Company Van Use

[hairyhippydave]

Hi there everyone,

I currently have the use of my company van for use to and from work. This wasn't originally offered to me when I started work for my employer, but has been the case for the last 8 years. I regularly do deliveries to customers on my way home, but don't see this as an inconvenience, but a bit of give and take as the use of the van is a bit of a perk.

I have been hearing a rumour at other branches within the company that staff are going to be stopped from taking the vans home with them.

I think I heard somewhere before that at work if you are doing something that has generally been accepted as the norm (ie taking the van home) over a certain period of time, that then forms part of your employment contract.

Basically I would like to know if that is true, and where I stand should I be asked not to use the van anymore.

I appreciate any advice that any of you may have.

Cheers

Dave

 

[Consistency]

This is why I refuse to give these kinds of perks, because in times of difficulty and in times where one is really taking the rise, it is hard to take these perks away.

What is given as a nice goodwill gesture, then becomes expected and before long the employee sees it as their right.

Running company vehicles is very expensive and it may not be affordable to carry on as before, especially if there are a few people taking their vans home.

You are still in your job and still have a wage at the end of the week. It could be that cutting this measure may help save on costs that will in the long run go towards keeping your wage bill going into the bank.

Employees rarely know what the state of the business really is. Directors rarely tell the staff as this is not good for employee morale and can cause panic, fear and depresssion. It is often at the last minute that employees have to stop whistling while they work and hear the bad news.

It could even be that this is because there have been a few members of staff taking the van home and taking the pee and in order to be fair to everyone have to apply the same rules to everyone.

Whatever the reason, count your blessings you still have a job. Maybe, just maybe your employers could do with your support. Supportive employees can on occasions be very hard to find.

 

[steve23]

Keep in mind that even if it was written in your contract, that does not put it in stone for ever.

It just means that you employer has to give you a reasonable notification of the change and reason for it - or something along those lines.

You could then say, sorry, dont agree with my new contractual position, so im off.

And the company can then employ one of the millions currently out of work.

I know it might be a pain in the butt, but see what happens.

As Consistency said above - there may be good reason behind all of this.

All the best

Steve

 

[eutrans]

I assume as this agreement is semi formal you are not paying the tax you possibly are liable for so in this case the words you say are thanks and be nice in a case like this where lots of depots involved it could be to the discretion of the local manager. If as you say you do the odd delivery on your way home at least you don't want it all your own way.

 

[hairyhippydave]

Thanks for your responses guys.

I only use the van to get me to and from work, so, as far as I know I'm not liable for any tax on it, and I probably do deliveries on half my journey home.

It was just an enquiry really, as I've had the van for 8 years, I haven't had the expense of having to own and run a car, so I was wondering if they took it away, would they have to compensate me in any other way?

 

[lesliedocherty]

This is why I refuse to give these kinds of perks, because in times of difficulty and in times where one is really taking the rise, it is hard to take these perks away.

What is given as a nice goodwill gesture, then becomes expected and before long the employee sees it as their right.

Running company vehicles is very expensive and it may not be affordable to carry on as before, especially if there are a few people taking their vans home.

You are still in your job and still have a wage at the end of the week. It could be that cutting this measure may help save on costs that will in the long run go towards keeping your wage bill going into the bank.

Employees rarely know what the state of the business really is. Directors rarely tell the staff as this is not good for employee morale and can cause panic, fear and depresssion. It is often at the last minute that employees have to stop whistling while they work and hear the bad news.

It could even be that this is because there have been a few members of staff taking the van home and taking the pee and in order to be fair to everyone have to apply the same rules to everyone.

Whatever the reason, count your blessings you still have a job. Maybe, just maybe your employers could do with your support. Supportive employees can on occasions be very hard to find.

Lot of assumptions gong on there, the guy asked a question, that you managed to somehow avoid answering in that over lengthy reply.

 

[saxondale]

Thanks for your responses guys.

I only use the van to get me to and from work, so, as far as I know I'm not liable for any tax on it, and I probably do deliveries on half my journey home.

It was just an enquiry really, as I've had the van for 8 years, I haven't had the expense of having to own and run a car, so I was wondering if they took it away, would they have to compensate me in any other way?

in a word - no, no they don`t.

