#Insurer "accidentally" sells former #BBC presenter's car to be scrapped in #Poland ,the #bollocks insurers come out with is laughable. #Esure @esure
ThisThe insurer put it down to “human error” and has apologised
A former presenter for the BBC was left shocked to hear that his insurance company had sold his car to be scrapped in Poland.
Ashley Blake, 49, is a former presenter of Watchdog and BBC Midlands Today. He now works as a freelance presenter.
Blake was involved in a small accident in September last year when a neighbour slightly dented the door of his Saab 9-3 outside his home, The London Economic is reporting.
It was collected by Gemini Accident Repair, where it was written off at a cost of £1,650.
But the publication reports that when Blake went back to collect the car, he found that his insurer, esure, had sold the car to salvage company Copart and it was due to be shipped off to Poland to be broken down into parts.
“Heart breaking” “I still want it back,” he told TalkRadio. ”How on earth can anyone sell a car that doesn’t even belong to them? Its like my own insurance company has stolen my car.
“I’m totally devastated. It’s like losing a member of the family. This car holds a huge amount of sentimental value to me.”
Blake bought the car six years ago and has spent over £5,000 in maintenance.
Upon learning the vehicle’s fate, he offered to buy it back as scrap for £200 plus a £300 excess.
“I had been really keen to keep hold of it,” he said.
“Esure said it wasn’t a problem and when I asked to go and pick it up, they said ‘don’t worry Mr Blake, we’ll have the car delivered back to you by Gemini.’
“But then the garage told me the car was with a company called Copart who told me it had been sold on January 4.
“I was totally gobsmacked, how can you sell my car, it’s mine. I’ve got the paperwork, the logbook, everything except the keys.
“Esure said they weren’t able to trace the whereabouts of the car but told me this week it had been broken up for parts and is in Poland.
“To be told it’s been sold without my permission and that it’s been broken into bits is quite heart breaking because it was a cherished and beloved car.”
Insult to injuryBlake was initially offered £100 in compensation, which he described as “adding insult to injury.” He was then offered an extra £400, but said that he had spent around £700 on in the month of September alone.
In an email sent to Mr Blake on Monday 21 January, esure said: “I’m sorry to say the salvage has been sold and transported to Poland to be broken into parts.
“It will not be possible for you to have it back. I understand you had already changed the cherished plate.
“Although we have met our obligations under the terms of your policy by paying the pre accident value, I know how disappointed you are, as we had agreed to let you have the salvage back and deducted this value from our settlement cheque.
“As I mentioned last week, we have sent a cheque to you for £300 which represents the £200 we deducted for the salvage, plus the £100 compensation we offered.
“When we spoke on Friday you said you considered the car to have been stolen by us, I can confirm this isn’t the case, we released the salvage for sale by mistake.
“I know this is not the outcome you wanted, and in recognition of what has happened I am arranging for a further cheque to be sent to you for £400 which brings the total amount of compensation awarded to £500.
“Whilst this doesn’t change what has happened to you, incidents like this are rare however we will make sure that lessons are learned.”
This article is care of www.insurancetimes.co.uk
This article can be found here
Automaker Porsche is dipping its toe into the insurance business with a new offering for customers in partnership with insurtech Mile Auto.
Porsche is creating a branded version of Mile Auto's mileage-based insurance app, which uses computer vision technology to verify a vehicle and its mileage from a photo sent from customers' smartphones, and charges based on the miles driven. The luxury-car manufacturer says the program is ideal for its customer base, which tends to drive less than the average.
"We know that many Porsche drivers exhibit low-mileage driving habits, making them a perfect fit for a pay-per-mile model with non-invasive technology," said Ross Dupper, President and CEO of Porsche Financial Services, the provider of leasing and financing products for Porsche in the United States.
Rates are calculated by combining a monthly base rate, determined using traditional insurance variables such as the customer's vehicle type and driving history, with a low per-mile rate.
"Where you go is your business, not your insurance company's," said Fred Blumer, CEO of Mile Auto, which launched last year after being founded in 2016. Its policies are underwritten by Falls Lake National Insurance Company.
Volvo has warned collision repairers in a position statement to replace a vehicle’s steering rack “if there is any doubt” to its condition or if parts including the front axle are damaged.
It seems likely that a shop would have doubts given what Volvo described as the uncheckable nature of the steering rack’s interior.
“A hard shock to a front axle, suspension system or steering linkage can potentially cause damage that is not externally visible on the rack,” Volvo wrote in one of what appear to be a few new position statements. “Specific pressure tests are required to make sure seals are not leaking and that the internal gearing has not been affected. Tests of these types cannot be performed at a repair facility level. The steering rack must be replaced when tests cannot be performed or if there is any doubt.”
The OEM wrote that the rack certainly “must be replaced if any components of the front axle, steering gear, or any part of the steering linkage are deformed or damaged.”
Shops are also instructed to inspect the steering rack anytime “areas surrounding the steering rack are damaged in an accident. … This is required to ensure steering components are not damaged. In cases of damage or doubt, the steering rack must be replaced.”
Volvo encouraged shops to get in writing any attempt by an insurer or appraiser to just reuse a questionable or compromised steering rack.
“If the repair facility determines that a steering rack replacement is required per Volvo guidelines, and the service is declined keeping the original steering rack in the vehicle, we recommended reviewing this document with, and getting the signature of, the appraiser or deciding insurance company representative,” Volvo wrote.
“… All Volvo Cars drivetrain, suspension and steering components are essential to safe control of the vehicle. These parts are designed to work with other vehicle components to keep occupants safe in an accident and manufactured to exact specifications.”
