Petition calls for tougher action on pavement parking in Bradford
The e-petition says pavement parking can block people in their homes and force wheelchair users and parents with prams onto the road to try and navigate the obstructions.
It is currently live on Bradford Council's website and runs until late November.
Pavement parking is a hugely contentious issue in the district, with rows of cars parked outside shops and takeaways a common sight on some streets.
Although the Highway Code says vehicles should not park on the pavement, it is not illegal, except in London and Scotland.
The Department of Transport held a national consultation on the issue more than five years ago, leading to over 15,000 responses.
However, there has yet to be any change to legislation following the consultation.
The new petition calls for the Council to bring new local laws in relation to on-street footpath parking and for more frequent Council checks to stop car owners/drivers from parking in a way that causes obstructions to pavements.
The petition adds: 'This is a major concern on every local street of Bradford.'
It goes on to say that many cars in Bradford 'casually' park on pavements when there is no immediate street parking space.
It adds: 'Such nuisance and obstructive parking needs council attention and action for prevention.
'On-street footpath parking causes high risk and hazards for those who also need to get in and out of their gardens and onto a public footpath.
'Lack of space for wheelchairs, prams, pushchairs, and parents with toddlers to walk on footpaths mean they have to go onto roads with cars passing just to get past.
'This causes high risk danger for accident and hazards.'
There should be daily parking checks in hot spot areas and new parking regulations introduced – the petition adds.
So far, 25 people have signed the petition, which can be found here.
If enough people sign the petition, it will be heard at a future meeting of Bradford Council.
The issue was discussed at a Bradford Council meeting last year, when Councillor Alex Ross Shaw, executive for regeneration, planning and transport, said pavement parking was 'one of the most frustrating issues to deal with.'
But he added: 'We need to differentiate between a careless driver who parks their car entirely on the pavement rather than park 10 yards down the road, and people who live in an area where they have to park partly on the pavement to avoid collisions, and leaves plenty of space for pedestrians.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Millions of drivers denied compensation by Supreme Court car finance ruling
Millions of drivers will miss out on tens of billions in compensation after Britain's highest court rejected claims drivers were mis-sold car loans. The Supreme Court on Friday rejected arguments that customers should have been informed about 'secret' commissions paid to car salesmen when they arranged loans to fund vehicle purchases. Judges overturned earlier rulings that had claimed payments from banks amounted to 'bribes' and salesmen had a 'fiduciary duty' to look out for customers. The Supreme Court decision is a major boost for Rachel Reeves, who had feared that a mass compensation scheme would undermine UK growth. Analysts had estimated the cost of redress schemes for banks could have reached £44bn, putting it on a par with the PPI scandal that cost £50bn. The Chancellor was preparing to push through new laws to protect banks in the event that the Supreme Court ruled against them. A Treasury source said this intervention was now no longer necessary. A Treasury spokesman said: 'We respect this judgment from the Supreme Court and we will now work with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers.' The Supreme Court did not hand banks and salesmen a total victory. It upheld one case that argued a car loan had been 'unfair'. However, experts said this judgment was based on the unique circumstances of one particular case. Nicola Pangbourne, a partner at Kennedys law firm, said drivers should be 'very pessimistic' about getting any compensation. 'The court ruled there was an unfair relationship in one case but that was very fact-specific. It's not going to be the same for everybody,' she said. Drivers may still be in line for some compensation from a separate investigation into the car finance market by the City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). However, Friday's ruling effectively shields lenders including Lloyds, Barclays and Santander from a wave of claims that they would have struggled to defend. Gary Greenwood, an analyst at Shore Capital, said: 'The worst case scenario is off the table for the banks.' Bank share prices are expected to rise in London when markets open Monday morning. Two million people use car finance loans each year and around eight in ten vehicles sold in Britain are purchased using borrowed money. It is common practice for car salesmen to be paid a commission or a flat fee when arranging a loan for a vehicle purchase. Customers are not always informed how much salesmen are paid under these arrangements. A lower court decision last year ruled that dealers should inform customers about the rate of commissions. This judgment triggered chaos in the car market, amid fears that the way it worked had become illegal overnight. On Friday, Lord Reed, president of the Supreme Court, said that because car dealers were motivated by commercial factors they could not be held liable for failing to disclose commission payments. Reversing the lower court decision, he said the payments could not be classed as 'bribes'. The Finance and Leasing Association, the UK's main trade group which represents dozens of lenders, called it an 'excellent outcome'. Stephen Haddrill, director general, said the decision 'restored certainty and clarity' to the market. 