Airline debit card fees

If you booked a low cost flight in Europe, I'm sure you are familiar with the low cost airlines 'optional extras' that tend to include things like buying a seat, and paying by a credit / debit card other than that operated by the airline. Well seems just as legislation is due in the UK to crack down on these things, with particulare reference to Ryan Air - at the bottom of the pile, I was a little suprised to see the following piece of marketing shite from slightly better Easy Jet

So while I might not be paying any more - there is a massive 9 quid in admin fees, and further 4.95 if I we were to pay by credit card. So while Ryan Air is in the shit for charging 6 a head, it looks as though companies are going to be getting away with admin fees like this for some time to come.

Speeding - a multi faceted gold mine for revenue

Having been through the process of losing my licence before, I'm thoroughly convinced that not too many places milk the motorist for petty speeding offences as badly as the Australian traffic police. Compared with the majority of Europe (excluding those that scale fines according to income), Australia must be 3-4 times more expensive. Clearly the approach being played by the police is cracking down on speeding as a means of accident reduction, while I dispute that as a direct cause (not a contributing factor) of the majority of accidents, it is indeed cheap and easy to police, and it's easy to make money out of. In actual fact I have a strong suspicion that poor driver training, poor spatial awareness, road rage, drink driving, and poor roads are bigger contributors, but all of these are pretty hard to tackle in the short term.

By contrast in the UK, I've done 20,000 - 30,000 miles and not been booked, breath tested, or even pulled over, Nothing! The country has gone that far up the path of pursing speeding as the course of accidents (or revenue raising, you decide), that now, as with the high density of CCTV cameras, this is mathced on the roads by a ridiculous density of speeding cameras, sometimes up to 1 per 100 metres! Incidently though driver education lags behind that of mainland Europe, and now Australia. So after 18 months incident free, my other half scored a low level speeding ticket from a fixed camera. No big deal, however the irony lies in how the fine was dealt - 3 points and 60 pounds - fair for the offence, but all this was served up from the "West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction Partnership". Yep thats what i'd call the West Yorkshire Police trying on a bit of marketing lingo to disguise revenue raising if ever I saw it.

Names aside, what was more Ironic was that for a further 15 pounds, she was able to attend a road safety awareness course, and have the points waived. This was pushed particularly hard, given that it was printed on a cardboard flyer next to the crummy government recycled paper fine notice, and mentioned in no less than all 3 pieces of correspondence to date. Further, one would think that this type of offer would be offered to repeat of high-level offenders - the ones who are just about to lose their licence. Here is what I suspect - knowing what I know about insurance premiums in the UK, and the fact that all demerit points have to be declared, I suspect that the cost of the course and the time to attend it must be worth it compared to what the average premium increase would be. This then is very clever marketing

The national car insurance scam

When I first moved to the UK, I was under the impression that securing auto insurance (of all things!) would be a relatively straight forward endeavour - I mean there are that many similarities between how things are administered in Australia and the UK, that auto insurance would likely be one of them.

My first quote for a car similar to what I was already driving back home came in at a whopping 3k online. Thinking I was missing out on something big style, I visited a broker, where the best I was offered was £1900 - more than twice the value of the car receiving the cover in the first place! Perhaps more surprisingly was being told that this was infact a good deal! Further digging online halved this price again, but the amount of input variables required by these companies when quoting I found to be simply astounding - the occupation list alone was about as extensive as that of the tax office. After handing over a substantial wad of cash, I was under the impression that this was the end of the hassle, and next years bill would be loads cheaper in any case, as I'd be accruing 'valuable' UK driving history.

Moving house 2 months later, well you could hardly call it moving when it was 5 doors down on what was once the same street, the insurance company decided that they were accepting additional risk and charged an additional £50 for the move. While I can appreciate that it may have been closer to a more dangerous area, I would hardly call 5 doors statistically significant - and herein lies the problem - If insurance companies sense any kind of additional risk that can be quantified on any scale they will charge for it! Clearly uncontrollable factors such as manner of parking, gang activity, and other incompetent drivers activity, and an individuals pre-disposition to making a claim (to name a few) would be more significant contributing factors to an insurers risk, but since auto insurance is administered via a call centre, the odds of actually having an intelligent conversation are out the window.