Mercedes offers similar guidance for handling naysayers in its steering position statement. BMW goes a step farther, providing repairers with an example of a memo it says any objecting BMW or MINI customer or insurer must sign.
Volvo also said a “four-wheel alignment” was necessary after “any work performed to the suspension systems” so the car is guaranteed “safety, performance and autonomous calibration.” (The “autonomous” reference might be just a reference to advanced driver assistance systems, though Volvo is also studying higher-level autonomy in the Swedish Drive Me pilot.)
Volvo’s U.S. sales rose 20.6 percent to 98,263 models in 2018.
More information:Volvo’s “Statement on Steering Racks”
Volvo position statements
Volvo repair procedures
Images:A 2019 Volvo V60 all-wheel drive Momentum model is shown. (Provided by Volvo)
A 2019 Volvo V60 all-wheel drive Inscription model is shown. (Provided by Volvo)
This article is care of https://www.repairerdrivennews.com
This article can be found here.
Nissan told collision repairers in new position statements that it requires raw bumper and other raw part prep, opposes partial clearcoat blending and anticipates denib and finish sanding will occur.
The Dec. 12, 2018, Nissan refinishing documents and similar Dec. 18, 2018, position statements for Infiniti ought to give repairers, insurers and customers more clarity into the issues.
They’re among nine new or updated position statements released recently by Nissan (and Infiniti).
Denib and finish sandingContrary to the argument that denib and finish sanding reflects a lack of paint skill, Nissan said in the position statement it understands that those operations could be required.
“Nissan is dedicated to providing vehicles of the highest quality to every owner,” the OEM wrote. “Every aspect of the vehicle, from mechanical, safety, and paint finish during the manufacturing process, receives the utmost attention to detail. Restorative paint processes can be one of the most impactful attributes to owner satisfaction when done properly. Repair facilities face a variety of challenges with vehicles including, but not limited to, paint maintenance and debris from daily road conditions.
“After refinishing any outer panel, it may be necessary to nib sand (or de-nib) any particles found within the final finish followed by polishing affected areas. It may also be necessary to finish sand and polish an entire panel finish, followed by polishing the affected areas to provide the desired uniform texture of the factory finish.”
In fact, Nissan acknowledged it has to denib and finish-sand within in its own multimillion-dollar factory paint shops.
“Nissan also completes these same processes in the manufacturing environment due to intrusive dirt or debris found in the production environment,” the OEM wrote.
More than a quarter of 740 responding shops also have found either denibbing or finish sanding and buffing necessary on all jobs, according to the January 2017 “Who Pays for What?” study.
Another 43.6 percent said they do at least one of those two operations on 75 percent to 99 percent of repairs.
The numbers fell off after that, with the next highest amount actually being the 11.8 percent who perform these operations less than 25 percent of the time.
(This year’s refinish “Who Pays?” survey is under way now.) Participants receive a free copy of the results. Get the past year’s data here.)
“It is important for shops to understand the difference between ‘denib’ and ‘finish sand and buff’ in order to charge the appropriate labor time based on what was done to the vehicle,” the “Who Pays” report stated. All three estimating system providers allow 30 percent of basecoat time for ‘finish sand and buff.’ But the systems each have a different formula (or none at all) for ‘denib.’ So the labor allowance varies significantly between ‘finish sand and buff’ and ‘denib.’”
Clearcoat blendsPaint manufacturer comments to the Society of Collision Repair Specialists already frown on and refuses to warranty clearcoats which don’t extend to the natural breaking point in a panel. Nissan put the additional weight of an OEM behind those stances and directs shops to uphold paint manufacturer procedures in its Dec. 12, 2018, position statement.
“Paint manufacturer’s recommended guidelines should be followed by qualified trained individuals with proper equipment during this process,” Nissan wrote.
The clearcoat blend might look good for a while — until the facade collapses, according to Nissan.
“Nissan North America does not recommend partial clear coat refinishing, ‘solvent blending,’ or ‘melting’ for any refinishing work that is being performed,” Nissan wrote. “While initial attempts will provide an aesthetically acceptable finish, it does not allow for proper adhesion of the material due to thermoset processes. Decreased film thickness and exposure to elements sacrifice long-term durability and can result in discoloration or peeling.
“To restore the factory finish, the final clear coat should be applied to the panel(s) edge or natural breaking point. It may be necessary to remove exterior trim, weather stripping, roof luggage rack or rail systems, or remove glass. Industry standards and paint manufacturer’s guidelines align with this methodology. Please refer to the paint manufacturer’s guidelines for additional information on recommended processes and warranty restrictions.”
Nissan also pointed out that removing exterior components to refinish a part can trigger a need to scan the vehicle.
“Removal of certain components such as mirrors, door handles, or glass, can cause a disruption in the vehicle control systems and may not create a Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) visible dash indicator,” Nissan wrote. “Following removal, the vehicle will require a post-repair diagnostic scan to ensure all systems are functioning as designed. Please reference Nissan’s revised Pre- and Post-Repair System Scanning position statement (updated 2018) for additional information.”
Repairers might also want to check if removing a particular part also requires calibration, we’d wager.
Any bumper fascia from Nissan will be raw plastic, and other plastic parts might be raw as well, Nissan wrote in a Dec. 12, 2018, position statement echoed six days later by Infiniti.
It will therefore fall on the shop to prepare such raw parts for painting, Nissan wrote.
“Any replacement bumper fascia shipped from Nissan will be raw plastic when received,” Nissan wrote. “Other items, such as mirror covers, may come in this state as well. This will require the repair facility to take additional preparation steps before any paint application.