'Cars are an essential part of UK life – and for many people, relying on a car means relying on motor finance,' he said. The FCA, which regulates the sector, is investigating another type of bonus commission, known as a discretionary commission arrangement, which was paid to dealers if they convinced customers to take on more expensive car loans. The regulator said it planned to lay out details of a compensation scheme for drivers who were sold this type of loan on Monday. The Supreme Court disclosed its verdict at 4:35pm on Friday, shortly after the London stock market closed, avoiding significant swings in share prices as investors digested the ruling. 07:18 PM BST Signing off... Thanks for joining us here. That's all for this blog but you can read our article on whether you could you still get compensation here. 07:01 PM BST Motorists warned to 'sit tight' and avoid claims firms Motorists are being urged to 'sit tight' and avoid signing up to potentially costly claims management firms. Paul Barker, editor of Auto Express, said: 'Today's Supreme Court ruling - which found that car finance firms did not unlawfully mis-sell products simply by failing to disclose commissions - narrows the scope for car finance compensation claims, but it doesn't eliminate them entirely. 'Anyone who signed up for a discretionary commission arrangement (DCA) between 2007 and 2021 should still be eligible for compensation; the FCA [Financial Conduct Authority] is expected to set out next steps regarding this ruling in the coming weeks. 'In the meantime, we strongly advise against using claims management firms, which often take a hefty cut of any compensation. 'Instead, there are free tools and official routes available to help you make a claim directly. 'And if the FCA introduces the mooted 'opt-out' scheme, you may not need to do anything at all - your lender will be required to contact you. 'Until then, sit tight, avoid unnecessary fees and keep an eye on updates from the regulator.' 06:34 PM BST Motorist involved in Supreme Court case 'dumbfounded' by ruling One of three drivers involved in a legal row over motor finance compensation has said he is 'dumbfounded' after the Supreme Court ruled that lenders are not liable for hidden commission payments. Marcus Johnson, then a factory supervisor, was buying his first car in 2017 and paid £1,650.95 in commission as part of a finance agreement. In October last year, the Court of Appeal ruled that the 35-year-old and two other drivers who had also paid commission as part of car finance agreements before 2021 were entitled to compensation. The court ruled that the motorists were not told either clearly enough or at all that the car dealers, acting as credit brokers, would receive a commission from the lenders for introducing business to them. The Supreme Court overturned the decision on Friday, but said Mr Johnson should retain his compensation and interest as he was in an 'unfair' relationship with the lender. When asked by he felt about the outcome of the case, Mr Johnson, from Cwmbran in Wales, said: 'It was surprise and sadness, because I was quite confident, just based on how I felt about it, the unfairness of what happened to me. 'I thought people looking at all the information would come to the same conclusion, and I'm just dumbfounded. 'I feel terrible that people won't be able to claim anything like I have.' Mr Johnson said he did not 'disagree with commission' as he understood 'that that is how the market works'. But he said that the ruling 'sounds like it's fine to secretly overcharge customers for commission'. 06:11 PM BST FCA to consider redress scheme for some car finance payments Britain's financial watchdog will this weekend reach a decision on whether to offer a redress scheme for some car finance customers. The Financial Conduct Authority said it would decide before financial markets open on Monday whether to provide some form of remedy to people who took out car finance and paid commission they did not know about. A spokesman for the regulator said: 'We welcome that the Supreme Court has clarified the law and are grateful to the Court for delivering the judgment after the market closed. 'We want to bring greater certainty for consumers, firms and investors as quickly as possible. 'We will be working through the weekend to analyse the judgment and determine our next steps. 'We said we would set out within six weeks whether we would consult on a redress scheme. But we want to provide clarity as quickly as possible. 'So, we will confirm whether we will consult on a redress scheme before markets open on Monday 4 August. 'Our aims remain to ensure that consumers are fairly compensated and that the motor finance market works well, given around 2 million people rely on it every year to buy a car. 