How new does a car need to be for it to be considered reliable and dependable? There are as many answers to that as there are cars and drivers. Modern cars are largely reliable for decades if well-kept, but deferred maintenance and sloppy upkeep can make a car look like it’s gone through hell in less than ten years. Clearly, not-new-car reliability depends on the car in question, but nonetheless, a British woman got a hard-and-fast ruling based on the age of her car alone from a company she had applied to: her 12-year-old car ruled her out for a trainee job at an estate agency.
The BBC reports that Alanah Thompson French, from Nottinghamshire in England, drives a 2014 Citroën C1 she bought last May. The small silver hatchback had less than 40,000 miles on the clock and one previous owner, making it a prime example of a good used buy for not a lot of money; she paid £2800, or less than four thousand dollars for it. It’s been getting her to work and back without any mechanical grief, and a car would continue to be a necessity were she to take the next step in her career toward working as an estate agent.
As well as sending a ton of applications elsewhere, she applied for a trainee lettings negotiator position in Nottingham in December. The estate agent company, which BBC names as haart, had replied that she didn’t make the interview shortlist as she had marked her car as being over 10 years old in the online application; they even had a separate box for the age of the car. She later received an email reply that the company had considered her application but ultimately decided not to invite her for an interview as they required access to a car newer than 10 years old.
In a statement provided to the BBC, the company replied: “It’s extremely important that people who work for us use reliable vehicles for their own personal safety, particularly where they travel many miles each day and often work alone.”
“Evidence from motoring organisations shows that the likelihood of mechanical problems increases as vehicles get older. For that reason, and in line with many organisations that require staff to use their own cars for work purposes, our policy is that vehicles should normally be under 10 years old.”
How Many People Even Have A New Enough Car?
This is certainly an interesting statement. For one, the average British car is around ten years old, according to the motoring organisation RAC; by the end of 2024, the precise average age was nine years and ten months. That means the average British driver would be on the edge of being acceptable for a position in which they would be required to drive their own car.
As Alanah herself says in the BBC article: “It’s just a bit of a kick in the teeth because obviously when you’re applying for jobs, you’re applying for loads and loads of jobs and to get an email back saying that … I just don’t understand it.”
“It doesn’t seem fair because how am I meant to afford a bigger and better car? And how am I meant to get insured on a bigger and better car?”
While the British used car market is usually priced cheaper than the rest of Europe, partially because of left-hand traffic and right-hand-drive, insurance is famously very expensive for young British drivers.
The situation is even worse for European drivers: based on this 2024 article using data from 2022, the average car in Europe was roughly 12 years old, and the economic situation has hardly improved after that. In the States, the average car is now nearing 13 years old according to S&P Global.
The Finnish Information Centre for the Automotive Sector states the average car in Finland is pushing 14 years. And to bring the point home to myself, when I last applied for a job, I was in fact asked whether I had access to a car for work. The fact my daily driver Corolla is over 25 years old didn’t matter, but perhaps it was deemed as reliable enough.
Does Being Nearly New Make A Car Reliable?
The woman named in the BBC article also has a reliable car, according to the RAC. The Citroën C1 is a badge-engineered version of the Toyota Aygo, also sold as the Peugeot 107, and with its Daihatsu powertrain in the gasoline versions, it’s one of the more reliable cars available for a budget sum.
And nearly-new cars haven’t proved to be as reliable as the Aygo: for instance, the now-infamous 1.2-liter PureTech engine has put a big dent in the image of Stellantis’ smaller cars, as the engine’s wet timing belt tends to crumble, blocking the oil passages with debris and requiring a big bill to put right. Stellantis has taken the step of rebranding its 1.2-liter engine line as the Turbo 100, backing the new motor with the statement that its timing chain and improved robustness would “increase driving pleasure.”
