ROUNDTABLE ADAS

John Groves, motor underwriter, Esure

Eric Chalmers, insurance litigation divisional manager and claimant personal injury partner, Lyons Davidson

Martin Milliner, claims director, LV

Pete Marsden, managing director, National Windscreens

John Kelly, motor underwriter, Esure

Tim Marlow, head of autonomous and connected vehicle research, Ageas

Kerry Bishop, technical and best practice manager, Axa

Barry Donaldson, business development director, National Windscreens

Bob Dawson, claims major loss manager, Allianz

ADAS and the next step to driverless carsAutonomous vehicles, drones and cyber innovation have been hogging much of the discussions as to how insurers can prepare themselves for the technology of the future. What can easily be overlooked is the complex technology that already exists in the motor market

By Ryan Hewlett

30 | Insurance Post | May 2017

030-033_POST_MAY_2017.indd 30 25/04/2017 10:52

In association with

Paul Wilyman, motor underwriting manager, Covéa

Adam Murray, motor technical manager, Aviva

Eleri Williamson, technical consultant, RSA

Some motor manufacturers have made life a little easier for insurers and have said they will accept liability for accidents that occur when the autonomous mode is engaged

The emergence of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems including lane assistance, automated emergency breaking, parking aids and even night vision mean improved safety for drivers but only if the systems can be maintained correctly.

A Post roundtable, in association with National Windscreens, explored liability around the recent introduction of ADAS and the costs for insurers, repairers, and customers in ensuring that this technology remains safe.

Over recent months, vehicle manufacturers have been introducing ADAS at an increasing pace. Over 10% of vehicles are already fi tted with such systems and this is set to grow to 40% of all vehicles on UK roads by 2020, according to research from National Windscreens.

Studies suggest that 94% of road accidents are caused by human error. Clearly the development of increasingly automated vehicles has huge implications for road safety. However, there is signifi cant concern at the lack of consideration manufacturers have given to the maintenance of these systems.

At the roundtable, Martin Milliner, claims director at LV, said that manufacturers aren’t thinking about the insurance implications or the liability implications while they’re designing and building this technology into vehicles.

“It’s very much an aft erthought at the moment,” he said. “If manufacturers did have these concerns at the centre of their design principles, then we wouldn’t be in a position where we have an aft ermarket dealing with recalibration issues.”

Bob Dawson, claims major loss manager at Allianz, added manufacturers need to be more engaged with both insurers and the aft ermarket. “If manufacturers want to be seen to be engaging in the liability and insurance

challenges, then they need to be very open and engaging on better access and sharing.”

Most ADAS are based around a combination of cameras, radars, infrared sensors and light detection and ranging – or lidar. These four components are used to detect objects or movements that may be in front or to the side of the vehicle.

When the systems work together, they have the ability to save lives. If a component fails, the results can be deadly. For insurers, this raises questions of liability.

“Insurers are in a very, very weak position in terms of proving who was at fault,” said Paul Wilyman, motor underwriting manager at Covéa.

“We cannot tell whether it was the driver, whether it was the installer, the retailer, the original manufacturer. If we don’t have that information, then it places us insurers on the back foot.”

The issue was thrown into the forefront in May last year, when Tesla’s autopilot feature came under scrutiny aft er the driver of a Model S died aft er colliding with another vehicle on a highway in Florida.

Tesla said it appeared that the car was unable to distinguish the side of the tractor trailer that had driven across the vehicle’s path with the brightly lit sky.

Some motor manufacturers have made life a little easier for insurers and have said they will accept liability for accidents that occur when the autonomous mode is engaged. Volvo is one manufacturer that has been vocal in its acceptance of responsibility for its vehicles’ systems.

On the other hand, companies like Tesla have said that all they will do is provide the vehicle and its technical systems, insisting

their responsibility ends there. This means that insurers are getting a diff ering message from the motor manufacturers, Wilyman said.