'If we do decide to propose a redress scheme, we'll consult widely. In designing a redress scheme, as we have previously said, we will balance principles including fairness, timeliness, and certainty.' 06:01 PM BST Lawyers ready fresh claims over motor finance debacle Lawyers are readying themselves to file lawsuits against banks after the Supreme Court left the door open for some compensation claims, Louis Goss reports. Lizzy Comley, from law firm Slater and Gordon, said people who took out car loans could still make claims on the basis their agreements were 'unfair' even after the Supreme Court largely ruled in favour of the banks. Ms Comley said: 'Where it was unfair, you can still seek redress for fixed commission.' 'You're going to have to establish that actually there were a number of different factors that made a particular arrangement unfair, and you'll have to do that on a bespoke basis.'Factors that could demonstrate unfairness include the characteristics of the customer and the size of the commissions paid, Ms Comley said. 05:52 PM BST Car finance industry welcomes ruling The UK's main motor finance body has welcomed the Supreme Court ruling, calling it an 'excellent outcome'. The Finance and Leasing Association represents dozens of lenders. Stephen Haddrill, director general, said: 'This judgment is an excellent outcome. It properly reflects the role and responsibilities of dealers, lenders and customers, and it has restored certainty and clarity to the largest point-of-sale consumer credit market in the UK. 'In addition, it has also restored confidence to the sector, confirming that it remains a solid investable option – which in turn means the supply of affordable motor finance will continue for customers. 'Cars are an essential part of UK life – and for many people, relying on a car means relying on motor finance. It's a product that's trusted and valued by our customers – just over 80pc of new cars are bought on finance, as is a large percentage of used cars. 'The FCA now has the legal clarity to continue its work to establish if a redress scheme is needed, and of course the thousands of unfounded complaints submitted to lenders by claimant law firms and CMCs can now be removed from the system.' 05:38 PM BST Car finance claims will not be 'easy win' Nicola Pangbourne, partner at Kennedys law firm, said drivers should be 'very pessimistic' about getting any compensation if they took out a car loan. She said proving customers had an 'unfair' relationship with a bank would prove challenging, not least because they would have to have all the documentation about the loan. 'The court ruled there was an unfair relationship in one case but that was very fact-specific. It's not going to be the same for everybody,' she said. 'If I was a driver, I would be very pessimistic about getting compensation. There's now quite a few hurdles they've got to get through. It will be difficult to find out the details about what commission rates were paid. 'It will not be an easy win.' She said the Supreme Court's decision was 'very good for the banks'. 'It rightly clarifies that there is no fiduciary duty when you are a car dealership. The banks are going to be breathing a sigh of relief,' she said. 05:26 PM BST Could you still get compensation? The court's decision means lenders including Lloyds, Barclays and Santander are likely to be shielded from the majority of claims that would have cost billions of pounds. As things stand following today's decision, far fewer consumers look poised to be eligible for reimbursement. Telegraph Money explains what you should and shouldn't do next... 05:17 PM BST Motorists could get 'automatic' compensation in some cases, Martin Lewis says Some customers who bought cars on finance could be offered 'automatic' compensation by Britain's financial regulators in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, Martin Lewis has suggested. The personal finance expert said: 'My suspicion is the FCA will within weeks announce consultation on a redress scheme for discretionary commission cases. You may not even have to claim it, could be automatic. 'And with excessive commissions I suspect more guidance will come on that at a similar time. 'If you sign up to a claims firm now, you may have to give it a cut even if it does nothing. So just sit on your hands for now.' The regulator had been looking at bonuses paid to dealerships - known as Discretionary Commission Arrangements (DCA) - which were higher if dealers get customers to take out loans at higher interest rates. DCAs were banned by the FCA several years ago but the watchdog is pursuing an investigation into historical deals dating back to 2007. 05:14 PM BST 'Worst case scenario' averted for banks, analysts say Banks appear to have swerved the worst of the financial impact of the car finance scandal after the Supreme Court rejected the majority of claims in a landmark case today. Gary Greenwood, an analyst at Shore Capital, said: 'The broad read across is that the extreme scenario of fiduciary duty and bribery have been rejected - therefore the worst case scenario is off the table for the banks. 