Basic pre pcp info

Dandytf

jeepjunkie wrote: »

Dear god...

Indeed it's Sunday

tonyh66

Dandytf wrote: »

Agreed similar car is 14k brand new, my potential purchase had 7k miles so not new though not very far away in terms if miles used.
I'm mot in headline grabbing rates territory either t.b.h.
Next option could have been 27k miles @150 per month, though I thought lower mileage would be preffferable.

7K on a 4 year old car, run away quickly.

Dandytf

Checked other cars the apr is 8.9%
My current total cost is 202*48 -9696 02014 purchased 2017 -approx 21-23l miles -possibly 7.9% apr.
These are costs of this age of car at least in Scotland, I think maybe a higher deposit could help which I don;t currently have as I have in past paid upto 1500 deposit to keep re payments 100 over 36 months -that was for 01 plate purchased in 2003 -9k miles approx.

Cornucopia

Dandytf wrote: »

Checked other cars the apr is 8.9%
My current total cost is 202*48 -9696 02014 purchased 2017 -approx 21-23l miles -possibly 7.9% apr.
These are costs of this age of car at least in Scotland, I think maybe a higher deposit could help which I don;t currently have as I have in past paid upto 1500 deposit to keep re payments 100 over 36 months -that was for 01 plate purchased in 2003 -9k miles approx.

Unless your credit-worthiness is very, very bad (in which case, they are unlikely to lend to you at all), it is not a safe assumption to believe that you are being charged "more" because of who you are. The reality is that you are being charged the going rate for finance on used cars (5-10% APR).

Because of the way PCPs work, PCPs on used cars, with their high underlying finance rates can be a poor deal. That's because you are paying those higher rates on the entire balance, and never making any repayments towards the amount that has been borrowed that is the equivalent of the balloon payment.

I'd be surprised if Scotland is that different to anywhere else in the UK, unless you live in an exceptionally remote area. If it were the case, then people would simply take a trip to Carlisle or Newcastle to buy their cars.

Dandytf

jeepjunkie wrote: »

Dear god...

Cornucopia wrote: »

Unless your credit-worthiness is very, very bad (in which case, they are unlikely to lend to you at all), it is not a safe assumption to believe that you are being charged "more" because of who you are. The reality is that you are being charged the going rate for finance on used cars (5-10% APR).

Because of the way PCPs work, PCPs on used cars, with their high underlying finance rates can be a poor deal. That's because you are paying those higher rates on the entire balance, and never making any repayments towards the amount that has been borrowed that is the equivalent of the balloon payment.

Agreed not sure why the 'who you are is mentioned'- not my way of thinking at all. I'm happy at the quoted costs at least on basis of purchasing a car with very low mileage with small engine size with some acceleration .
Let's hope this goes through, if so I'll be able to find myself in year three if I have any trade in option at all (without have it to pay 3.3. K for the privilege )

Cornucopia

Dandytf wrote: »

Agreed not sure why the 'who you are is mentioned'- not my way of thinking at all.

Okay. You seemed to be saying: "These are costs of this age of car at least in Scotland", as if there was something significant about Scotland, and earlier in the thread you suggested that a personal loan wouldn't be suitable for some reason.

Let's hope this goes through, if so I'll be able to find myself in year three if I have any trade in option at all (without have it to pay 3.3. K for the privilege )

It's unlikely that there will be significant equity in the vehicle at the end of the term. I note that you dislike the term "equity", but it is really the only way to get to the root of what is and isn't value for money, here.

jimjames

Dandytf wrote: »

Agreed not sure why the 'who you are is mentioned'- not my way of thinking at all. I'm happy at the quoted costs at least on basis of purchasing a car with very low mileage with small engine size with some acceleration .

Entirely your choice but I'd question the reasons and costs in changing from a 2014 to 2015 vehicle which doesn't seem to offer a massive difference other than costing more money when debts might be a higher priority.

Dandytf

Cornucopia wrote: »

Okay. You seemed to be saying: "These are costs of this age of car at least in Scotland", as if there was something significant about Scotland, and earlier in the thread you suggested that a personal loan wouldn't be suitable for some reason.


It's unlikely that there will be significant equity in the vehicle at the end of the term. I note that you dislike the term "equity", but it is really the only way to get to the root of what is and isn't value for money, here.

No significance at lest on my part where others gave their opinion on the cost of a car which I'm possibly purchasing in Scotland which was. Deemed too costly, whereas I pointed out that the cost is comparable with other cars of age and model based in Scotland -I don't know if costs differe in other parts of u.k. hence specified Scotland,

The equity part I dislike as I had only ever understood property equity, then when PCP arrived past few years car dealerships started using the 'equity' left over and dare I say it 'Negative Equity' -has the potential of going like a property marker crash or correction on the value of vehicles.
No that my thoughts make any difference as such just don;t particularly like equity use for cars.

Cornucopia

Dandytf wrote: »

No significance at lest on my part where others gave their opinion on the cost of a car which I'm possibly purchasing in Scotland which was. Deemed too costly, whereas I pointed out that the cost is comparable with other cars of age and model based in Scotland -I don't know if costs differe in other parts of u.k. hence specified Scotland,

I suspect you'll find that prices are similar. However, I think that the bulk of the comments are about the expense of the PCP, not of the car as such.

The equity part I dislike as I had only ever understood property equity, then when PCP arrived past few years car dealerships started using the 'equity' left over and dare I say it 'Negative Equity' -has the potential of going like a property marker crash or correction on the value of vehicles.
No that my thoughts make any difference as such just don;t particularly like equity use for cars.

That IS how the car market works, whether we use those terms or not. The fact is that a PCP works by only paying off the depreciation component of the vehicle's cost, not the remainder (that is left as the balloon payment). The car will always be worth the difference between its market value and whatever settlement cost is applicable at the time. Many PCPs will result in negative equity during the early-mid stages of the term. This is a direct consequence of how they work.

I think if you told us a little bit more about what you are trying to achieve and why, then we might be able to give you some advice about saving money on the deal (or through a different deal). That's what MSE is about, really.

As an example, you talked about 0.9 and 1.2 litre engines, which suggests a small Renault/Nissan/Dacia. The current Renault offer on a basic Clio is a 0% PCP with £169 deposit and £169pm. Part of the nature of PCPs is to blur the cost-distinction between new and used (and that's why the manufacturers and dealers like it).

LandyAndy

Dandytf wrote: »

As the option of another car a few years later is why I'm considering pcp route.
+ .9 car is reviewed as slightly better than my 1.2,
Personal loan isn't a option-though agree it would make sense apr/cost wise.
Any particular reason why pcp is not a good idea is it deprecation or what their calling negative equity-I dislike that equity language.

Is it a Fiat 500? :cool: