
Car Deal of the Day: Get EV3-style for less with a Kia Niro EV for £237 per month
Just £237.50 a month
Nearly £100 a month cheaper than EV3
The new EV3 may be the Kia that's (rightly) in the spotlight right now, but don't forget the other electric car that has helped Kia to become a leading EV maker – the Niro EV.
It may not have the EV3's new factor, but the Niro EV is still an excellent electric family hatchback – especially if you're new to the world of EV motoring. Add in the fact that the Niro costs around £100 less a month on lease than its glitzier sister, and it's a winner in our book. Advertisement - Article continues below
First Vehicle Leasing is offering the Niro EV for just £237.50 a month right now, after an initial payment of £3,200.04. This 36-month agreement has a 5,000-miles-a-year cap, but this can be revised up to 8,000 for an extra £17.16 a month.
This deal gets you a Niro EV in 2 spec. It's the lowest of the two-trim line-up, with the higher being – you guessed it – 3. The range has recently been rationalised and you can thank the EV3's arrival for that, probably.
Still, 2 gets you 17-inch alloys, a 10.25-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, sat-nav, rear parking sensors, a reversing camera, and a plethora of safety kit. Skip advert Advertisement - Article continues below
The Niro also gets a 64.8kWh battery pack that's good for a claimed 285 miles. In our testing we've found 250 miles to be the most likely range you can get, which is still pretty good.
The interior is well finished and has a design that's very similar to that of its EV6 big brother. It's roomy, too, with plenty of space for a couple of six-footers in the back, while the boot is huge at 475 litres. Fold down the back seats and this rises to nearly 1,400 litres, plus there are plenty of clever storage places such as a handy 'frunk' under the bonnet.
The Car Deal of the Day selections we make are taken from our own Auto Express Find A Car deals service, which includes the best current offers from car dealers and leasing companies around the UK. Terms and conditions apply, while prices and offers are subject to change and limited availability. If this deal expires, you can find more top Kia Niro EV leasing offers from leading providers on our Kia Niro EV page.
Check out the Kia Niro EV deal or take a look at our previous Car Deal of the Day selection here…
Find a car with the experts Car Deal of the Day: 717bhp BMW M5 Touring super-estate on a tasty lease deal
Car Deal of the Day: 717bhp BMW M5 Touring super-estate on a tasty lease deal
The BMW M5 Touring is M car royalty, with a thoroughly impressive PHEV powertrain. It's our Deal of the Day for 29 June Electric car appeal is at its lowest since 2019
Electric car appeal is at its lowest since 2019
From poor electric car sales to crashes in F1, Mike Rutherford thinks its been a crazy few weeks in the automotive world New Skoda Epiq vRS to headline brand's hot-SUV onslaught
New Skoda Epiq vRS to headline brand's hot-SUV onslaught
Every future Skoda will get the go-faster treatment, with the brand also working on making cars sharper and more engaging

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Car finance mis-selling scandal: Millions of drivers denied payouts after Supreme Court ruling
Millions of drivers have been denied payouts after the Supreme Court ruled that lenders are not liable for hidden commission payments in car finance schemes. Two lenders, FirstRand Bank and Close Brothers, went to the UK's highest court to challenge a Court of Appeal ruling which found 'secret' commission payments paid by buyers to car dealers as part of finance arrangements made before 2021, without the motorist's fully informed consent, were unlawful. The ruling in October last year found three motorists, who all bought their cars before 2021, should receive compensation after they 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. But lawyers for the lenders told the Supreme Court at a three-day hearing in April that the decision was an 'egregious error'. And intervening in the case, the Financial Conduct Authority claimed the ruling 'goes too far'. The three drivers, Marcus Johnson, Andrew Wrench and Amy Hopcraft, opposed the challenge. Giving a summary of the long-awaited Supreme Court ruling on Friday, Lord Reed, one of five justices who heard the case, said: 'For the reasons set out in detail in a judgment published today, the Supreme Court allows the appeals brought by the finance companies.' In a letter to the Supreme Court in December last year, the FCA said almost 99 per cent of the roughly 32 million car finance agreements entered into since 2007 involved a commission payment to a broker. Mr Johnson, Mr Wrench and Ms Hopcraft all used car dealers as brokers for car finance arrangements for second-hand cars, all worth less than £10,000, before January 2021. Only one finance option was presented to the motorists in each case, with the car dealers making a profit from the sale of the car and receiving commission from the lender. The commission paid to dealers was affected by the interest rate on the loan. The schemes were banned by the FCA in 2021, with the three drivers taking legal action individually between 2022 and 2023. Ms Hopcraft, then a student nurse, bought her replacement car in 2014 through an agreement with Close, which paid the car dealership £183.26 in commission. Mr Wrench, described by the Court of Appeal as a 'postman with a penchant for fast cars', entered into two hire-purchase agreements for an Audi TT coupe and a BMW 3 Series, with FirstRand, in 2015 and 2017, respectively, paying hundreds in commission in total. Mr Johnson, then a factory supervisor, was buying his first car in 2017 and paid £1,650.95 in commission as part of his finance agreement with FirstRand for the Suzuki he purchased. After the claims reached the Court of Appeal, three senior judges ruled the lenders were liable to repay the motorists the commission due to the lack of disclosure about the payments. Lady Justice Andrews, Lord Justice Birss and Lord Justice Edis said last year that while each case was different, 'burying such a statement in the small print which the lender knows the borrower is highly unlikely to read will not suffice'.


Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Car finance scandal: could you still get compensation?
Does the Supreme Court ruling mean I won't be compensated? The upholding of the judgment could have paved the way for anyone who took out a car finance loan before 2021 to be in line for some form of compensation. Now it's been overturned, pending any further appeals or escalations, it could mean only those who are eligible to claim against the potential misuse of discretionary commission arrangements could receive compensation – pending further information from the FCA. This could still implicate a lot of people, but the scale is not expected to be as huge if it also included commission disclosure complaints. The Supreme Court, however, did uphold one complaint against the lenders, suggesting there could be scope for some individuals to successfully claim. It upheld a claim from a claimant over an 'unfair' relationship between a customer and a finance company. The size of commission was 55pc of the total charge for credit. As it was so high, the 'relationship' between the customer and finance company was deemed to be unfair. How much could I be owed? This is still unclear. In regards to the discretionary commission agreement arm of the scandal, those who signed up to multiple car finance agreements between 2007 and 2021 could be eligible for several payouts. The average mis-sold car finance payout, according to LawPlus Solicitors, is £1,500. The FCA has suggested that for a typical £10,000 four-year car finance deal, a customer could have overpaid £1,100 in interest. Exact amounts would depend on individual circumstances. A driver would likely receive the difference between the amount they paid at an inflated interest rate and the rate they should have been charged. Interest of 8pc on the overpayment would also likely be added, so the payout could be quite substantial. Should I use a claims management company? Thousands of drivers have been lodging compensation claims via claims management companies, which charge a commission fee upon the outcome. Scores of law firms are also offering 'no win, no fee' deals to manage claims. You do not need to use one of these companies to make a claim. Consumer rights expert Martyn James said there was 'no reason whatsoever for claims companies to exist'. He said: 'They are like vultures. This industry made millions if not billions from PPI claims, and now they are doing the same with car finance. They are out in force.' Regulated claims firms can take up to 30pc of the reward, up to a maximum amount of £10,000, excluding VAT, whereas those who go solo will receive 100pc of their payout. You may not even have to make a claim yourself, as the FCA is considering setting up a free redress scheme, which will force lenders to automatically compensate consumers. What should I do next? For discretionary commission arrangements, the best thing to do is wait and see what the FCA reveals in six weeks' time. It could be influenced by the Supreme Court's separate ruling, so it is best to wait for the next development. Do not use a claims management company, as the FCA could force banks to automatically compensate impacted consumers. In case an automatic redress scheme isn't set up, you could log a claim if you haven't done so already. In order to do so, you'll need to contact your original lender and ask them about the commission agreements secured on your deal. The FCA has put a pause on the deadline for providers to get back to you while it carries out its investigation. As it stands, lenders don't have to respond to your complaint about car finance until December 4 this year. If you're unhappy with the eventual response from the lender, you can take your case for free to the Financial Ombudsman Service.


The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Millions set to miss out on car finance compensation after Supreme Court ruling
Lenders have avoided potentially having to pay compensation to millions of drivers after the Supreme Court ruled they are not liable for hidden commission payments in car finance schemes. Two lenders, FirstRand Bank and Close Brothers, went to the UK's highest court to challenge a Court of Appeal ruling which found 'secret' commission payments paid by buyers to car dealers as part of finance arrangements made before 2021 without the motorist's fully informed consent were unlawful. The ruling in October last year found three motorists, who all bought their cars before 2021, should receive compensation after they 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. Lawyers for the lenders told the Supreme Court at a three-day hearing in April the decision was an 'egregious error', while the Financial Conduct Authority intervened in the case and claimed the ruling 'goes too far'. The three drivers, Marcus Johnson, Andrew Wrench and Amy Hopcraft, opposed the challenge. Giving a summary of the Supreme Court's ruling on Friday, Lord Reed, one of five justices who heard the case, said: 'For the reasons set out in detail in a judgment published today, the Supreme Court allows the appeals brought by the finance companies.' In a letter to the Supreme Court in December last year, the FCA said almost 99% of the roughly 32 million car finance agreements entered into since 2007 involved a commission payment to a broker. Mr Johnson, Mr Wrench and Ms Hopcraft all used car dealers as brokers for car finance arrangements for second-hand cars, all worth less than £10,000, before January one finance option was presented to the motorists in each case, with the car dealers making a profit from the sale of the car and receiving commission from the lender. The commission paid to dealers was affected by the interest rate on the loan. The schemes were banned by the FCA in 2021, with the three drivers taking legal action individually between 2022 and 2023. Ms Hopcraft, then a student nurse, bought her replacement car in 2014 through an agreement with Close, which paid the car dealership £183.26 in commission. Mr Wrench, described by the Court of Appeal as a 'postman with a penchant for fast cars', entered into two hire-purchase agreements for an Audi TT coupe and a BMW 3 Series, with FirstRand, in 2015 and 2017, respectively, paying hundreds in commission in total. Mr Johnson, then a factory supervisor, was buying his first car in 2017 and paid £1,650.95 in commission as part of his finance agreement with FirstRand for the Suzuki he purchased. After the claims reached the Court of Appeal, three senior judges ruled the lenders were liable to repay the motorists the commission due to the lack of disclosure about the payments. Lady Justice Andrews, Lord Justice Birss and Lord Justice Edis said last year that while each case was different, 'burying such a statement in the small print which the lender knows the borrower is highly unlikely to read will not suffice'.