Ford isn’t off the hook, either, as the 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine, widely used in Fiestas and Focuses in Europe, also has the same wet-belt issue. Ford’s most troublesome units were produced up to 2019, and Stellantis only initially improved the PureTech with a timing chain in 2023, before introducing its successor that the company claims is more robust. These cars are out there on the used market, far newer than the stated 10-year cut-off for “likelihood of mechanical problems.” And a bad 12-volt battery can render any newish car inoperable, with the likelihood of the battery giving up the ghost increasing the newer the car is. Even the Toyota Yaris, a car considered reliable, is named in WhatCar’s reliability survey as having problems with the battery. The Nissan Juke, another popular car in the UK, got a ridiculous 50% score in another WhatCar survey, with the battery the main culprit.
But the likeliest explanation for the entire deal is that an estate agency simply doesn’t have the bandwidth to consider the multitude of vehicle choices when hiring new workforce. The blanket 10-year rule for cars means the least amount of effort needed to sift applications, as it relies on a simplified rule of thumb. It’s just that the current economic situation means more young people are applying for work while having a reduced budget to shop for cars to make that job happen, especially as new cars are increasingly more expensive.
In a Catch-22 situation, you need a job to be able to source a car, to buy one or finance it, but you also need that car to get the job in the first place. And while not every job lists a car as a requirement, a car-based economy with its long commutes means a lot of people need to rely on a car to get anywhere to begin with.
Top graphic image: Citroën
Maybe I’m just being contrarian, but I have positive views of people who drive older cars. To me, it shows the owner drives responsibly and keeps up on maintenance. I also see older cars as indicators of fiscal responsibility and contentment. I don’t see anything wrong with driving a new and/or expensive car, but I don’t see why some people view drivers of older, cheaper cars negatively.
I’m also skeptical of realtors that drive expensive cars. I’m sure they are trying to say “I’m successful and will sell your house quickly!” but the message I receive is “I’m going to maximize my profit at your expense!”
This isn’t a new phenomenon. However, a company that feels this way is likely taking advantage of employees by making them put wear-and-tear on their personal cars and not providing any kind of personal stipend. Which is just one more outrageous aspect of this late-stage-capitalism world in which we find ourselves.
Similarly, I once worked an office job that definitely did not require us to drive anywhere. Nevertheless, there was one employee with a pretty beat-up teal ’94-era Ford Escort wagon. And it did break frequently. I once personally witnessed her in the parking lot changing the alternator out on it. Management already handled her with kid gloves because she was transgender, but she told me she was outright asked to start parking her car around the back of the building or drive something else, because her car made the front lot look bad when visitors saw it.
My response to her was, “Well, if they feel so strongly about your car, the management/executives can pool some money together and give you a bonus check for a new one. Otherwise, f**k ’em.”
Cars today are much more reliable than in the past, its pretty common to see 20 year old cars daily. Back in the 80’s you rarely seen early 60’s cars around.
At one of my old jobs, I was “encouraged” to drive the company runabout (a 2012 Ford Fiesta with the PowerShit transmission) to client meetings instead of my own car (a battered 1995 Toyota Corolla that was dead-reliable but looked awful). I had two bosses; only one of them cared. So I only took the Fiesta when she was paying attention.
Just borrow a nice car to drive to the interview. Just put “pending” in the what do you drive box. After you have the job and show up in your daily driver, you would be on the winning side in court if fired!
I’ve got a mate in Nottingham with a 23-year-old Renault Clio 172, the car’s one year older than he is! I bet any future employers are gonna freak out 🙂
My Toyota used to get called a Lexus for the sake of applications for rental houses.
If the car is part of your job function and one isn’t provided to you then sadly this is legit. Plenty of jobs require private transportation.
Nice to see Mercedes’ wife isn’t the only person who is losing work based on what they drive.
People need to fuck allll the way off with this stuff. Demand reliable transportation and mind ya goddamn business on what that transportation is.
Agreed in principle, but what defines “reliable”? This company is apparently taking a lazy approach based on the car’s age.
Mercedes’s wife was being discriminated against due to the perceived lack of prestige of her car. This UK company would apparently be fine with the cheapest little runt on the market assuming it fell within the age limit.