Lot of assumptions gong on there, the guy asked a question, that you managed to somehow avoid answering in that over lengthy reply.

ditto .......... however the OP then admits to not paying tax as suggested (which may or may not be due depending on what the van commute status is) do try and remember some of us actually know how things work in the real world and post according.








/

 

[Parthelan]

I think I heard somewhere before that at work if you are doing something that has generally been accepted as the norm (ie taking the van home) over a certain period of time, that then forms part of your employment contract.

I used to love these warehouse human resources experts

In fairness there is sometimes reference made to ''custom and practice'' but in no way does this form a part of your written contract of employment.

No, your employer in no way is obligated to give you another automotive solution to your commuting problem if they want their vans left in the depot overnight.

And I'd thank them for their 8 years of generosity and hand the keys over with a smile.

 

[Vending Siting Services]

Thanks for your responses guys.

I only use the van to get me to and from work, so, as far as I know I'm not liable for any tax on it, and I probably do deliveries on half my journey home.

It was just an enquiry really, as I've had the van for 8 years, I haven't had the expense of having to own and run a car, so I was wondering if they took it away, would they have to compensate me in any other way?

Hi Dave

We have a number of vans on the road with staff for our business. Our drivers do not live local to our business in Lincolnshire and it would not be cost effective for us for the drivers to return their vehicles each day. Their day is spent servicing our vendors around their county. We have to sign a declaration for the tax man that our vehicles are ONLY used for the purposes of our business. We have trackers on our vehicles as a backup to confirm this. Our drivers are all aware that they are not permitted to use our vehicle for any personal use. The tax authorities are tough on this and a new law came out a few years ago which states if the employee uses the vehicle for just one journey they will be liable for the benefit for the whole year! Our accountant ensures we cover ourselves each year. If I get time next week, I will try and dig out the actual notification from the tax office.

Don't listen to rumours that circulate the workplace, I suggest you approach your boss with your concern and just ask to sign a declaration to confirm that you do not use the van for personal use and get your boss to inform you in writing that you are not permitted to use the company van for any personal use whatsoever.

Hope this helps.

Barbara

 

[saxondale]

from last time the topic came up


http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/eimanual/EIM22800.htm

 

[Parthelan]

The tax authorities are tough on this and a new law came out a few years ago which states if the employee uses the vehicle for just one journey they will be liable for the benefit for the whole year!

This isnt quite correct. It depends on the nature of the one journey, and if it can be classed as ''insignificant''.

If the one journey was to drop the family off the the luxury villa in Devon, then that's not insignificant.
But a one off trip to the dump with an old bike would.
In fact you can even make regular personal use of the van daily - if for example you want to make a detour of 500 yards to drop your kid off to school. That's classed as insignificant.
But doing the weekly shopping isnt classed as ''insignificant'' !!!

And the van matters. If it's zero emmissions then up until 2014 you can knock yourself out with private use

And the availability matters - the employee is not liable for the whole year even if they breach the restricted private use conditions if the van itself is not available for the whole year, or is shared.

 

[hairyhippydave]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for all your replies, I really appreciate the time you've spent in answering my post.

Looks like I'm probably gonna have to start watching my pennies and save for a car..... or maybe the motorbike my other half won't let me have (bit cheaper to run!).

I have a performance review with my area manager in the next week or so, so I think I'll ask what the situation is, and see if I can come to some sort of arrangement with him.

Nice one

Dave

 

[Consistency]

Lot of assumptions gong on there, the guy asked a question, that you managed to somehow avoid answering in that over lengthy reply.

Not assumptions as I do not know the business owner, its position or its nature, they were possibilities.

My answer was - be grateful, you still have a job.

I see you haven't answered, just sought to pick up on someone else's - clever clogs.:|

 

[lesliedocherty]

Not assumptions as I do not know the business owner, its position or its nature, they were possibilities.

My answer was - be grateful, you still have a job.

I see you haven't answered, just sought to pick up on someone else's - clever clogs.:|

You assumed they are changing van use due to financial pressures.

He asked a specific question, you went of on a rambling social commentary, best saved for yourself.

 

[Consistency]

You assumed they are changing van use due to financial pressures.

He asked a specific question, you went of on a rambling social commentary, best saved for yourself.

I have not assumed that they are changing van use due to financial pressures, I have said it is a possibility as I have also said it is a possibility that all the vans may be being withdrawn due to employees taking the rise. An assumtion is not the same as suggesting a possibility of why.

Employees are all too often getting on their high horse looking to claim their employer has been unfair or created hardship without looking for or thinking of reasons as to why they have come to the decision they have.

 

[safetynut]

Driving company vehicles is a hot Potato at the moment with the HSE, Police and RTC and Corporate manslaughter.

After reading these posts a couple things spring to mind that has not been mentioned 1) insurances - use of the company vehicle outside business hours the driver and its load may not be insured 2) And the boring subject of Health and Safety that surrounds driving company vehicles...

Line managers and company directors can be charged even when they are not directly responsible for an offence. Employees can also be charge if found negligent in the event of being involved in a road traffic accident causing an incident or fatality.

Over 70% of traffic accidents involve a company vehicle.... Food for thought...

 

[lesliedocherty]

Driving company vehicles is a hot Potato at the moment with the HSE, Police and RTC and Corporate manslaughter.

After reading these posts a couple things spring to mind that has not been mentioned 1) insurances - use of the company vehicle outside business hours the driver and its load may not be insured 2) And the boring subject of Health and Safety that surrounds driving company vehicles...

Line managers and company directors can be charged even when they are not directly responsible for an offence. Employees can also be charge if found negligent in the event of being involved in a road traffic accident causing an incident or fatality.

Over 70% of traffic accidents involve a company vehicle.... Food for thought...

70%, thats high, i did see a company van recently that said on back in BIG letters something like 'if being driven before 8am and after 7pm this van is stolen, police please stop', i did laugh at the time, effective though.

 

[safetynut]

Thats one reason why companies have those notices displayed.. to protect the directors, managers and their employees.

quite effective in my opinion but I wonder how many actually do get stopped.

 

[saxondale]

Over 70% of traffic accidents involve a company vehicle.... ..

how many of them are buses though?

 

[David Griffiths]

70%, thats high

Is it, though? What percentage of miles travelled is by company vehicles - lorries, buses, cars on the road through the day on company business? Compare that with private vehicles more likely to be parked up through the day while the owner is at work.

And of course that's the percentage of accidents involving a company vehicle - there could well be non company vehicles involved, perhaps more than one.

To me it's the sort of meaningless statistic that can be bandied about but actually proves nothing.

 

[steve23]

Line managers and company directors can be charged even when they are not directly responsible for an offence. Employees can also be charge if found negligent in the event of being involved in a road traffic accident causing an incident or fatality.
quote]

This can (even if not intended as such) come acroses as scaremongering, so can you clarify any of this ?

Ok, I can see where a director covers up or authorises the use of a defective vehicle could (and should) be open to some form of prosecution - but that is fairly obvious and not something a well run business should have to fear.

Are you saying that there are more, less obvious things we need to worry about - and if so, examples if you have them.

If anyone is going to tell me that just becasue I tell Fred he can use the company van at the weekend to move house and he then has an accident, I can be held to blame, then I'd like to see a case law example please.

And I dont just mean examples where it can be shown it might happen - I mean real examples where it has.

Almost any law or policy can be pulled apart and hypothetical situations dreamed up that seem mad - but in the real world that is why we have judges and the like - to interpret these issues etc.

And as to the ground shaking news that if an employee kills someone in an RTC they could be prosecuted, well.... the temptation is to say 'doh !' but then I'd sound like my 11 year old daughter

All the best

Steve

 

[Lease4Less]

This can (even if not intended as such) come acroses as scaremongering, so can you clarify any of this ?

Ok, I can see where a director covers up or authorises the use of a defective vehicle could (and should) be open to some form of prosecution - but that is fairly obvious and not something a well run business should have to fear.

Are you saying that there are more, less obvious things we need to worry about - and if so, examples if you have them.

If anyone is going to tell me that just becasue I tell Fred he can use the company van at the weekend to move house and he then has an accident, I can be held to blame, then I'd like to see a case law example please.

And I dont just mean examples where it can be shown it might happen - I mean real examples where it has.

