Posted By Darren J Fraser No company car with current employer, but previous employers stated that in the event of any claim the employee was responsible for the excess. Worked extremely well, as employees were a lot more careful, due to the fact it was then as though they had damaged their own vehicle.

Posted By Phil Tye A large number of minor damage accidents.

Posted By Peter Leese Do you understand what you are advocating CK? On a public forum!

Posted By Ron Hunter Our old company lease scheme had I think a 'blanket' £100 excess. A bit of a bind for broken glass, otherwise reasonable though I thought. With a company Insurance Policy of course, everyone pays the same premiums. In effect, poor driving can be rewarded?

Posted By Alan Haynes My wife's employer [Local Authority] charges £250 for any damage to her lease car - which is refunded [many moons later] if the other driver is found to be at fault

Posted By Phil Tye Thanks for all the help, It looks like it it is not uncommon for a charge to be made but how on earth could you introduce such a policy and expect the employee to pay up £250 Regards Phil

Posted By Dave Wilson Last year I had to replace 3 windscreens and 2 flat tyres and if this was a company I worked for i would have left the car at the side of the road got the RAC to take me home and they could deal with it. (about 50k miles pa). My companies view is that 'if it was your car would you repair it? if not then dont bother! IT IS THEIR PROPERTY!! I would assume that this has not been challenged at a tribunal.

Posted By Pete48 And what I wonder do you do when the employee does not have the £500? Deduct it from salary payments? Persistent accidents as a result of poor driving should be a simple disciplinary issue not cowardly cost management. If good driving skills are required for the work on offer, then employees must posses and use those skills. If they do not then the process should be the same as for any other disciplinary matter. For goodness sake, before long we will be charging employees for re-make costs when a batch goes wrong or expect them to make up lost sales costs. Or telling them they have to pay for replacement gloves or boots that they have worn out quicker than the next person. What is the year 1907 0r 2007? Sorry rant over.

Posted By Brigham Pete 48 You said "Persistent accidents as a result of poor driving should be a simple disciplinary issue not cowardly cost management. If good driving skills are required for the work on offer, then employees must posses and use those skills. If they do not then the process should be the same as for any other disciplinary matter." Get a life! Disciplinary action, why? For something that should have been identified and remedied by the employer at the outset! It's all about getting the right people in the right jobs with the right training. Only if there is a blatant disregard for company policy and property and you can prove it, is when disciplinary action should be taken

Posted By Merv Newman OK. some interesting views here. I worked for a company which had a hard policy of inquiring into every car incident (car park type accidents excluded) The idea was not expressed as apportioning blame, rather as one of learning lessons. No-one was ever charged for repairs. But there were a number of garage bills detailing "gear-box problems" I once bought an ex-company car which had been driven by a guy named as "safe driver of the year" for the last few years. First time I took it in for a service the mechanic took a look around and said "that there has been resprayed a few times" People will cheat. And the higher the penalty for being honest the more they will cheat. So the less you will learn and the less you can do about it. Just to complete the anecdote ; the company I worked for won the award "safe fleet of the year" (1990 ?) second was my niece's boyfriend who worked for an insurance company.(Prudential ?) The next year our head office safety and fleet manager died in a car accident. Merv