To Illustrate just how out of touch call centre operators selling insurance are, I'll give an example of how I tried to negotiate my premium increase down from the £50 increase. The only factors left to change were where I could leave my vehicle overnight (street, driveway, or garaged). I had them all quoted, and was surprised that the most expensive was indeed having it garaged! The explanation: "People who have expensive cars garage them". Once again a demonstration of lack of critical thinking - In reality it's likely that these expensive cars are actually targeted by organised thieves, and are not simply kids out stealing whatever they can break into. Putting things into context - I was driving a family car in South Yorkshire at the time - clearly not a target for organised crime, and much more likely to be stolen by joy riders. Clearly if they are going to use such a high-level model on quoting insurance premiums, they should occasionally apply the odd reality check! Incidentally I didn't have any of these options available to me living in a flat - hence also demonstrating the lack of operator engagement or any kind of thought, when you can check all this on google street view!

Further to this, I've been charged indiscriminately for minor policy upgrades. Firstly I wanted to add another driver for a week - fair play, I get charged. To add 1 more day of coverage to this, I'm charged for a whole extra week - cover I don't need, but I'm still paying for. I've also borrowed a car from the dealer while mine has been getting serviced - only to be told that I'd need to get it added to my policy for £20 per day! And that no, I couldn't remove my car from the policy, as it would need to be insured too. Clearly this would have incurred a lot of administration costs to do so, but the stupidity remains - my car getting serviced would have been covered by the dealers property / professional insurance, and it would hardly have been possible for me to be driving both at once in any case. Further the car I did end up borrowing had the power of a lawnmower - reduced risk if anything! And for all this they wanted £25! for 1 Day.  Just to go the full trifecta, I'll add one more example. Recently I  had to add business cover for my partner on the policy (the fact that they can charge for usage type on it's own is a crime), and as I'm the policy holder, I had to upgrade too - yes thats right, more fees for additional features that i'm never going to use!

These 3 examples illustrate the rigid nature to which insurance companies enforce and monitor usage - any changes, you bet they will charge you for them! Sure they also demonstrate a clear lack of analytical thought on the operators behalf too, but what is slightly worrying for me is that for an industry such as this which is essentially a service sector, the customer is treated like crap. I mean if you walked into a car dealership and spent the same order of money as we are talking about here on accessories, then had the hide to ask for a discount or say take 2 car matts instead of 4, I'm sure they'd come to the party to please you owing to the amount of money spent.

So we have seen by the previous price hike that insurance companies blindly apply statistics to any kind of circumstances change, all without the slightest reality check, so long as it adds up in there favour - so what happens when it doesn't? Recently I changed from an Australian to UK licence, and was told before doing so that my premium would be discounted. Clearly this makes sense, as a UK licence means that points from traffic offences actually count, rather than being lost in international waters. Funnily enough though this made no difference to my premium, despite a pretty significant incentive to slow my driving down, had I been inclined to fully exploit the benefits of possessing a foreign licence.