Pete Marsden, managing director at National Windscreens, said the approach from the likes of Volvo towards liability is laudable. However, manufacturers are not taking the right level of responsibility or accountability when it comes to aft er-sales and vehicle maintenance.

“The issue is what happens down the line in terms of giving the right skills, data or training to body shops and the people that service and support the complexity of the technology that is now in vehicles,” Marsden said.

“We’ve got technology in vehicles now that is well ahead of the capability of the aft ersales market to support. The manufacturers have to take responsibility and accountability for doing something about that because they are getting ahead of the capability that supports the consumer and the public safety at large.”

Control and infl uenceKerry Bishop, technical and best practice manager at Axa, said the technical nature of ADAS and the complexity of the systems place insurers and repairers at the behest of the manufacturers.

“The manufacturers have so much control and infl uence and it is just going to get bigger and bigger,” she said. “Gone are the days when, if your car needed servicing or fi xing, you had a mechanic with a toolbox.”

ADAS sensors and cameras are usually mounted inside a vehicle’s windscreen and provide a view of the immediate surroundings.

The problem comes when replacing or refi tting windscreens on vehicles fi tted with ADAS. These sensors are a core part of most automated systems and if they are not correctly calibrated, the systems may not work correctly.

Adam Murray, motor technical manager at Aviva, explained that a windscreen sensor that is one degree out of alignment could impact the accuracy of the sensor by as much as 30%.

Calibration is required not just after windscreen replacement but in multiple situations that could affect the alignment of the car including changing a tyre, a change in wheel alignment, as well as an accident, Murray added.

In order to combat this, repairers now recalibrate the windscreen once it has been installed. Barry Donaldson, business development director, National

May 2017 | Insurance Post | 31

> 32

030-033_POST_MAY_2017.indd 31 25/04/2017 10:52

ROUNDTABLE ADAS

“If you had self-calibrating technologies in vehicles, then a lot of the potential disputes around effectiveness of the technology would go away.” Martin Milliner

32 | Insurance Post | May 2017

considered and it would depend on why the particular instrument needed recalibration.

One way to bring down costs is through systems that are able to self-calibrate, Milliner said, reducing the need for repairers to do so.

“It should be self-calibrating technologies that are installed into vehicles,” Milliner said.

“If you had self-calibrating technologies in vehicles, then a lot of the potential disputes around effectiveness of the technology would go away.”

Point of claimRecalibration also presents an issue at the point of a claim, said Eleri Williamson, technical consultant at RSA. Williamson said policyholders may not be aware of a vehicle’s capability and, therefore, may not understand when something has gone wrong.

“None of us has yet had a customer that says: ‘I crashed into the back of the car in front because my emergency braking didn’t kick in.’ We need to be able to identify those cases at a really early stage to get the data and understand exactly what went wrong with the technology. At the moment, we just don’t have the experience of that.”

Ultimately, the individual insurers will need to evaluate policy wordings to deal with the issue of recalibration costs, Williamson said.

Milliner added that insurers are starting to see a proliferation of a not accident-related need for recalibration. “Heavy braking, even hitting a pothole can send a windscreen

Windscreens, said manufacturers request recalibration to be carried out in “factory conditions”, adding to the cost of repair for both insurers and repairers.

Also adding to the financial challenge is the fact that there isn’t a single, comprehensive calibration solution that can be used across all vehicles, he added.

“We’ve never had to do something that’s then interfered with the running of the car. It used to be that you took a glass out and put it back in again. Replacing the glass is going to be an incidental part of what we do now,” Donaldson said.

Donaldson said training staff to use new equipment is essential but this too represents a significant investment for repairers. The cost of the equipment required to complete these recalibrations may prevent some garages from carrying out the work, he said.

“As a windscreen company, we’re having to do recalibrations. We don’t know if it’s necessary but the manufacturers say that we have to do it,” Donaldson said. “We have to have an audit trail and we have to be able to produce that in the future if there’s an accident.

“Repairers have to recalibrate but don’t know if it’s actually effective before they start. So there might be nothing wrong with the vehicle but you have to go through a recalibration to say that it has been recalibrated.”