'It allows the FCA to come up a redress plan that only punishes those that need to be punished. It's a positive impact for Close Brothers in particular.' Susannah Marsh, a lawyer at Moore Barlow, said: 'This decision prevents what could have been the biggest consumer compensation crisis in UK history after PPI and the Chancellor can now park any plans for retrospective legislative intervention. 'As the threat of billions in industry-wide payouts has been lifted, the financial services sector may breathe a sigh of relief, however this doesn't put a pin in the issue entirely. 'While the Supreme Court ruling might prevent mass litigation, there may still be litigation to come. Ultimately, we're not out of the woods yet. Each case will turn on its facts and there will still be circumstances where a motor broker could be found to owe fiduciary duties.' 05:08 PM BST 'Excessive' claims could still come to court, says Martin Lewis Customers who were mis-sold car loans and charged 'excessive' commission could still bring claims in the motor finance scandal, Martin Lewis has suggested. The MoneySuperMarket founder said that the fact there was 'no disclosure [of] commission will not make arrangement unfair', but deals with excessive commission could still have a claim. In the case that was upheld, a finance firm charged a car customer 55pc commission as part of their loan. Mr Lewis said: 'The fact it was so high is powerful indication that relationship between the customer and finance company was unfair. 'Other cases can be brought on case by case basis if excessive commission and/or misleading documents.' 05:04 PM BST Chancellor 'respects' Supreme Court judgment The Government has said it will now work with regulators to unpack the Supreme Court's ruling and its impacts on consumers, banks and the car industry. A Treasury spokesman said: 'We respect this judgment from the Supreme Court and we will now work with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers. 'We recognise the issues this court case has highlighted. That is why we are already taking forward significant changes to the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Consumer Credit Act. These reforms will deliver a more consistent and predictable regulatory environment for businesses and consumers, while ensuring that products are sold to customers fairly and clearly.' 04:55 PM BST Supreme Court rejects majority of claims in car finance scandal The Supreme Court has rejected two of the claims before it in the car finance scandal. Lord Reed told the court that the commission paid to car dealers was 'not a bribe'. However, he said the court had upheld a claim from a third claimant over an 'unfair' relationship between a customer and a finance company. He said that in this case the 'financial commission was so high' that it was unfair. Lord Reed said: 'The finance company should pay the amount of the commission plus interest.' In a written summary of the judgment rejecting the majority of the claims, the Supreme Court said: 'A finance package on acceptable terms was always going to be an integral part of what had to be negotiated to bring the transaction to fruition. 'No reasonable onlooker would think that, by offering to find a suitable finance package, the dealer was thereby giving up, rather than continuing to pursue, its own commercial objective of securing a profitable sale.' However, in one of the claims, the court decided that the 'fact that the undisclosed commission was so high is a powerful indication that the relationship' was unfair. 04:50 PM BST Court of Appeal decision was a 'shock' to industry The Supreme Court has considered three cases seeking to claw back commissions paid to dealers. Lord Reed says the cases are based on three arguments: the commissions amounted to a 'bribe'; the dealers had a 'fiduciary' duty to look out for the best interests of customers and the commission violated this; and in one case it was argued that the relationship with the finance company was 'unfair' based on the consumer credit act. He adds the decision of the Court of Appeal was a 'shock' to the industry and the FCA. 04:44 PM BST Court lays out how car loan scheme works The case revolves around two relationships, says Lord Reed, the Supreme Court president: the agreement between banks and dealerships and the agreements between the customer and banks. Lord Reed says it considered the two relationships as a whole as both agreements are contingent on each other. He said they feature a 'three-cornered' arrangement between customers, financiers and dealers. He adds: 'The important point to understand is the car dealer has an interest in the negotiation over the customer's finance package.' The customer does not deal with the finance company directly, he says. The dealer acts as an intermediary. 'The dealer does not act as the agent of the customer,' he says. 'It does not give the customer any reassurance that it is setting its commercial interest aside.' 04:39 PM BST Supreme Court delays judgment to avoid financial volatility The court is now in session. The Supreme Court has confirmed it delayed delivering a judgment on the car finance scandal to avoid volatility on the London stock market given the huge implication for Britain's financial services industry. The President of the Supreme Court, Lord Reed of Allermuir, confirmed the FCA and other parties had requested the decision was handed down after markets closed to avoid 'market disorder', and that nobody had objected. 