Being fed up of paying for minor changes - which incidentally are a legal requirement of being insured driving in the UK - I decided to look into the regulations on the industry. I'd heard many times on the phone to my insurer about who they are regulated by in the legal blurb, and for all the legal crap that they sugar coat it with, essentially my insurer (and all others i presume) are regulated by the FSA, while the industry is self regulated by an industry association. A small but significant point- this only regulates them in terms of selling financial products, not in terms of how they can charge for policy differences. Sure they do provide a high level of financial cover - if you ever actually need it - and this is what is required by the government, but for the vast majority of people this remains a facility seldom used. I believe that the way this industry conducts itself is a shining example of self regulation, and a strong case for government to step in, and ensure these companies limit their profits and cut down on scamming the public.  The irony here is that this is perhaps one of the better microcosms for the current attitude of UK society - that self regulation promotes competition and is good for business. That it may be, but at what price to the consumer? Sure it can be a hefty financial price, but few Brits ever consider what I like to call the administration cost - the lost time spent checking for discounts, updating the companies on minute circumstance details, and wondering which car they should buy based on how much the insurance is going to be. I'm honestly surprised that few seem to want to do anything about the state of affairs given the supreme waste of time it generates, not to mention the family feuds it must cause for all those but the super wealthy who are not bothered by a few thousand pounds expenditure on the rolls.

Whilst on the cost of insurance to the average Joe - it must be significant, given the fact that there are of order 500K drivers on this small island presently driving without cover - this must be of order 2-3 % of cars on the road if we estimate that there is roughly half the population owning and driving cars. I'm sure this number is liable to grow, as we are presently watching unemployment climb, and auto insurance has gone up 40% or so in the past year. Hold up 40%! Thats ridiculous. So while there is currently a government inquiry into the price of auto insurance, the public is repeatedly fed the message by insurers that the price of insurance is driven up by un-insured drivers. Interestingly the fine for being uninsured is £500 max ,and the cheapest car you can get is only a few hundred, so when you compare this to nearly £1k for an insurance policy for someone living a less than desirable area, you can see if you are barely scraping by financially, its a risk thats going to look more and more attractive as the economic situation worsens, and insurance premiums rise. Incidently, it is often that in impoverished areas where people struggle to pay the bills that auto insurance is also at its highest.

So Insurance was something I'd never be making use of - that was until someone decided to key my car in a supermarket carpark under full view of CCTV. While it would be any sane person's view that catching the petty theif who did this (along with several other cars at the same time) would be the primary concern of the insurance company, supermarket, and police - sadly it was not. My partner was shown CCTV footage of the car parked in the car park at the supermarket, so she made a police report in the hope that they would have access to the footage and get on the case. Several days later the police notified us that the the supermarket had no sign of our vehicle on CCTV footage. For me that just didn't add up, so a trip to the supermarket revealed that their corporate policy was to only release footage to insurance companies - not even the Police! From this series of events, I'm left to conclude that the supermarket probably did have the footage, and that it's highly likely they are in bed with the insurance companies - financially it adds up. If the perp was to be prosecuted without me making a claim, there is no upside for the supermarket - perhaps apart from having retained a customer, however knowing the state of affairs with the accident and injury claims side of auto insurance that was revealed some months ago, it would not be too much of  a stretch to assume a similar state of affairs here.

One more nail in the coffin of poor customer service was when it came to renewal time. One would think that for a business that customer retention would be a high priority, given the administration time and costs involved in transferring customer information between companies, so you can imagine my surprise when discovering my renewal price was £250-300 more than a 'new customer' price from the same insurer with identical policy conditions! This does nothing to retain a customer, and it clearly is poor business when the onus is on the customer to check the pricing, and even poorer when the discrepancy is so great. Alas though, as with the case with the supermarket, it would appear that customer retention is a long lost concept in the UK.

Fundamentaly it's a pretty poor state of affairs in the UK when there is little to no transparency in policy pricing, or even any common sense behind it. The industry is one of the few of its kind left that is not administered online, rather it relies on call centres - I suspect in part this is so the consumer is unable to spend too much time comparing the relative costs of policy options in order to get a discount. In essence it is the complexity and lack of clarity in the system that allows them to charge to the hilt, legaly and without a so much as a reality check.  To further Illustrate the state of affairs one can purchase "No claims bonus protection" along with a policy - i.e. paying an extra premium to retain ones no claim history in the event of a claim - Hold up thats effectively taking out insurance on your insurance!