Almost any law or policy can be pulled apart and hypothetical situations dreamed up that seem mad - but in the real world that is why we have judges and the like - to interpret these issues etc.

And as to the ground shaking news that if an employee kills someone in an RTC they could be prosecuted, well.... the temptation is to say 'doh !' but then I'd sound like my 11 year old daughter

All the best

Steve

The law is a joke, but you would have to prove that if an employee was injured or killed or injured someone else whilst using a company vehicle that you took all available precautions - e.g. having his driving license on file and running a check every 6 months to ensure that he/she hadn't been banned, ensuring that the vehicle is road worthy and being able to document that the vehicle is checked at regular intervals, ensuring that the driver is insured to drive the vehicle (Fred saying "yeah boss of course I am insured" does'nt cover you.)

You also have to show that if an employee has regular access to the company vehicle that all health and safety procedures are in place, including things like eye tests.

 

[Lease4Less]

http://www.billplant.co.uk/corporate_manslaughter_bill.html

 

[steve23]

Hi,

It's possible to find all sorts of opinon and advice about this on the internet, but I was wondering if anyone has any 'case law' or the like that they can point at to show etc.

For the record, I think it is very wise to follow all the guidelines such as checking the employees driving particulars and what have you.

But I suppose you could say that if it is a good idea, why look for examples of others not doing it and being prosecuted ?

In answer to that, it's just out of interest really - nothing more.

All the best

Steve

 

[Lease4Less]

Hi,

It's possible to find all sorts of opinon and advice about this on the internet, but I was wondering if anyone has any 'case law' or the like that they can point at to show etc.

For the record, I think it is very wise to follow all the guidelines such as checking the employees driving particulars and what have you.

But I suppose you could say that if it is a good idea, why look for examples of others not doing it and being prosecuted ?

In answer to that, it's just out of interest really - nothing more.

All the best

Steve

Hi Steve,

You are correct when you say that the internet is full of rubbish, you could probably find an article proving/disproving just about anything.

However, in my line of work my company and staff have to undertake a lot of training to be compliant with the BVRLA. Last year one of the modules involved "duty of care" and in particular providing company car's to staff. The link I have found is quite accurate.

Rediculous as it is, I wouldn't want to end up in court just because I couldn't be bothered to implement a few procedures with the work place.

Ignore them at your peril!

 

[steve23]

Certainly agree that best to follow the old belt and braces approach - cant do any harm.

All the best

Steve

 

[MrPAYE]

Hi,

It's possible to find all sorts of opinon and advice about this on the internet, but I was wondering if anyone has any 'case law' or the like that they can point at to show etc.
Steve

I think it was the selby rail crash that really started the corporate manslaughter thing.

From memory, I think the guy driving the car which crashed onto the line had been up texting his girlfriend all night and was sleepy when driving the next morning. I think there was a lot of argument in the case as to whether the employer had been negligent in allowing him to drive in this state.

Regards

 

[elliot.rigsby]

Hi there everyone,

I currently have the use of my company van for use to and from work. This wasn't originally offered to me when I started work for my employer, but has been the case for the last 8 years. I regularly do deliveries to customers on my way home, but don't see this as an inconvenience, but a bit of give and take as the use of the van is a bit of a perk.

I have been hearing a rumour at other branches within the company that staff are going to be stopped from taking the vans home with them.

I think I heard somewhere before that at work if you are doing something that has generally been accepted as the norm (ie taking the van home) over a certain period of time, that then forms part of your employment contract.

Basically I would like to know if that is true, and where I stand should I be asked not to use the van anymore.

I appreciate any advice that any of you may have.

Cheers

Dave

If it isnt in your contract then it would be difficult to argue. You should also be careful as if this hasnt been declared to the revenue you could be liable to tax! I might keep quiet!

 

Hi everyone,

Thanks for all your replies, I really appreciate the time you've spent in answering my post.

Looks like I'm probably gonna have to start watching my pennies and save for a car..... or maybe the motorbike my other half won't let me have (bit cheaper to run!).

I have a performance review with my area manager in the next week or so, so I think I'll ask what the situation is, and see if I can come to some sort of arrangement with him.

Nice one

Dave

Just a thought, but how about you suggest a financial contribution for use of the van - this might help both parties and might (don't take my word for it!) mitigate your tax liability.