When you appoint a service provider for novated leases, there are distinct reasons why you would want to test the provision of services;
- The appoint was endorsed by you, as Corporate Services Manager / Director.
- You have done the necessary due diligence to confirm the provider can provide,
- Vehicles at discounted prices;
- Competitive finance rates;
- Choice in terms of Insurance;
- Discounts on Parts and Labour;
- Discounts on Fuel;
- A fully budgeted, managed and reconciled service.
- If you have not allowed for a choice of provider, you have effectively forced employees to use your selected provider. In situations where a monopoly exists, employees can be gouged. If this were ever tested by ACCC (which thankfully it has not yet), you would want to be sure that you addressed this growing problem.
We have tested some cases where there is a monopoly and the outcome has been dire, to say the least.
First Test Case – Mazda CX9 2020 TC Sport Wagon 7st 5dr SKYACTIV DRIVE 6sp 2.5T
- We acquired the vehicle $3,792 cheaper than the incumbent provider;
- Because the running costs are just a budget, we disregarded those and focused on the finance costs, which over the same term are indcitive of margin. In this scenario, we were $1,982 cheaper per year and $9,912 cheaper over the term
This was a Whopping $10,000 more expensive over a 5 year term and what was worse, is that this employer has appointed the provider on a sole provider contract.
Second Test Case – Land Cruiser VDJ76R GXL Wagon 5dr Man 5sp 4×4 4.5DT
- We acquired the vehicle $4,120 cheaper than the incumbent provider;
- Because the running costs are just a budget, we disregarded those and focused on the finance costs, which over the same term are indicative of margin. In this scenario, we were $1,649 cheaper per year and $8,245 cheaper over the term.
This was another $8,000 more expensive over a 5 year term and once again this employer has appointed the provider on a sole provider contract.
What is the takeout?
As a Corporate Services Manager, it is your duty to ensure that employees receive a FAIR DEAL. What we found above, clearly indicates that the following approach is prudent;
- NEVER use a sole provider for Novated Leases;
- Appoint one provider of scale and another provider who is smaller and can drive the cost down. Providers of similar scale have a similar profit motive and the key here is to enrich the employee experience. Here Pay@bility have proven their capability to provide value.
- Test your providers by introducing a dummy deal every 6 months, or if you are a smaller employer, every year
The above approach should ensure that you have exercised your fiduciary duty to employees.