To avoid this pile of nonsense, it would be my suggestion to charge based on 4 simple factors: accidents, claims, driving history, and vehicle class only. Other factors that are charged for at present - which indeed may or may not be actual significant factors - are likely discrimination under European Law. Earlier last year, a case was heard in Luxembourg as to why there was discrepancy between men and womens insurance premiums - this was ruled illegal under EU law, so naturally premiums will rise to parity! Furthermore 3rd party cover should be assumed on any vehicle if the driver has permission - the amount of drivers who are restricted to a single car, and for example could not driver their drunk friends car home from the pub, is simply ridiculous owing to current legislation. Government regulation would also likely make insurance affordable for those who presently do not see the financial benefit (i.e. those who choose to drive uninsured), meaning fairer cover for all in the long run.

UK Border control - Inconsistency, poor service and the list goes on

Well I've meant to write about this one for a while! Ever since I first travelled to the UK as a student, I can recall on one hand the number of times I haven't had trouble of some kind crossing the borders. I've been a few places in my time, and I can't recall anywhere (yes even the US) that has such needlessly strict and inconsistent border security.

The whole saga started around July 2008, I had plans of bike racing and camping in the European summer, then starting a year of student exchange in the UK that Autumn - not too much of a biggie visa wise, a quick call to the UK embassy in oz ($10 flat fee no less though!), and it was revealed that I could apply for the visa in Vienna or Paris in  person - far easier than sending all the stuff to Canberra for 6 wks +! Besides It could not have been processed in time if I was going to race world champs on the bike and then make it to the UK.

Halfway through the summer though, things got a bit fishy - a few email, calls to both embassies, and even a visit to Vienna, I realised that these places had suddenly become like black holes - you could send your documents into them for an application, but no information would return out of them. Turned out that they also didn't take applications unless you resided in that country - contradicting the supposedly sound advice I paid for out of Canberra. Several years later, I found out that the whole UK Border agency / Forreign office / whoever was responsible, was in the process of being privatised for visa applications .

Unable to make sense of the situation where information was not freely given up, I chanced the border at the Eurostar terminal in Paris, knowing I'd be able to get a 6 month student visa there. Or so I thought! I got as far as having my passport stamped, but just as it was about to be handed over they questioned why I had 9 months worth of courses on my offer letter from Uni- I reiterated that It was my original intention to stay for 2 semesters worth of study, and that the only reason I didn't have the proper visa was that I had been fed a load of crap by the embassy in Canberra, and hey it's not every year you qualify to race at world champs is it? My finger prints were taken, and I was assured the consulate in Paris would process my application. With this, I set off, unsure of pretty much anything - I'd already had all my bikes shipped off to the UK and dropped off my rental.

Arriving at the address of the consulate, I found that it had not been there for sometime, I was given another address, and the search continued. At the supposed consulate I found that it was merely a place to submit visa applications for those in the country - It was little wonder then that my attempts to get in touch with them were unsuccessful! Distraught, I had uni doctor up 6 months worth of paperwork. Just in case I was barking up the wrong tree, I went and asked at the border what they'd need - apparently they wanted a full letter couriered over from the University! I retired for the night - it had been a pretty average day to say the least. Finding a hostel would be easy I thought , at least that would go my way. It didn't, and I travelled to 2 before I was successful.

The next day I took my chances printing an online version, and I was through. Happily I didn't pay for my attempts, as a fire in the Eurostar meant they were handing out replacement tickets and refunds more readily than an oversubscribed American commuter flight. Sadly though this is not where the trouble finished. Travelling to Belgium a few months later, I was taken aside at the border - my visa had been backdated 6 months rather than forward - rookie error on their behalf! After this hassle,  I wrote, explaining the whole lot to the home office in the UK, and even offered to come down and have the whole lot verified - no chance, If the good times were to continue, I'd be going home for christmas. This was far from straightforward, with my application returned for not signing it (after it head sat in the que for 3 weeks on someones desk no less, no phone call no nothing!), Getting it back, and a few weeks later, I find out my passport has made it's way back to the very office in London I had offered to visit! 7-8 weeks after returning home, I was on my way back to the UK.

