Special Feature - Fleet: Rules of the road - complying with ever-changing fleet legislation

However, it does come with some provisions. All diesel cars have a 3% surcharge over petrol cars of the equivalent CO2 level, in order to account for the extra particulates and nitrous oxide they produce.

As well as raising fuel duty by 1.84 pence per litre on 1 April this year, the 2009 pre-Budget report confirmed that fuel duty will increase again on 1 April 2010, by 0.5 pence per litre above indexation.

While the six new, much-criticised Vehicle Excise Duty bands will still be introduced as planned in 2010 ­ and VAT is expected to return to 17.5%, too - Chancellor Alistair Darling relented on increases that would have hit residual values of larger, higher polluting cars hardest. In 2010, the maximum increase in VED will be capped at £5, while in 2010 the maximum will be £30.

From next April, in order for the new bands to “create an environmental incentive”, the government will start to separate the 13 differential rates. As a result, cars producing less than 150g/km of CO2 will see a cut in their VED of up to £30 per car.

Cars up to 175g/km of CO2 will see no increase in their VED, while those of 176g/km of CO2 and above will see a tax increase of between £20 and £30. From April 2010, a differential first-year rate for new vehicles will be introduced. Cars that emit more than 225g/km of CO2 but were registered between 1 March 2001 and 23 March 2006, will be moved into the new ‘K’ band in 2009 and stay there in 2010 ­ meaning they maintain their exemption from the top rate of VED.

When the government introduces first-year rates for newly purchased cars next year, new cars with less than 130g/km of CO2 will pay no VED in the first year of use, whereas the very highest-emitting cars will pay £950.

Safety first
In the past decade, companies running their own fleets have operated under the spectre of the forthcoming corporate manslaughter legislation. The Corporate Manslaughter Act introduced in last April heightened the duty of care employers can reasonably be expected to show putting pressure on fleet managers to prepare for compliance by shelling out on everything from driver training and journey scheduling to driver declarations and eye tests. It was strengthened this January with the introduction of the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008, which aims to stop companies from turning a blind eye to problems or safety issues in their fleet. It has raised the maximum penalty sums that can be imposed on companies that are found to have contravened the legislation and has also made it effectively easier than before for a court to impose stronger penalties or sentences.

That said, GE Capital Solutions reports that in the three months to last November the new corporate manslaughter legislation had declined in influence on fleet decision making by 21%, while health and safety and accident prevention had followed as recession became a reality.

Compliance comes down to what is ‘reasonably practicable’ in company fleets: ensuring servicing is completed regularly, keeping an audit trail of documentation to prove it, checking licenses regularly and making sure employees are fit to drive. It is worth remembering, whenever a company selling the latest innovation to save you from yourself and your drivers approaches, that all your drivers are subject to the rules of the Highway Code and laws pertaining to road safety. If they know they are not fit to drive, or they hide points on their license from you, it is their responsibility. If you have asked them, and they lie, they are the ones in trouble.

Duty of care
What the Act has changed is the way in which a company could be prosecuted. It allows for a company to be found guilty either through a gross breach of duty of care by a senior manager or by the company. Previously, an individual had to be found guilty, which proved almost impossible and only a handful of this type of prosecution has been made in the past few years. If successfully prosecuted, a company could find itself subject to a massive fine ­ as much as 10% of its annual turnover.

However, a company would become liable only if it was found that it had been doing something that caused a driver to cause an incident, such as forcing them to drive unacceptably long hours, or talking to them on a mobile phone. More likely to have an impact is a supplier doing a bad job and the fleet management failing to rectify the issue despite knowing about it. For example, if a company performed sub-standard servicing and the fleet failed to act, resulting in a mechanical issue causing a fatal crash, then the company could be found liable.

For companies that keep a full audit trail of work, are able to prove that work was done when it should have been, has good systems for checking drivers’ licences and fitness to drive, and ensures employees understand their responsibilities when on the road, they should have nothing to fear if the authorities came knocking.

See a summary and FAQ on the 2007 Corporate Manslaughter Act
For details of the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008, introduced in January 2009