Electric cars risk becoming effectively uninsurable as analysts struggle to put a price on battery repairs, according to a researcher for the car insurance industry. The Telegraph has more.
Jonathan Hewett, Chief Executive of Thatcham Research, the motor insurers’ automotive research centre, said a lack of “insight and understanding” about the cost of repairing damaged electric car batteries was pushing up premiums and resulting in some providers declining to provide cover altogether.
Electric cars can be particularly expensive to repair, costing around a quarter more to fix on average than a petrol or diesel vehicle. Experts have previously warned electric vehicles are being written off after minor bumps because of the cost and complexity of fixing their batteries.
Mr. Hewett said: “The challenge is that we have no way of understanding whether the battery has been compromised or damaged in any way.
“The threat of thermal runaway means that a catastrophic fire can take place if the cells of the battery have been damaged in a collision.
“What we’re struggling to understand at the moment is how we approach that diagnostic technique.
“It’s like a doctor trying to understand what’s wrong with you without any notes or an X-ray.”
John Lewis Financial Services stopped providing car insurance for electric cars last month for new and existing customers, as its underwriter Covéa analysed risks and costs.
Aviva removed insurance products for the Tesla Model Y earlier this year before restoring them several months later.
Vehicle repair costs rose 33pc over the first quarter of 2023 compared to 2022, helping to push annual premiums to record highs, according to the Association of British Insurers.
Average electric car insurance costs rose 72% in the year to September, compared to 29% for petrol and diesel models, according to Confused.com.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
As with every green scam the huge cost will be offloaded on technology that actually works.
It will not just be the cost of repairs but that of the massive collateral damage they have the potential to inflict. You only have to look at Luton Airport car park to see what they are capable of.
Luton Airport car park fire was caused by climate change, 1 million percent.
Ha ha, yes. It was definitely a wildfire!
The climate inside the car park itself was certainly negatively affected.
And antivaxxers.
And Brexit
And racism. And don’t forget white supremecy.
That’s an interesting case. If the incident qualifies under the airport’s insurance, I wonder if the insurer will seek to recover their payout from the insurer of the vehicle which caused the fire? And will the insurers of the other vehicle do likewise?
Anyone know?
Also could BEVs be banned from car parks?
I saw a YouTube video explaining that if it can be demonstrated which vehicle caused the fire it’s very likely (particularly given the cost involved) that all parties will go after that vehicles insurance company.
Given the car park will also be looking to recover lost revenue as well as rebuild costs them alone will be many millions
Maybe go after the manufacturer/s of the battery which almost certainly caused the fire. (see the videos on this).
There’s millions at stake here so, interesting to see what happens.
ICE cars do catch fire but petrol/diesel do not ignite on their own, thus Shell, BP cannot be sued successfully.
EV batteries can and do “explode” – due to faulty manufacture?
So, watch this space.
And as per on here recently – would you be happy to live in a high rise block with car parks unerneath. Heat rises I believe.
A huge amount is being made of it being registered as a diesel.
I guess they’ve never heard of cars being cloned?
I wonder if they’ll ever be able to find the vehicle to confirm but that’s a very interesting point about the manufacturer.
Will they claim that the battery had been damaged in use?
Wouldn’t be surprised if the manufacturers are reviewing their warranty terms and conditions, to clarify whose responsibility for proper use, including maintenance, is. Insurers might do the same, maybe limiting cover if one parks in certain places, perhaps (as they already do, e.g. don’t leave a batch of notes on display, and so on).
It was a hybrid I believe.
Battery under the passenger seat where the fire started.
And that vehicle’s insurance company could likely then claim the lack of fire extinguisher sprinklers in the car park led to the spread being unchecked, therefore not their responsibility.
Almost certainly Luton Airport (wholly owned by Luton Borough Council) will go after the owner of the car that caused it. The other lot would normally do the same, however, it’s possible that some of them will be with the same firm as the one that insures the culprit. I don’t know what will happen with in house trading for the settlements. It’s also possible that several solicitors could become involved as well, acting on behalf of whoever, so the financial value of each claim could vary quite a bit, even taking account of the market value of each scrap vehicle, especially if all sorts of add on costs are totted up in each case.
So –
1) Ban ICE cars and thus remove personal travel options for a huge chunk of the population who can’t afford EVs.
2) For those who can afford EVS initially, remove personal travel options for another large chunk of the population who can’t afford the insurance/repair costs.
3) For those remaining who can afford EVs and the insurance/repairs, remove personal travel options by severely limiting the range of parking options in public and private areas, and
4) Ensure that the national electricity supply and charging infrastructure does not meet even this remaining demand, removing personal travel options for a chunk of the rest.
5) This will leave about 10 people in the UK able to run EVs. (I wonder if we’re supposed to doff our caps to them like the early days of ICE cars?)
I think that just about covers it.
Which is why: 15 minute ghettos.
Now you’re being a silly “conspiracy theorist”.
Simple solution: government bans insurance companies from ‘discriminating’ against EV owners – like they’ve been banned from discriminating between male and female drivers despite the different risk profile.
The policy is to have only EVs as soon as possible; and the fewer the better. The (unwritten) policy is the same in Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties… These are all the enemy.
Then everybody’s premium will go up to cover the risk.
Maybe the only way to encourage the use of them is for the Treasury to pick up the tab for the features that are privately uninsurable, relieving the insurance trade of the risk. That would be like taking on the risk of vaccine injury claims from the drug firms.
“… is for the Treasury to pick up the tab…”
If I may correct the typo.
”… is for the taxpayer to pick up the tab…”
Because nothing says ‘sustainable future’ like bankruptcy.
From Not A Lot Of People Know that.
“Volta Trucks, which had been developing a 16-tonne all-electric vehicle, said it had filed for bankruptcy in Sweden after its main battery supplier collapsed.
Its UK division is also applying for administration and intends to appoint insolvency experts Alvarez & Marsal. The collapse puts roughly 600 British jobs at risk.
The company said: “Volta Trucks accomplished a great deal from a standing start in 2019, revolutionising commercial vehicle operations for a sustainable future.
Just because a technology exists does not mean we should use it. We had the technology to build Concorde. ——Where is it now?—- It turns out that it was totally uneconomical. All the billions of taxpayers money is mostly wasted on politically motivated technologies, eg a Wind Turbine sounds like a great idea, but no one would actually build one without the 100% subsidy because they are totally uneconomical. Money would probably be better spent elsewhere, eg on Research and Development of technologies that have not been chosen by governments with an agenda.
Don’t forget the hovercraft…
Mr. Sixt figured that out 5 years ago, he also noted in another article that he would offer them to lease, as the battery lifespan and risk of exchange was impossible to calculate.
http://www.wiwo.de/unternehmen/auto/sixt-chef-ich-glaube-nicht-an-e-autos/22619854
His sons do not seem to listen to him anymore though.
They and those actuarians seem indicative of the decline of quality of the education system….
No one was killed in the Luton Airport fire. Imagine the consequences if one goes up in flames on a RoRo ferry, or in the Channel Tunnel.
Even a multiple pile up on a motorway which involves several EVs is going to have far worse consequences for people and the infrastructure than ICE cars.
It’s probably a good move by the Insurance companies refusing to insure them – it sends a clear signal to consumers to steer well clear of these dangerous vehicles.