18 months later, and I had my YMS visa in my hand, this time ready to go before leaving Oz. Entering though the same border in Paris, there was not a single problem! But that was only temporary - Some nasty prick in Manchester decided that my student visa (which I was clearly no longer using!) had not been verified properly in 09' by stamping it - clearly not my problem! Several months later, and one of his colleagues tells me that my current YMS visa is not verified properly since it never got stamped - talk about inconsistency - they were probably even colleagues! Somewhere between these two inconsistencies, I  was questioned about my work - the bloke reckoned that I was only allowed to work for 12/24 months on my visa - I called his bluff and asked for the proof - when you have had as much shite as I have you don't skim over the fine print! I was allowed through…. only if I was careful about how long I worked! I later looked at the legislation, and it was another case of this being true …. about 07/08' - once again the border security people are out of date!

So lets look at the list of blatant errors from the British Border Agency and Consulates:

• Canberra Consulate 08 - Advises that student visas can be applied for in-person anywhere - despite the process changing several moths before to outsourced processing, and only being done from the applicants home country or regional centre.
• Paris Sept 08 - Advised that I could apply for a visa at the consulate - it had moved, and definitely would not process my application due to the above outsourcing.
• Paris Sept 08 - My visa is stamped with the wrong year - making it expire 6 months prior to the date it's validated
• Aug 11' - I'm told I cant work for more than 12 months on my 2 yr visa - these conditions expired on the YMS visa ~ 3 years ago
•  Nov 11' the border people can't work out if visas are DEFINITELY supposed to be stamped or unstamped.

Clearly all these errors point to a few basic things that need to be verified. Border staff need better training on what is and isn't current legislation - particularly since this is the legislation that they enforce! Secondly - don't privatise a government function, and if it is done, at least make sure everyone is on the same page, so they don't give false information to applicants.

Finally, I thought we as Australians were part of the Commonwealth? I reckon the above is pretty excessive given we still have the Queen as our head of state!

As a postscript, a quick search of t'internet did not reveal too much - It appears that sometime in Feb 08' that visa applications started to be outsourced for the UK, but naturally the Border Agency has no information on this! I did however find this - seems i've got plenty of company!

Utes in the UK

Utes or Pick-up  trucks are traditionally thought of as an Australain / US cultural icon, however I have a sneaking suspicion that the UK is cottoning on - well at least the marketing people have cottoned on to the envy the average UK citizen has for their less spatially constrained english speaking counterparts.

Marketing Utes in Australia and the US is a pretty simple affair - it just needs some pretty decent power figures, and the thing will sell itself. In the UK, it would seem they are trying to sell a lifestyle:

• Ford are offering the Ranger - also offered in Australia - available in the UK as the 'Thunder' edition
• Nissan have the Navara - again the same as what is offered back home, but with an  'Outlaw' edition offered -
• Mitsubishi have marketed their L200 consumer ute as the L200 Warrior - what we in Australia call the Triton
• Toyota, as pretty much everywhere, have the Hilux, with the top model in the UK branded as 'Invincible'

So what are all these manufacturers getting at? It would seem that all these branding editions conjure up images of new world ruggedness - perhaps the marketing people got it right - all these special editions mentioned above are THE most expensive version of each respective vehicle - yet they are the most numerous on UK roads in terms of non-govt utility vehicles. Says a lot about people's aspirations in the UK I think!

English Society - drowning in a sea of charity and 'awareness'

English love charity - there is little questioning this, when you hear the sheer volume the topic occupies in general conversation. But just how far does this love extend? Doing a little digging - according to the charity commission there are 162,119 registered  charities in Just England and Wales at the time of writing. That is quite substantial for a population just shy of 60 million. Thats more than one charity per 400 people!

