of
the Corporate Manslaughter Act stating that they will obey all the
rules of the road. ‘We have a piece of paper, an audit trail – the
company is safe!’ appears to be the thinking behind these
pledges.
But what do we do to keep our drivers up to date with what
they can and cannot do when driving? Equally, do we give them
sufficient time to get from one sales call to the next – or do we
want ‘a little extra efficiency for this year’s budget’? What about
Duty of Care – or was that last year’s ‘must have’?
Cashing up
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataRules regarding cash and money laundering have been extended so
ever more service providers have a legal obligation to report on
shifty characters, long term family clients who might be criminals,
drug dealers or terrorists. No longer can we use cash for larger
purchases without being questioned – now it’s plastic, cheques or
traceable instruments of transfer. Surprises are out in the name of
fighting crime – my wife looks after our accounts so she knows
exactly how much I spend on presents for her – cash is
suspect.
The Director of Public Prosecutions announced he wants to
prosecute and fine motorists up to £2,500 for splashing
pedestrians. Very commendable. But whose fault is it that the
puddles are there in the first place – will the DPP take local
authorities to court at the same time for not maintaining storm
water drains?
This balance of responsibility has taken a new twist. There
has been abuse over the purchase and trading of zero VAT-rated cars
and a number of individuals who initially purchased vehicles as
disabled users are being prosecuted. However, I understand, HM
Revenue & Customs (HMRC) is unwilling to clarify the rules as
to what constitutes a ‘substantially-adapted car’.
As a result, dealers could be held liable, retrospectively, for
that VAT. To protect themselves, many are no longer willing to make
zero-rate VAT sales to people with mobility disabilities. Where
does this leave enforcement of Disabled Discrimination Legislation
– does a disabled motorist refused a legitimate zero rate deal sue
the dealer or HMRC?
Thickets of red tape
My concern is a simple one. The cost and risk of business
transactions could escalate out of all proportion. Too often
business is regarded as guilty until proven innocent and to counter
the risk companies may well increasingly reject bona fide
transactions because the law or formal guidelines have been badly
drafted, or because of the risk of countering some hastily and
poorly drafted all-embracing legislation.
Government micromanagement of business in the name of
‘counter terrorism’ may be a laudable objective but what is it
doing to business? We have all come to accept, albeit often
reluctantly, that well planned and implemented key performance
indicators can sweep away unnecessary bureaucracy and irrelevant
measurement and help us to measure and manage what is
important.
Would it be asking too much for government to look critically
at the rapidly snowballing corpus of all embracing legislation and
ask the question – does this represent the achievable – and is it
realistic?
