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

  • April 5, 2017
    Autonomous vehicles will not prevent half of real-world crashes
    Alan Thomas of CAVT looks at the reality behind the safety claims fuelling the drive towards autonomous vehicles
  • June 4, 2015
    The future looks bright for ITS
    Professor Eric Sampson talks about the past successes of ITS, its potential for the future and the challenges the industry faces. If anybody should know when Intelligent Transport Systems started that person is Professor Eric Sampson, a visiting professor at both Newcastle and London City Universities. Having spent 40 years working for the UK’s Department of Transport and other public administrations, Professor Sampson now supports the European Commission on ITS systems and advises ERTICO ITS-Europe and ITS
  • October 31, 2016
    Average speed cameras reduce injury collisions, says report
    Research carried out into average speed camera (ASC) effectiveness by the UK’s RAC Foundation concludes that the implementation of ASCs in the locations that have been assessed in its report has had the effect of reducing injury collisions, and especially those of a higher severity. Even taking into account other influencing factors, the report says the reductions are large and statistically significant. Researchers analysed detailed accident data taken from 25 sites where average speed cameras were inst
  • July 31, 2012
    Debating the future development of ANPR
    What future is there for automatic number plate recognition? Will it be supplanted by electronic vehicle identification, or will continuing development maintain the technology's relevance? In recent years, digitisation and IP-based communication networks have allowed Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) to achieve ever-greater utility and a commensurate increase in deployments. But where does the technology go next - indeed, does it have a future in the face of the increasing use of, for instance, Dedi