By contrast in Australia there are something like 10,200  registered in a population of 23 million (thats about one charity per 2300 people then). Interestingly the figures I have obtained for Australia were part of an article in The Age on the very crux of this post - surely there is a butt load of duplication going on if there are this many charities - surely there cannot be THAT many endemic causes out there? Happily the article also mentions the role of government - particularly that in many of the model societies of Northern Europe it is seen as the role of government to assume many of the roles typically catered for by charity elsewhere.

Sticking with the two nations above, it is interesting to read at The Guardian that Australia actually donates MORE to charity. Clearly then, there must  something going on with competition for awareness and donations between charities in Britain - potentially casuing people to donate smaller amounts when they do donate. With the national profile that charity holds among the people, It would nearly be inconceivable for a person NOT to donate to a charity when asked. I hypothesise then that the typical UK citizen donates to charity in the same manner one should eat when dieting 'often, but small'. Why the small donations then?  Charity is ingrained nature in the culture. Saying no to charity is one of the biggest faux pas on this tiny island.

I was recently asked at work to donate 10 pounds to sponsor a colleague - the majority of the other people in the office made rubbish excuses or donated pitiful amounts. Perhaps it is my Australian heritage, but i'd rather be honest, so i told the guy upfront that I simply didn't want to sponsor him. I think the whole office stopped and stared, you would have heard a pin drop. But that is the crux of it - with loads of charities floating about, there are far too many impromptu collections, which the population somewhat begrudgingly deposits pitiful amounts into.

Think you can get away from these in an anonymous environment? Take a walk onto any of the UK's high streets on any given day and there will be a 95% that you will run into a chugger. These people are crazy invasive, and really begs the question - if they can pay out of work students to hassle passer by's into coughing up a monthly direct debit donation, then how much money are charities which support these practices actually spending on the cause?

Monetary matters aside, charities are also there to lobby governments and raise awareness of issues. This is usually a fair point, but picture the thousands of charities jockeying for awareness among 162k of them. Sure raising awareness is always a good thing, but this could be achieved so much more efficiently if the interested parties did a simple search and found an existing, related charity to support. But then again, as mentioned in The Age article above, there usually are some pretty big egos involved! Namely the kind that feels obliged to dedicate a charity to someone they know who died of x,y,z illness. If only these people would stick to dedicating park benches!

So not only is charity questionably ineffective (in terms of awareness and finances) when their number per cause is proliferated, but there are other inefficiencies in the system. Namely gap years. Ask any English person who has attended university, and chances are they took one of these. Moreover, unlike their Australian counterparts, they probably took it in aid of charity. But is this really effective? I recently looked at joining an Engineering organisation which operated in the 3rd world with gap-year style projects  - mainly from what i had seen of it's achievements through friends in Australia. It's a pity for me to say this, but my local branch in the UK looks like it offers far less in real projects and looks more like a CV builder under the guise of a charity. From speaking with many of my peers it would seem this is normal - that there are indeed many charities like this that exist just for building CV's and for facilitating a year away from organised society under the guise of doing something positive.

Further to charity projects providing an opportunity for lost university age students to pilfer a year abroad, yet still build their cv, is the culture of volunteering in corporations. With corporate culture it seems short of having children, there is little lenience to those who have ambitions of additional time away from the desk. That is unless you do it for charity. It all makes sense to me now - hearing of how the English have conquered the outdoors, how people have rowed across oceans cycled the world or similar schemes on a much smaller scale - all in the aid of charity. Perhaps this is me being cynical, but i reckon a fair load of them are doing this as an excuse to get out of work. I mean really, the majority would probably be able to donate more cash if they stayed at work and donated the proceeds from the same time period. Perhaps it's also that British people feel social guilt for just doing an adventure for adventures sake?

So there is a take home message at the end of this one - if I die of mysterious causes please do not start a charity in my name, and should I ever decide to pack it in and go walkabout - I'll be doing it off my own batt. You might say i'm a scrooge, but one day, when i'm earning more, i might just donate a massive chunk of cash to a deserving mob - that ought cut through all the pesky admin costs!