These necessary steps help provide a longlasting finish on the new replacement bumper or other plastic replacement parts.”
“To reduce and release the compounds from the plastic or other chemicals used during production, the bumper will need to be washed, dried, scuffed, re-cleaned, and inspected prior to any paint procedure.
repeat this step as needed until the new bumper (or other replacement part) is ready for paint. Appropriate cleaners, adhesion promotors, and flex additives recommended by the paint manufacturer should be used to provide the proper paint adhesion.”
Collision repairers might want to double-check that Audatex, CCC, Mitchell or any other estimating system in use is taking into account a part’s raw plastic status (sometimes IPs don’t always match the OEM portfolio) and all the associated preparation steps in its labor times. It might be necessary to add not-included operations manually if not.
The Database Enhancement Gateway responded to a Dec. 18, 2018, inquiry by recounting how each of the Big 3 estimating systems handled raw plastic prep. Here’s wording from the P-page passages the DEG highlighted:
Audatex refinish allowances start with priming a part. Due to the differences in the paint manufacturers’ procedures, OEM recommendations, and the unpredictable nature of the parts, any preparation required for raw, unprimed bumper covers or other plastic parts is Not Included in Audatex labor allowances. This operation may be added manually, if required.
The Audatex formula for preparation of a raw, unprimed Bumper Cover or Plastic Part is:
• 20% of the base refinish labor.
Note: Audatex will begin to add a “Prep Raw Bumper Cover” operation to the Bumper Cover part choice box for new and update vehicles, beginning with Q1 2011. This will apply only to manufacturers known to supply raw, unprimed bumper covers. This operation only applies to the front and rear bumper covers.
The Audatex formula for Prep Raw, Unprimed Bumper Cover is 20% of the base refinish allowance, with a .3 minimum time.
The Audatex formula includes the following:
1. Wash cover with soap and water, rinse & dry
2. Degrease the surface with a wax, grease, and silicone remover.
3. Sand cover with a sanding paste and grey scuff pad
4. Wash cover with soap and water, rinse & dry
5. Degrease the surface with a wax, grease, and silicone remover.\
If the paint manufacturer or OEM requires any other or additional steps to prepare a raw, unprimed bumper cover, these steps are Not Included in Audatex labor times. They may be accounted for manually, if required. (Minor formatting edits. Emphasis Audatex’s.)
Unprimed Flexible Component Preparation
• 25% of the component’s base refinish time
• Maximum time allocation: 1.0 hours
• Removal of mold-release agents as outlined by manufacturer
• Masking (if required)
• Application of adhesion promoter
Does Not Include:
• Correction of pre-existent surface imperfections
• Material Costs (Emphasis CCC’s. Minor formatting edits.)
• Allow .2 per refinish hour (20%) for plastic components that come from the manufacturer/supplier in a raw/un-primed state.
• Detergent wash
• Alcohol/plastic cleaner wash
• Additional solvent wash
• Application of specialized adhesion promoter
• Clean Equipment (Minor formatting edits.)
Nissan also reminded shops that not all plastic was identical, and a repairer might have to treat different polymers differently based on information found within Nissan OEM repair procedures.
“Nissan North America utilizes a variety of plastic components that vary throughout the vehicle,” the OEM wrote. “These include parts that have different heat resistance, solvent resistance, and other precautions needed when handling. …
“Refer to the Electronic Service Manual (ESM) to confirm locations and precautionary measures needed for all plastic components. These can be found under the ‘Handling Precautions for Plastics’ section of the ESM.”
More information:“POSITION STATEMENT: De-Nib & Polish and Finish Sand & Polish”
Nissan, Dec. 12, 2018
“POSITION STATEMENT: Nissan Partial Clear Coat Blending”
Nissan, Dec. 12, 2018
“POSITION STATEMENT: Raw Bumper and Other Precautions for Plastics”
Nissan, Dec. 12, 2018
Nissan position statements
Nissan collision repair procedures website (use Internet Explorer)
Infiniti position statements
Infiniti collision repair procedures website (use Internet Explorer)
Images:Nissan opened a new plant plant in Smyrna, Tenn., with a black 2013 Infiniti JX on Jan. 31, 2013. (Provided by Nissan)
More than a quarter of 740 responding shops found either denibbing or finish sanding and buffing necessary on all jobs, according to the January 2017 “Who Pays for What?” study. (Provided by Collision Advice and CRASH Network)
Repairers solicited by Auto Damage Experts provided photos of failing C-pillar clearcoat-paint blends. (Provided via Auto Damage Experts)
The 2019 Nissan Altima Platinum’s bumper fascia is shown. (Provided by Nissan)
This article is care of https://www.repairerdrivennews.com
This article can be found here.
By John Huetter on January 15, 2019
Announcements | Business Practices | Education | Repair Operations | Technology
FacebookTwitterGoogle+LinkedInPinterestEmailShareNissan updated its 2016 scanning position statement Jan. 7 to stress “ALL Nissan vehicles from 2008 forward MUST” have a diagnostic scan following a collision repair. (Emphasis Nissan’s.)
The OEM also released a handy video Jan. 11 explaining how to use the CONSULT scan tool.
Despite the specific mention of the year 2008 near the document’s end, the first half of the Jan. 7, 2019, position statement (and a virtually identical one for Infiniti) suggested shops would need to post-repair scan at least some older Nissans as well.
