Skip to main content

UK drivers want to be insured against hackers

According to a new survey of almost 1,200 people by road safety charity IAM RoadSmart, 74 per cent of drivers think insurers should provide cover for damage caused by hackers accessing control systems in driverless cars. The results of this survey have been used to guide IAM RoadSmart’s response to the Centre for Connected & Autonomous Vehicles’ consultation, Pathway to Driverless Cars.
September 9, 2016 Read time: 2 mins

According to a new survey of almost 1,200 people by road safety charity IAM RoadSmart, 74 per cent of drivers think insurers should provide cover for damage caused by hackers accessing control systems in driverless cars.

The results of this survey have been used to guide IAM RoadSmart’s response to the Centre for Connected & Autonomous Vehicles’ consultation, Pathway to Driverless Cars.  

When asked whether they agree with the proposal that in future insurers must include cover for driverless cars in their new policies, almost half (46 per cent) said this was a good or very good idea. However, this view shifted when asked whether they’d still agree if this adds to the cost of insurance for all drivers, with 68 per cent disagreeing with the proposition, versus 23 per cent who agreed.

Those surveyed were largely not in favour of driver assistance systems being able to take over from the driver. When asked if they agreed with amending Highway Code rule 150, ‘do not rely on driver assistance systems’, 55 per cent said no compared to 35 per cent who said yes.

And when it comes to self-driving cars manoeuvring themselves with no occupant in the car, those surveyed were vehemently against changing the rules to allow it.

When asked if the Highway Code rules (which currently say that you should be in full control of a vehicle and switch off the engine when you are not in it) should be changed to allow a car to park itself, just six per cent supported this statement strongly. Some 13 per cent supported it, but 69 per cent didn’t support it at all.

Neil Greig, IAM RoadSmart director of policy and research, said: “In our view it is logical that hacking electronic systems in autonomous vehicles is treated the same way as a traditionally stolen vehicle, with the insurer bearing the cost. This will be an important way of developing consumer confidence around one element of the plethora of questions driverless cars pose.

“Driverless cars are a very new proposition for many and views towards them are mixed. Previous research we have carried out shows that road users are by and large excited about their development. But they still have concerns about responsibility, especially when it comes down to liability.”

Related Content

  • January 23, 2012
    Changing driving conditions need ongoing driver training
    Trevor Ellis, chairman of the ITS UK Enforcement Interest Group, considers the role of ongoing driver training in increasing compliance. It is over 30 years since I passed my driving test. The world was quite a different place then, in that there were only half the vehicles there are now on the UK's roads, mobile phones did not really exist and (in the UK at least) the vast majority of us drove cars which by today's standards exhibited dreadful dynamic stability and were woefully underpowered.
  • January 31, 2012
    Managing congestion, better information changes perceptions
    Kapsch's Dietrich Leihs talks about the true fundamentals of urban pricing. In some Italian and German towns and cities, the solution to congestion is an outright ban on certain types of vehicles. As far as Dietrich Leihs is concerned, any attempt to sweeten the pill that is congestion charging is only ever going to be a partial success at best.
  • February 28, 2022
    Putting the brakes on smart motorways
    The UK government has announced that development of its all-lane running highways is going to be put on hold for another few years to assess safety data. Adam Hill finds out why
  • October 12, 2017
    Driver Ahead conference: more training needed on driverless cars
    Driverless cars can create confusion unless training meets the fast pace of change and helps drivers cope with a whole new set of demands, according to a conclusion reached by industry experts at London’s ‘Driver Ahead’ conference in London. The IAM RoadSmart/ RAC Foundation/ Pirelli event consisted of over 100 industry experts who set out to map a safe route for driverless cars. Guest speaker Victoria Coren-Mitchell opened the conference by introducing the “death by code” concept