What applies to business applies to life?

We all know by the sheer volume of DIY and property shows that have originated in the UK that there must be some thing of a knack for business and project management ingrained in the average citizen. Applying high levels of advanced planning to this kind of project usually pays dividends. Naturally English have thought to apply the same levels of diligence to other facets of life.

On favourite pastime of the English is to plan Holidays. Whether this is related to a sense of project management, or ingrained desire to leave cloudy Brittani for some sun remains to be seen. I'm not just talking about planning a holiday, I'm talking about planning a holiday to the max, all included in a nice package - complete with payment plan (should one chose). Thing is Brits book these package holidays that far out, that anything could happen in the mean time. The travel company could go bust. Their personal circumstances could preclude them being able to make the trip. etc. Naturally all this leads rather conveniently to another rubbish financial product - travel insurance - the kind that includes all that extra crap that covers these eventualities. So why do Brits do it? Why do they pay through the nose for all manner of questionably unnecessary holiday extras (when in all likeliness they are just going to get drunk at night and lie on the beach all day), then take out a ridiculously priced insurance policy on the whole shebang, and potentially ice it off by paying for it on personal finance. I reckon it has to be a desire to plan ones pursuits in life like a business - planning months or years ahead in business is common practise, and progress in business often comes with coughing up cash in regular payments. Perhaps on the one hand it looks like holidays in the sun is all they have to look forward to, or to brag to colleagues to!

So you don't believe me on all this holiday stuff - go and open a British tabloid (or even a flashier broadsheet) newspaper - these are loaded with holiday 'packages'. Funny thing about these holidays is that if the protagonists involved simply got educated on their destination rather than the deals, i'm sure they could snag even better offers on accommodation and activities. Furthermore a bit of freedom never hurt anyone - booking later, and booking activities/ accom when you use them may cost a little more, but also leaves more options open. Potentially it may even be cheaper given the opportunity to haggle with poorly occupied hotels.

Holidays are not the only thing English people like to plan as if they were running a business. As i have touched on before, they also like to purchase assets ina similar manner to businesses - in payments - also known as finance. Finance is not really a new concept to an Australian such as myself, Aussie Bogans have been maxing out mortgages and credit cards for decades - not to mention buying furniture on x months interest free terms. 
What is staggering by comparison is the manner in which English employ yet another rubbish financial product. I'll give two examples of acquaintances of mine. The first earns a reasonable salary for someone his age, and decided to treat himself to a new car, on finance of course. All and good i suppose, if it enables you to get to work reliably in order to earn money. Nope, he has a new performance car that cost about 10k - yet today he complains about social commitments to going out for dinner - but surely for a once a month event that is cheaper than the interest he pays per week !
Another ludicrous example of finance is yet another acquaintance of mine who intends to buy a 1k bicycle frame. on finance. over 2 years. Few things here - you would want to be bloody good to pay that much for a frame - I've represented my country in the sport, and by current steed which sees probably 5k miles a year cost 80 quid. On this form i would not dream of spending any more. Thing is this bloke hasn't turned a pedal in 2 years! Then he intends to put a race bike on Finance? They are usually obsolete / worn out within that pay off period!


Not only do English love to pay for things in instalments, they also like to 'pre-buy' - in a similar manner that a business does when setting up or launching a new product. The classic English example is buying a car prior to having a licence. Yepo i know someone in this boat too. He's just bought a near new car on finance - a few months prior to actually being able to drive it!

Whats the moral to all this? Don't run your life like a business. The key thing about buying things in advance and in payments in business is the capital cost of these things, and the fact that they are purchased in order to pay for themselves by value adding to the business. Critically anything bought with personal finance is likely to depreciate in value, and is not likely to earn it's keep. clearly then, business concepts should not be applied to individual lives! Perhaps this is also where it needs to begin when it comes to the debt crisis too?