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

  • March 2, 2022
    Want intelligent transit? Then share data
    How will the US deploy intelligent transit networks that enable connected vehicles? Data sharing is crucial if urban mobility users are to benefit, explains Timothy Menard of Lyt
  • May 27, 2016
    Survey - majority of people would be reluctant to be a passenger in a driverless car
    According to a survey carried out by ICM Unlimited on behalf of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 55 per cent of the 2002 people surveyed said they were unlikely to want to be a passenger of a driverless car, with 40 per cent saying they were very unlikely to want to be a passenger. Just 21 per cent said they would be happy to ride in a driverless vehicle. Philippa Oldham, head of Transport and Manufacturing at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, said: “The benefits of driverless vehicle tech
  • April 22, 2022
    Peter Norton: ‘We can reintroduce freedom of choice in transportation’
    Funding for transit, cycling and walkability can be politically divisive – so why not bypass politics by letting toll payers themselves choose how a fraction of their toll is spent, asks Peter Norton
  • July 1, 2016
    NHTSA opens investigation into fatal Tesla crash
    The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has opened a preliminary investigation into a fatal crash involving a Tesla autonomous car in Florida. According to a Florida Highway Patrol report, the 40-year-old driver was killed when his 2015 Model S drove under the trailer of an 18-wheel truck. In a blog post on the crash, which happened in early May, Tesla said “the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to t