If there is one thing guaranteed to annoy anyone running a fleet, it might be uninformed envy from elsewhere within the organisation. Managing vehicles is not easy. Every other type of manager seems to have an endless list of potential suppliers, mostly offering predictable costs. If, however, the IT folks are quoted a silly figure for hardware support, there are literally hundreds of other companies keen to win the contract. If the HR people put, “UK recruitment agency,” into Google, they get 25 million hits.

When you need to add or replace a vehicle, how many options do you have – and how do you choose between them with confidence? Anyone not working in fleet management might suggest comparing mpg figures alongside the vehicle prices. The more aware among them could realise the increasing importance of fleet emissions. Both are necessary considerations but, even together, they fall some way short of being a complete answer.

It does not help that neither is as simple as it would appear. Fuel consumption will vary from vehicle to vehicle, even for identical models, and between drivers. The only safe solution is to record total expenditure on fuel for a given vehicle during its service. As for emissions, September’s news from VW served only to underline what most of us already knew, that the only reliable emissions figures are the ones you collect yourself. Apart from anything else, if recording them is not already mandatory to comply with your organisation’s sustainability strategy, it soon will be.

So, when the time comes to replace a vehicle, or add to the fleet, procurement decisions must consider total cost of ownership. The arithmetic is simple. Add together everything spent on acquiring and running a vehicle, from tax to tyres and everything in between. You then have a realistic basis for comparison – and powerful evidence for negotiation with a supplier who wants to quote manufacturers’ claims.