“Nissan North America continues to add greater technology and electrical systems promoting driver assist features and overall vehicle safety,” Nissan wrote. “The presence of increasingly sophisticated and inter-connected technology supports and necessitates the requirement of all Nissan vehicles, having a diagnostic system scan to identify any diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTCs) present, even in cases where there is no identifiable Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) illuminated on the vehicle’s dashboard. Forces encountered in a loss or simply disconnecting vehicle systems during the repair process for paint or other access can trigger a DTC in the vehicle’s systems.
A pre-repair system scan is recommended to identify items in advance that are malfunctioning on a vehicle. This helps the repair facility fully understand the scope of the repair before starting as well as documenting elements related to the overall loss. The post-repair diagnostic system scan is required to confirm DTCs are properly resolved and assist in system calibrations, helping to ensure our owners’ safety and satisfaction.”
Nissan also explained that cars prior to 2008 had the capacity for diagnostics. (For example, Big Sky Collision owner Matthew McDonnell’s scanning research has recorded a 2007 Nissan Xterra with fault codes pre- and post-repair.)
“Introduced in 1996, Nissan vehicles systems have the ability to capture and record DTCs of vehicle systems within the vehicle Electronic Control Units (ECU). All 1996 to current vehicles that contain a 16-pin OBD2 port have the potential to have a diagnostic system scan.
In vehicles without an OBD2 port it may be necessary to locate other vehicle data link connectors to perform this task. Nissan recommends the use of the CONSULT diagnostic scan tool with the most up-to-date software installed. Nissan North America does not test or validate other diagnostic scan tools in the market and cannot comment on their capabilities or accuracy. Using the CONSULT diagnostic scan tool, stored DTCs are identified, validated, and then addressed within the repair process.”
Nissan also continued its 2016 policy of advising — but not mandating — a pre-repair scan.
Nissan’s new document also stressed again that dash lights don’t reflect all possible diagnostic trouble codes.
“The proliferation of vehicle control systems has increased the potential number of DTCs beyond the point where dashboard indicators can illuminate for every DTC,” the OEM wrote. “The dashboard indicators are intended for driver notifications, NOT vehicle diagnostics.
“… The presence or absence of dashboard indicators/warning lights is NOT an acceptable method to determine if a post-repair diagnostic scan is necessary. ALL Nissan vehicles from 2008 forward MUST have a post-repair diagnostic scan for this reason.” (Emphasis Nissan’s.)
The repair as well as the crash can trigger codes, Nissan also noted.
2016 position: ‘All’The new Nissan document — one of nine new or updated statements released recently — replaced a statement from June 2016 which simply declared “all” Nissans needed a scan. (Emphasis Nissan’s.) The Jan. 7, 2019, Infiniti position statement replaced a more detailed September 2016 statement regarding scanning “ALL” CONSULT-capable vehicles for the luxury brand. (Emphasis Infiniti’s.)
Then-Nissan certified collision planner Justin Miller (now senior planner for Nissan wholesale marketing) had said at SEMA 2016 that “some of the insurance partners had mentioned … By saying ‘all,’ we weren’t kind of being clear enough.”
“I thought it was pretty clear,” he continued then, drawing laughter. He said he clarified it further in the Sept. 15, 2016, Infiniti position statement to explain that “anything that can be plugged in with the console and read” — essentially, everything with the OBD-II port — should be scanned.
“INFINITI model years 1996 and newer are able to be scanned by our CONSULT tool, and are subject to the requirements given within this statement,” Infiniti wrote in its Sept. 15, 2016, statement. “… It is the stance of INFINITI, that ALL of our CONSULT compatible vehicles be scanned following a collision repair to help ensure the vehicles’ systems are communicating properly with no trouble codes outstanding.” (Emphasis Infiniti’s.)
“That would apply to Nissan as well,” Miller said in November 2016 of the Infiniti statement. He also said then that Nissan had two 1995 models requiring scans.
For all intents and purposes, even if Nissan had actually said that no scans were required for cars older than 2008, it might as well still be saying “all,” since many older Nissan and Infinitis are likely to be automatic totals anyway.
The average total loss vehicle in 2017 was only 9.64 years old, 9.73 years if you throw out Hurricane Harvey, according to CCC. The valuation average if you don’t count Harvey was $9,125, $8,943 for Asian vehicles.
For context, a base 2008 Infiniti G35 Journey sedan in Infiniti’s Tennessee P.O. Box ZIP Code was only worth around $8,052, according to Kelley Blue Book. A QX56 was worth around $12,167.
This article is care of www.repairerdrivennews.com
This article can be found here.
Nissan last month directed auto body shops to measure a vehicle before and after a structural repair, a critical element of collision work one expert has noted repairers might be neglecting.
Astech industry relations director Jake Rodenroth noted in August that 30 percent of ostensibly repaired vehicles sent to his company for calibration failed because they weren’t straight enough, he said.
“Nissan vehicles, whether constructed on a framed or unibody platform, require different techniques to correct body alignment issues after a collision, incident, or loss,” Nissan wrote Dec. 12, 2018, in one of nine recent new or updated position statements. “Repairs requiring any structural or alignment corrections are the first step in the restoration process and the basis of a safe and quality repair.
“To ensure that a vehicle is repaired and restored to factory specifications, measurements should be taken both before and after a frame or structural repair. This ensures proper body alignment that could affect safety or mechanical systems.”
Infiniti issued a virtually identical position statement six days later.
Nissan also cautioned shops against relying on any measurements outside of its official data, bringing to mind a 2017 warning from Audi against measurements on unapproved benches.