04:20 PM BST Bank shares fall ahead of Supreme Court ruling UK bank shares are trading down this afternoon ahead of the Supreme Court's ruling. Lloyds Bank, which is the most exposed to the motor finance matter, is down 2.7pc and Barclays is 3.65pc lower. They are among the heaviest losers on the FTSE 100, which is down 0.65pc. Close Brothers, a smaller FTSE 250 lender also heavily involved, has fallen 2.6pc. The Supreme Court will issue its judgement starting at 4:35pm - shortly after the London stock market closes. 04:12 PM BST Timeline: How the car finance scandal unfolded 04:05 PM BST Banks set aside billions to pay potential claims Some of Britain's biggest banks have already set aside billions of pounds to cover potential claims if today's Supreme Court verdict does not go their way. Lloyd's, through its Black Horse division, was the UK's top motor finance lender and the bank has already put aside £1.2bn for possible compensation. Santander has earmarked £295m and Barclays has set aside £90m. Close Brothers, a smaller specialist lender deeply embedded in the market, has provisioned £165m and Investec has set aside £30m. The scandal also threatens to blow a hole in the Government's finances. Treasury officials believe that a string of major firms could use compensation payments to people who were mis-sold loans to legally cut their corporate tax bills. This would reduce revenue for the Treasury at a time when the Chancellor is battling to meet her fiscal targets. Analysis suggests the Treasury could lose up to £5.5bn in corporation tax receipts as a result. 03:52 PM BST Car finance ruling risks 'calamity for Reeves' The Supreme Court's decision later today could have major knock-on effects for the Labour Chancellor, the UK economy and the pockets of millions of consumers. As Louis Goss reported this morning, a ruling that upholds the decision by the Court of Appeal in October could hamper growth in the financial services sector and force banks to pay out billions of pounds in compensation. It could also open the door to a flood of other claims: The judgment could not only unleash a PPI-style compensation scheme worth billions, but also create a fresh headache for Reeves, who fears a ruling against the banks would reflect badly on Britain as a place to do business. Read the full story here: The £44bn car finance ruling that threatens calamity for Reeves 03:42 PM BST Supreme Court to deliver £44bn verdict Good afternoon. The Supreme Court is preparing to deliver a critical verdict over the car-finance mis-selling scandal that threatens to spark a wave of compensation claims and shake the City of London. The UK's highest court is set to rule on an earlier decision that said car dealers should have informed customers about the commissions they were paid by banks when they arranged car loans. The decision could have major implications for Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, who is concerned having another major redress scheme for the banking sector will hit UK economic growth. The court is expected to hand down its judgment at 4.35pm today. The Telegraph will be covering events live here. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fewer crashes, longer trips under 20mph 'the roads are definitely safer'
Journey times on Welsh roads are increasing as drivers slow down under the country's 20mph speed limit law, according to new data. Vehicle speeds on key 20mph routes have dropped by an average of 3.8mph, and compliance with the new limit has improved significantly. Wales Online readers remain to be convinced of the benefits of the law. Figures show more than 130,000 drivers have now been caught exceeding the 20mph default speed limit. The data, covering November 2023 (two months after the law was introduced) to May 2025, shows a gradual rise in the number of drivers breaking the limit again. A report by Transport for Wales, released this month, evaluates how the new default speed limit is performing. It notes that while speeds have fluctuated, there has been a 'significant and sustained' increase in drivers travelling at or below 24mph — the benchmark for compliance. READ MORE: Welsh rock legend fights for his life in hospital READ MORE: Horrifying footage shows street brawl in Newport involving multiple people armed with long poles The report found that vehicle speeds on main 20mph roads have dropped by an average of 3.8mph. Around 54% of drivers now travel at or below 24mph, up from just 20.8% before the change — a shift that is expected to reduce both the likelihood of collisions and the severity of injuries. Average speeds have increased slightly between winter 2023/24 and winter 2024/25. Average journey times on 15 routes — measured during both morning and evening in both directions — rose in 57 out of 60 cases. However, in 44 of those, the increase was no more than two minutes. At the same time, journey time variability has reduced in 45 cases, offering more consistent travel durations. Monitoring of vehicle and pedestrian interactions at crossings has so far produced inconclusive results. Similarly, air quality data shows no significant difference in nitrogen dioxide levels between areas with and without the 20mph limit. While it is too early to draw firm conclusions about trends in pedestrian and cyclist casualties, there has been an 