Wilyman said the complexity of work involved in replacing and recalibrating a windscreen for ADAS drives the cost of windscreen replacement up significantly. Ultimately, this cost will be passed on to the policyholder, he added.

“It may be a higher excess, it may be increased limits, more stringent terms and conditions. But from the customer’s

perspective, they are being penalised for having a car that is supposed to be safer and crash less.”

At the moment, there is a lot of discussion about who should pay for the cost of recalibration and which repairers should be accredited to carry out the work.

In a recent Post whitepaper, Advanced driver assistance systems and their impact on the future of the UK motor insurance market, 24% of insurers said it is reasonable to assume that insurers should absorb the cost, 35% said it should be the manufacturer and 24% said various factors would have to be

< 31

030-033_POST_MAY_2017.indd 32 25/04/2017 10:52

May 2017 | Insurance Post | 33

sensor out of alignment. It’s not even an accident but at the moment our policies don’t really cover this sort of cost. They’re not clear on whether those things are covered.”

Milliner said: “As insurers, should we be paying for recalibration in those circumstances? It just shows the length of complexity that we’re probably going to have to look at in terms of dealing with these issues.”

Eric Chalmers, insurance litigation divisional manager and claimant personal injury partner at Lyons Davidson, said:

“Repairs are going to become ridiculously expensive. One bump and the whole thing’s going to have to be recalibrated all over again in order to ensure that everything is working.

“Insurers are going to be writing off vehicles that are perfectly good but the cost of repairing them is sky high.”

Increasingly, vehicle manufacturers are using ADAS to ensure their vehicles meet the highest European safety ratings.

Tim Marlow, head of autonomous and connected vehicle research at Ageas, said the New Car Assessment Programmes are a key driver of ADAS. “The NCAP organisations and Euro NCAP are particularly strong,” Marlow said. “They have a road map that is looking fi ve to 10 years ahead. This road map is discussed on a confi dential basis with each of the manufacturers with the aim of raising the bar when it comes to safety and ADAS.”

The safety ratings of the Euro NCAP were changed earlier this year. Now any new

vehicle wanting to be granted the fi ve-star rating requires two separate forms of ADAS: autonomous emergency braking and lane departure warning.

Marlow said the NCAP organisations are actively engaged with manufacturers on what highly autonomous systems will look like in the future.

“It’s about where and how things will move on. Because of their highly sensitive and commercial nature, those discussions tend to be fairly confi dential but at least they’re all moving in the same direction. Manufacturers want to sell cars. They want to ensure that the cars are as safe as they can be.”

Code of PracticeIn July 2016, Thatcham Research issued a Code of Practice for the replacement and resetting of automotive glazing for vehicles fi tted with screen-mounted ADAS. The idea is to create consistency in the market and ensure repairers and body shops work to consistent standards.

Dawson said more needs to be done to create a consistent regime: “The government is to take a lead now rather than waiting for

the legislation in a few years’ time. Without a regulated data-sharing regime, it just won’t work. We want to get what we need when we need it from the manufacturers.

“The manufacturers will always have an advantage in liability disputes when they have immediate access to the data that we need at the same time.”

Murray added: “If they don’t give shared access, then the liability could be cloudy because they could eliminate the data quite readily and make it more diffi cult for people to actually access the right data to inform the right event. That’s the issue.

“If you don’t have the data at the right point from both sides, it’s diffi cult to fully understand what actually happened.”

It is crucial that the industry maintains perspective as to the benefi ts of these systems and continues to support and drive forward this life-saving technology, Milliner said.

“Insurers have to be responsible and supportive. We must be seen to be able to support and aid and not slow down the progress of this. The big prize for all of us is a reduction in killed and seriously injured people.” ■

It is crucial that the industry maintains perspective as to the benefi ts of these systems and continues to support and drive forward this life-saving technology

In association with

030-033_POST_MAY_2017.indd 33 25/04/2017 10:52