Who is liable on company car repairs 16 November 2022 at 6:41PM edited 16 November 2022 at 6:43PM in Motoring 7 replies 311 views

akira181

I'm currently updating some company policies and just spotted that in our company vehicle policy, if a company vehicle or pool vehicle is involved in an accident or an event that depreciates the value of the vehicle, the driver is liable to pay a waiver of £300 or the repair cost (whichever is lower). I was under the impression that the Company was responsible for all maintenance and repairs unless they can prove intentional damage or serious negligence?

Or is this wrong and your employer can bill you for anything, such as dings made by someone else in a car park chipping paint, causing depreciation of the vehicle for example?

Grumpy_chap

You are referring to something that is really down to the terms and conditions of the employer and can often be set like that to encourage vehicle users to treat the cars with some respect and foster a general culture of care and responsibility.  Unfortunately, at times, there are individuals who drive a company car like they stole it.  Applying what is, in effect, an excess is a way to manage that behaviour.

Grey_Critic

Only £300 - was £500 in my day and it did not matter who was responsible. There were very few accidents.

HampshireH

We have a similar excess on I think 2nd occurrence onwards. Basically they get the first one free.

All drivers sign the fleet management policy before taking on the vehicle so they are all aware

akira181

These policies haven't been updated in a while, wasn't sure if things have changed since then. Just wanted to be sure it was above board.

Thanks for the replies!

sevenhills

I wouldn't be happy if it cost me money to go to work. If you value your staff, the company are responsible for accidents.

chrisw

Non fault accidents would usually be reclaimed from a third party so wouldn't fall under the charge and it's highly likely that wear and tear would be acceptable up to the BVRLA standards. Mechanical abuse would be very hard to prove.

So it's really the at fault accidents and non fault accidents with no third party identified where the payment comes in to play. Which is why I used to park mine at the far end of car parks away from anyone else.

akira181

chrisw said:

Non fault accidents would usually be reclaimed from a third party so wouldn't fall under the charge and it's highly likely that wear and tear would be acceptable up to the BVRLA standards. Mechanical abuse would be very hard to prove.

So it's really the at fault accidents and non fault accidents with no third party identified where the payment comes in to play. Which is why I used to park mine at the far end of car parks away from anyone else.

I figured mechanical abuse would be difficult to prove unless a tracker or something was fitted, and even then I think it's questionable on whether your boss is allowed to use that data to assess your driving style.

Just found out a colleague of mine did have a boss in the past who told him to stop driving the company car at over 100mph and the next set of tyres was coming out his paycheck if he burned them out in 4 months again. Unsure what the policy was at that place though.

The depreciation thing is the only part I find a bit harsh. My personal car is thankfully an old junker that isn't worth much and I live in an area with some very narrow streets. A lot of people use the area as a park and ride as parking is free and a train station is nearby but none of them seem to know how to park. Every scratch, dent, and paint chip (and there's quite a few from just this year) is due to others not knowing how to park or open a door. Naturally, none of them fess up and parking dash cams are never sensitive enough to catch small parking dings.

It's the only reason why I haven't replaced my car yet and if I got a company car, it would cost me quite a lot of money if that policy is abided by and not just a precautionary threat.