“Measurements can be found in the Electronic Service Manual (ESM) taken from a variety of control points during production,” Nissan wrote. “Nissan North America has not validated any alternative measurements provided by a third party vendor and refers all collision repair professionals to the ESM measurements. … Initial damage measurements will also be helpful in repair-versus-replace scenarios.
“… Proper anchoring techniques should be used during body alignments and may vary depending on the alignment system being used. Recommended anchoring techniques can also be found in the Electronic Service Manual (ESM) for each model. Corrective push/pull methods will be outlined there as well and should be used in conjunction with machine manufacturer’s guidelines.”
Nissan also reminded shops that the measurement process could add extra R&Rs or R&Is.
“Removal of vehicle components, panels, or exterior trim may be necessary to perform accurate measuring during the repair process,” Nissan wrote. “… Any protective coating (seam sealer, stone guard, undercoating, corrosion protection, etc.) removed for initial setup or damaged in the repair process should be restored accordingly.”
Estimators and technicians are going to want to consider these factors — some of which might be not-included operations — when developing a repair plan and delivery date.
This article is care of of www.repairerdrivennews.com
This article can found here
In a recent article, Ford Motor Company has found a way to use Graphene in vehicle parts, a material which is 200 times stronger than steel and one of the most conductive materials in the world according to some engineers.
Graphene is a material used in coating, cell phones and even some sporting goods and soon, will be used under the hood in Ford vehicles.
In vehicles, graphene, which is lightweight and strong, will act like a pair of super-powered, noise cancelling headphones, reducing sound inside the cabin.
Graphene has recently generated the enthusiasm and excitement in the automotive industry for paint, polymer and battery applications. Although graphene is not economically viable for all applications, Ford, in collaboration with Eagle Industries and XG Sciences, has found a way to use small amounts in fuel rail covers, pump covers and front engine covers to maximise its benefits.
“The breakthrough here is not in the material, but in how we are using it,” said Debbie Mielewski, Ford senior technical leader, sustainability and emerging materials. “We are able to use a very small amount, less than a half percent, to help us achieve significant enhancements in durability, sound resistance and weight reduction – applications that others have not focused on.”
Ford began working with suppliers to study the material and how to use it in running trials with auto parts such as fuel rail covers, pump covers and front engine covers four years ago. Generally, attempting to reduce noise inside vehicle cabins means adding more material and weight, but with graphene, it’s the opposite.
“A small amount of graphene goes a long way, and in this case, it has a significant effect on sound absorption qualities,” said John Bull, president of Eagle Industries.
The graphene is mixed with foam constituents, and tests done by Ford and suppliers has shown about a 17 percent reduction in noise, a 20 percent improvement in mechanical properties and a 30 percent improvement in heat endurance properties, compared with that of the foam used without graphene.
“We are excited about the performance benefits our products are able to provide to Ford and Eagle Industries,” said Philip Rose, XG Sciences’ chief executive officer. “Working with early adopters such as Ford Motor Company demonstrates the potential for graphene in multiple applications, and we look forward to extending our collaboration into other materials, and enabling further performance improvements.”
Graphene is expected to go into production by the end of the year on over ten under hood components on the Ford F-150 and Mustang and eventually, other Ford vehicles.
An interesting use of a new material but what happens when it becomes an ELV? According to 2dmsolutions: ‘Graphene can replace carbon fiber, steel, and aluminum components.’ If this is the case what will be the scrap value of Graphene? Will it be of similar value to those materials listed above? Let us know your views on this topic at firstname.lastname@example.org
There is a GRAPHENE AUTOMOTIVE 2019 Exhibition and Conference where graphene researchers and automotive manufacturers will meet to explore new graphene-based solutions for use in automotive applications. This event will take place on the 4th-5th March, 2019 in Detroit, Michigan USA. Click here to find out more.
ANALYSIS: The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) will become responsible for the regulation of claims management companies in Great Britain from April this year in a move broadly welcomed within the insurance sector. Legislation implementing the reforms provides some details on how the new regime will work.07 Jan 2019
The current position
Currently, claims management companies in England and Wales are regulated by the Claims Management Regulation Unit (CMRU), a unit that sits within the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), while claims management companies in Scotland are not regulated at all.
From 1 April 2019 this will change, as the FCA will take over from the MoJ's unit as the regulator of claims management companies (CMCs) in England and Wales and on the same date assume regulatory responsibility for claims management companies in Scotland.
The new regime
The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Claims Management Activity) Order 2018 (the Order) implements the transfer of claims management regulation from the CMRU to the FCA on 1 April 2019. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) will also become responsible for handling claims management disputes on that transfer date.
The Order came into force on 29 November 2018 to allow the FCA and FOS to make rules ahead of the changes to claims management regulation. For all other purposes the Order will come into force on the transfer date.
Last summer, the FCA published a consultation paper outlining draft rules and guidance in relation to CMCs and the process for CMCs to become authorised.
The new legislation
The Order outlines when a person is to be treated as carrying on claims management activities in Great Britain.
Claims management activities are considered "regulated activities" under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA), following amendments to FSMA by the Financial Guidance and Claims Act 2018 (FGCA). Claims management activities include services in respect of claims for restitution, repayment, compensation or any other remedy relating to an obligation, loss or damage.
Part 2 of the Order amends the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (RAO) to specify which claims management activities are "regulated activities" requiring FCA authorisation. These activities are outlined in Part 3B of the Order and include:
seeking out, referrals and identification of claims or potential claims; and
advice, investigation or representation of claims and the investigation of claims.
The types of claim include: personal injury, financial services or financial product, housing disrepair, specified benefit, criminal injury and employment related.
