Like, why don't they just PCP or Hire Purchase a cheaper car. They'd get whatever benefit the PCP provides, and spend less money. What about the PCP convinces them (rightly or wrongly) that they can afford those cars?
There's so many people doing it I feel I must be the one that is wrong, and there's some tax dodge or something they are taking advantage of.
> What about the PCP convinces them (rightly or wrongly) that they can afford those cars?
At the end of the PCP plan, you don't get to keep the car (it's more of a rental than a purchase). Therefore the monthly payments on a 3-5 year PCP are going to be lower than on just a loan for the full price of the car. That makes it more "affordable" to people than actually buying a car - and the issue of what to do in 3 years time, when you will have no car, is conveniently forgotten.
Possibly nice cars are just cheaper, or everyone is richer or people can get credit for cars where before they couldn't.
It might just be me, I thought people spent too much on cars anyway, and now they seem to have nicer, newer cars, so I assume they're spending even more, but as a non-car guy maybe that only seems weird to me.
It's because you get the benefit of the part exchange value of the car in three years time now, rather than in three years time.
That simple discounted present value trick allows you to have a nicer car the first time you get on a PCP plan, because it lowers the total amount of credit on that plan vs the alternative.