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

  • June 7, 2017
    Technology and finance shapes up to make MaaS happen
    The technology and finance aspects needed for Mobility as a Service (MaaS) to become widely adopted are taking shape as Geoff Hadwick and Colin Sowman hear. Sampo Hietanen, CEO of MaaS Global and ‘father’ of MaaS, started his address to ITS International’s recent MaaS Market conference in London by saying: “All of the problems that can be solved by a company or group of companies have already been solved, and now we are left with the big ones such as housing, transport and health. He called MaaS the “Netfli
  • February 3, 2012
    Driver training saves lives, increases profits, reduces costs
    An innovative UK Government initiative on work-related driver training has resulted in astonishing success, not only in terms of government objectives, but also in substantial cost-benefits for companies and public sector authorities participating in the scheme: they save lives and increase profits/reduce costs Here, we present an overview of the initiative and, overleaf, provide a detailed cost-benefit analysis which amply illustrates why it has been enthusiastically embraced by industry and the public sec
  • February 6, 2012
    Driver training saves lives, increases profits, reduces costs
    An innovative UK Government initiative on work-related driver training has resulted in astonishing success, not only in terms of government objectives, but also in substantial cost-benefits for companies and public sector authorities participating in the scheme: they save lives and increase profits/reduce costs Here, we present an overview of the initiative and, overleaf, provide a detailed cost-benefit analysis which amply illustrates why it has been enthusiastically embraced by industry and the public sec
  • February 13, 2015
    Crashes affect one in three but drivers continue to take risks
    According to the AAA Foundation’s latest Traffic Safety Culture Index, too many Americans report that they regularly speed, run red lights, use distracting devices or drive drowsy, despite the fact that one in three have a loved one who has been seriously injured or killed in a crash. The results further find that unsafe behaviour persists even though one in five drivers have themselves been involved in a serious crash, and one in ten has been seriously injured in a crash. These most recent findings from