The Order outlines that claims management activities are to be treated as controlled activities under section 21(1) of FSMA, by amending the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotions) Order 2005. Accordingly, it is an offence to communicate an invitation or inducement to engage in claims management activities, unless an exemption applies or the communication is approved by an authorised person.
The Order, however, outlines that certain legal professionals, including solicitors, barristers and legal executives, are exempt and can carry on claims management activities in the ordinary course of legal practice, without FCA regulation under the RAO. There are also further exclusions for certain bodies including charities, not-for-profit agencies and insurance intermediaries.
The view from industry
The transfer of this function from the CMRU to the FCA has received positive feedback within the insurance market. The move is a major reform of the current system and has the potential to lead to an increase in consumer protection.
Huw Evans, director general of the Association of British Insurers (ABI), said that the move "is absolutely the right thing to do" and that "for too long the regulation of claims management companies has not been fit-for-purpose".
However, as Martin Milliner, general insurance claims director at LV=, has pointed out, "for it to be effective... the FCA needs more funding and resourcing than the Claims Management Regulator received under the Ministry of Justice".
The FCA clearly has an important task on its hands and we must wait to see whether or not this move turns out to be a successful one.
Colin Read is an insurance law expert at Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com.
This article is care of www.out-law.com
This article can be found here.
A recent I-CAR post alerted us to an OEM scanning position statement which had slipped under our radar late last summer.
As the Repairability Technical Support portal pointed out Jan. 2, Jaguar Land Rover in August 2018 declared it “necessary” to conduct a post-repair diagnostic scan of any of the OEM’s vehicles.
“Post-repair scanning and diagnosis of the vehicle is necessary to ensure that the vehicle’s safety and driver-assist systems are operable and fully functioning,” Jaguar Land Rover global customer service global body and paint operations manager Glen Mathews wrote in the document, which is available for free on Jaguar’s OEM repair procedure website TOPIx. (You need to create a login, but that’s free too. However, other technical bulletins and the instructions to actually fix the car correctly require a paid subscription.)
Jaguar Land Rover illustrated its position statement with examples of when “a full Pathfinder diagnostic scan is required” — noting that other scanworthy scenarios besides those could exist. According to Jaguar Land Rover:
Some examples of when a full Pathfinder diagnostic scan is required include, but are not limited to:
Vehicle collisions, regardless of the appearance of damage, windshield replacement for vehicles with driver-assist sensors (including rain/light sensors) located in the windshield, Headlamp assemblies, removal and/or replacement of exterior components, bumpers, SRS sensors, parking sensors, driver-assist system sensors and cameras, wiring harnesses, vehicle control units, seats, or interior trim panels If a collision repair is necessary.
And if that weren’t enough, Mathews later reiterated in the document that a post-repair scan was “required.”
“When the vehicle is fully repaired, a post repair diagnostic scan and calibration is required to ensure all safety and customer systems are functioning correctly as designed,” the OEM wrote.
Jaguar Land Rover also suggested that repairers should conduct a pre-repair scan.
“The pre-repair scan will reveal any potential issues early in the estimating and repair process to allow for a more complete and thorough estimate of repairs,” Mathews wrote.
Jaguar Land Rover cited the technology within its luxury vehicles as the rationale for a scan.
“Advancements in Jaguar Land Rover vehicle technology incorporate many different electronic control units, sensors, and cameras that assist various functions within the vehicle,” Mathews wrote. “These components are an integral part of the vehicle’s operational, safety, and help to deliver a positive owner experience. During a collision, some of the vehicle’s sensors could sustain damage internally or be affected in a manner in which failure is not evident to the driver of the vehicle.
“These vehicle sensors and control units must be evaluated after a collision to ensure that a complete repair is performed, regardless of whether the vehicle notifies the driver of damage or failure via the central instrument assembly. …
“Many of the safety and driver-assist systems that may have been activated during a collision require vehicle calibration, normalisation, or coding.”
Jaguar Land Rover provides examples of the kind of technological features consumers have been requesting — noting again, this time in bold, underlined type, that the list is not inclusive. The implication seems to be that these kinds of things require scanning.
According to Mathews:
Every Jaguar Land Rover vehicle is required to perform to global and market safety standards. From extensive research customers are requesting more technology in the vehicle to support comfort and safety. Some of the features identified (and not limited to) are:
• Intelligent Driveline Dynamics
• Autonomous Emergency Braking
• Blind-spot monitoring
• Forward Collision Avoidance
• Clear Exit Monitoring
• Driver Drowsiness
• Adaptive Cruise Control
• Dynamic Stability Control
• Roll Stability Control
• Sonar for Wading
• Parking Sensors
• Seat Weight Calibration
• Lane Departure Warning (Minor formatting edits. Emphasis JLR’s.)
We’d point out that such scan-demanding technology dates back at least more than a decade. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, multiple Jaguars and Land Rovers came standard with electronic stability control since at least 2005. (NHTSA’s records cut off at that year.)
Jaguar Land Rover also instructs repairers to use its OEM repair procedure site TOPIx.
“‘Any owner or repairer should refer to Jaguar Land Rover published workshop manuals for maintenance and repair methods,” Mathews wrote. “The owner and repairer remain responsible for the professional and proper execution of the maintenance and repairs they carry out. …
“The official technical information portal TOPIx must be accessed to ensure that repair procedures are followed.”
I-CAR bundled its Jan. 2 Jaguar Land Rover post and numerous other articles offering guidance on OEM and industry scanning position statements in a handy Jan. 9 roundup. Check it out here, though of course you’ll have to check OEM official repair procedure websites (many of which are also accessible through the I-CAR portal) for the most up-to-date versions of any position statement.