11.8% drop in overall road casualties in the four quarters since the law came into effect. Commenter Rodgerthedodger says: 'I know that many don't like the 20 limit, but I do. I see far more courtesy towards pedestrians since its introduction. It has brought a valuable reduction in the estrangement between pedestrians and drivers, so I'm all for it. I realise that when you drive north through the valleys with their ribbon development it's tiresome, but doesn't that just show that the WG should have built bypasses for these towns decades ago?' Seaphin thinks: 'The speed limit means prices rise as trucks take longer to deliver. it also means an increase in the amount of fuel used, so much for clean air!' Goatman writes: 'I met loads of tourists down Pembrokeshire this year that said as much as they love Pembrokeshire they will not be coming back to Wales. This government in Cardiff is either destroying the tourism industry on purpose or they are just incompetent.' 636396 points out: 'I travel from Newport to every weekend. Virtually none of the route is 20mph, a couple of miles at most. The only bits that are 20mph in rural areas are the towns and villages, they are so small, the speed restrictions make no difference to overall travel times.' Pontybear states: 'But the roads are definitely safer and that cannot be argued.' Blackhand18 replies: 'Roads are not safer as drivers are watching the speed dial instead of the road. That definitely cannot be argued. Plus the frustration of crawling at 20mph is damaging to mental health and wellbeing.' wizard until i die says: 'Huge sections of roads in the west of England have been 20mph for years, nobody's moaning over there. Drive to the speed limit and we'll all be ok.' PJ372 thinks: 'Wales needs a common sense, targeted approach to appropriate speed limits, not the ludicrous mess we have now.' Jeff2509 believes: '20mph works in that it saves lives, injury and money in return for a few extra minutes on journeys. 'Sorry about your child's death, Mrs Jones, but the driver wanted to save a minute on his journey.'' Simoncorkswill retorts: 'It's suitable at certain points, but entirely unnecessary in others. All those who witter on about saving lives, may I suggest learning and teaching how to cross roads? I've noticed pedestrians being even more careless since it's introduction thinking they no longer really have to bother looking at all.' Has the 20mph speed limit in Wales significantly affected travel times and road safety? Share your views in our comments section.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Slow drivers warned of 'black death' risk
Drivers are being urged to take better care of their engines – and it could be as simple as heading down the motorway now and then. Experts at car repair finance firm Bumper have warned that cautious, slow driving habits may actually be doing more harm than good. They say it can increase the risk of engine damage caused by carbon build-up – often referred to by mechanics as 'black death.' Most motorists try to protect their cars by driving gently around town, but this can unintentionally lead to long-term problems. One of the biggest risks is the accumulation of carbon deposits, which clog internal components, reduce fuel efficiency, and can eventually lead to engine failure. 'If you're constantly driving at low speeds – especially for short journeys – your engine never gets hot enough to burn off carbon deposits,' explained a spokesperson for Bumper. 'Over time, this can lead to a build-up inside your valves, pistons and exhaust system.' Known as 'black death' because of its thick, dark appearance, the deposits are a by-product of unburnt fuel and poor engine circulation. Left unchecked, they can harden and cause serious damage. 'In the worst-case scenario, carbon build-up can cause your engine to seize – and replacing that could cost thousands,' warns Bumper. But there's a simple solution – and it doesn't cost a penny. 'Modern engines are designed to be run at higher speeds from time to time," the spokesman said. "Taking your car for a steady drive on the motorway helps heat the engine fully and allows fuel to clean and lubricate components." Petrol, when forced through the system at higher pressure, can act as a natural solvent – cleaning valves and piston rings as it goes. Another warning sign to look out for is white foam or froth under the oil cap, which could indicate water condensation in the engine oil, often caused by short trips where the engine doesn't heat up properly. 'If you take your oil cap off and notice a milky substance, that's usually a sign your engine isn't getting hot enough to burn off moisture,' the spokesman for Bumper said. 'It's not necessarily a serious fault, but it can lead to long-term problems if ignored.' Again, a regular long-distance drive at a steady speed can resolve the issue. The spokesman added: 'When you drive at motorway speed for 45 minutes to an hour, the heat generated by the engine is enough to evaporate condensation and prevent that build-up. 'We know unexpected engine repairs can be financially stressful, which is why Bumper helps drivers spread the cost with interest-free payments. 'But the best approach is prevention – and in this case, it really can be as simple as giving your car a proper run every now and then.'