More information:Jaguar Land Rover global position statement: “Pre & Post Scanning”
Jaguar Land Rover, August 2018
Jaguar Land Rover body and paint position statements
JLR TOPIx OEM repair procedure website
“Pre- and Post-Repair System Scanning Position Statements”
I-CAR, Jan. 9, 2019
“Jaguar Land Rover Issues Pre- and Post Repair Scanning Position Statement”
I-CAR, Jan. 2, 2019
Images:The European version of the next-generation 2020 Range Rover Evoque is shown. (Provided by Land Rover)
Jaguar Land Rover in August 2018 declared it “necessary” to conduct a post-repair diagnostic scan of any of the OEM’s vehicles. (Provided by Jaguar Land Rover)
These articles are care of repairer driven news, these articles and more great ones like it can be found here.
Jaguar Land Rover joined other OEMs in November 2018 by issuing a position statement banning all repaired and reconditioned alloy wheels.
However, the luxury automaker broke from other manufacturers in refusing to endorse cosmetic repairs.
A number of OEMs have permitted shops that single exception — so long as it’s limited to sanding and refinishing a coating only, not the actual wheel. (For example, here’s fellow luxury brand Mercedes’ position statement.)
But Jaguar Land Rover warned repairers in November that its engineers hadn’t verified such refinishing, and any shop attempting it was on their own.
“Jaguar Land Rover understands that wheel repairs limited to cosmetic surface sanding and refinish are carried out by retailers and third party companies however there is no approved refinish method verified by engineering,” global customer service global body and paint operations manager Glen Mathews wrote in the document, which is available for free on Jaguar’s OEM repair procedure website TOPIx.
“The repairer is solely responsible for any warranty on such repair. Jaguar Land Rover reserves the right to exclude that component or components from any subsequent warranty claim arising from such repair.”
That’s a critical distinction shops must remember.
Of course, such a cosmetic repair scenario might never actually arise anyway. As a Porsche collision instructor observed in December, there’s a difference between what’s “technically possible” and what was “practically possible.”
Even though Porsche allows repairs to wheel coatings (it bans any other wheel work), it’s unlikely that a collision repairer would encounter a Porsche wheel with an impact so minor it only damaged the paint, aftersales technical training collision repair technology instructor Mike Kukavica said.
As for the broader wheel repair ban, Jaguar Land Rover wrote in November:
Jaguar Land Rover does not support or approve the use of reconditioned wheels or any process that claims to restore damaged wheels or rims on any Jaguar Land Rover vehicle. Use of such wheel or wheels with inferior integrity may compromise safe motor vehicle operation, and may cause loss of control which may result in injury or death, and in many global markets this could lead to criminal prosecution of the supplier or repairer.
Reconditioning of damaged wheels typically involves a process that may include heating, straightening, welding, material removal, reshaping, or re-plating. This process can cause deficiencies in the strength and integrity of the wheel material. Reconditioned wheel and rims do not meet the exacting engineering specifications for Jaguar Land Rover vehicles and this is not a method of repair acceptable to Jaguar Land Rover. (Emphasis Mathews’.)
Mathews also told shops to inspect wheels near collision damage, and if there’s doubt, throw them out.
“Any road wheel near the area of any collision damage should be thoroughly examined to ensure that the wheel is undamaged and meets the original safety specifications and if there is any doubt regarding the integrity of the wheel/s they should be replaced,” Mathews wrote. (Emphasis his.)
As noted above, the wheel position statement is free to access on TOPIx. You need to create a login, but that’s free too. However, other technical bulletins and the instructions to actually fix the car correctly will require a paid subscription to the site.
More information:Jaguar Land Rover global position statement: “Alloy Wheel Repair”
Jaguar Land Rover, November 2018
Jaguar Land Rover body and paint position statements
JLR TOPIx OEM repair procedure website
Featured image: The wheel of a Jaguar E-PACE is shown in this image released in 2018. (Provided by Jaguar)
Five men have been sentenced after a number of stolen cars were broken down for parts and sold on.
Gloucestershire Police found 18 cars with an estimated value of £500,000 had passed through a site in the Forest of Dean over a month before being dismantled.
Officers started their investigation after a tracker from a stolen motorhome led to Everything Land Rover on the New Dunn business park near Coleford and resulted in the discovery of other stolen vehicles.
Officers trawled through CCTV from the site and found some of the men burning registration plates and emptying and then dismantling vehicles.
They found t vehicles were also being dismantled at a site in Parkend which Edward Barrington, who owns ELR, was in process of purchasing.
The 28 year old, of Wellington Terrace in Newnham, admitted conspiracy to handle stolen goods at his business premises on the New Dunn Business Park back in October. He has now been jailed for four years and told he will serve a minimum of two years with the remainder on license.
Kelvin Harding, 28 and of Euston Road in Croydon and Luke Heron, 25 and of Kingston Road in Epsom were both found guilty following a trial of conspiracy to handle stolen goods.
The offences relate to the cloning of vehicle numbers plates and assisting in the delivery of stolen vehicles from London to the Forest of Dean.
They were both jailed for four years for the offence to serve a minimum of two years with the remainder on license.
As part of the investigation, officers seized two devices from Heron and Harding.
A device which is used to physically unlock a vehicle when the keys are not present was found at Harding’s home address.
A device which plugs into the on board diagnostics system of a car and allows you to start a vehicle with no key was found at Heron’s business premises.
Officers also found a number plate making machine at Luke Heron’s home address, which he stated was a laminator.
Despite the fact that they worked from within a rural community, the conspiracy has had a national impact depriving many families of their means of transport across the country.
Stephen Goode, 45 and of Gloucester Road in Coleford admitted to conspiracy to handle stolen goods at Bristol Crown Court on 15 March 2018.
His part in the conspiracy was the breaking down of stolen Land Rovers following their delivery to the ELR site.
At Bristol Crown Court today he received a six month sentence which was suspended for two years.
Edward Barrington’s father, Michael Fear, 58 and of Parc Road in Gwent pleaded guilty to two separate counts of handling stolen goods on 23 October 2018.
This was in relation to two stolen vehicles which were located at his home address. He was also required to forfeit £19,000 as a result of his guilty plea.
He was sentenced to 26 months for the first count and 12 months concurrent for the second count.
Barrington, Fear and Goode entered guilty pleas whilst Harding and Heron were found guilty following a trial at Bristol Crown Court which ended on 19 November.
Daniel Hayler, 28 and of Violet Gardens in Croydon and Gavin Wroe, 49 and of Lords Gate in Coleford were both found not guilty of conspiracy to handle stolen goods following a three week trial.
Following the sentencing, senior investigating officer Karen Wildin, of the Crime Investigation Department said: “I am happy with the sentencing although to some it might seem that the actual sentencing they have got isn’t a lot for the amount of cars that have been through both the sites.
“However this is part of a much larger enterprise that was running out of the London area and we’ve managed to convict and put inside two members from the enterprise in London.
“They were the two that were responsible for bringing the stolen vehicles to the Forest of Dean. Without them Edward Barrington wouldn’t have been able to do what he was doing in both the Sling and Parkend site and a member of his staff wouldn’t have been convicted through being part of that enterprise by dismantling the vehicles.
“We’ve also got to take into consideration that other family members were involved as Michael Fear who is Edward Barrington’s father was arrested in possession of two stolen vehicles, one of those being a Land Rover Discovery which had come from the London area so I am happy with today's result".
This article is care of www.heart.co.uk this article can be found here.
(Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co. is pursuing another path with talking-car technology that could reduce road deaths, break up gridlock and even ease ordering at the McDonald’s drive-thru.
The automaker announced Monday that it’s outfitting all its new U.S. models starting in 2022 with cellular vehicle-to-everything technology. Known as C-V2X, the system will enable Ford’s cars to communicate with one another about road hazards, talk to stop lights to smooth traffic flow and pay the bill automatically while picking up fast food.
The move is controversial because U.S. regulators have yet to greenlight C-V2X, which will run on 5G, the fifth generation of cellular mobile communications. The government has spent hundreds of millions on competing Wi-Fi technology called dedicated short-range communications, or DSRC, which has been embraced by General Motors Co. and Toyota Motor Corp. Ford says it’s trying to accelerate adoption of C-V2X as the best solution for getting cars to talk to each other.
“Our hope is that this would spur others to potentially reassess and, in other cases, decide on this direction,” Don Butler, executive director of Ford’s connected-vehicle platform, said in an interview. “We’ve been looking at DSRC for a number of years along with Toyota, GM and Honda, so this is not a step that we take lightly in the sense of dismissing DSRC. But we think this is the right step to make given where we see the technology headed.”
Butler argues 5G -- which is 10 times faster than current broadband technology -- is the easiest and most elegant solution because telecom companies already are spending billions to upgrade cell towers and build roadside antennas to service existing cellular networks for smartphone users. DSRC, on the other hand, would require the government to spend billions to create new infrastructure.
For Ford, installing C-V2X technology in its vehicles would build on plans to outfit all new models by the end of this year with cellular modems. Researcher IHS Markit forecasts that by 2023, worldwide sales of connected vehicles will reach 72.5 million, representing more than two-thirds of all autos sold, up from 24 million in 2015.
Down the road, C-V2X could improve the vision of self-driving cars, giving the computer brain more information about the vehicle’s surroundings to make the drive much safer. Currently, robot cars are dependent on a suite of cameras, radar and light-reflecting lidar to make decisions on the best path to take.
C-V2X can transmit from vehicles obscured by buildings, tunnels or other traffic, as well as give a car information on the location of pedestrians whose cell phones would emit a signal as part of the network.
“We have the opportunity to provide a wider field of view to autonomous vehicles,” Butler said. “It could literally see around corners.”
This article is care of www.dig-in.com this article can be found here
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has warned ‘below par’ claims management companies (CMCs) must improve their standards if they want to continue to operate in the industry once it takes over regulation in April 2019.
This is when all CMCs set up or serving customers in England, Scotland and Wales will have to be authorised by the FCA to continue operating legally.
To be authorised by the FCA they must demonstrate they meet minimum standards to operate and any firm that is not authorised will have to stop handling claims.
Jonathan Davidson, executive director of supervision for retail and authorisations at the FCA, said: “The new regime aims to drive up standards in a sector whose reputation has been tarnished by some companies engaging in high pressure selling and by failing to provide clear information on the fees they charge.
In its latest report entitled “Claims management: how we will regulate claims management companies”, the FCA has outlined how it aims to ensure that CMCs are trusted providers of high quality, good value services that help customers pursue legitimate claims for redress, and benefit the public interest.
The document focuses on three main areas including wanting customers to be empowered and confident in choosing a value-for-money service, which is appropriate for their needs. It also wants CMCs to help customers get redress in a way that complies with FCA rules and meets a common set of standards.
Lastly, the document also outlines how the FCA wants to regulate in a way that prioritises high standards of conduct, protects consumers and improves public confidence in claims management services.
In addition, the new rules state that all firms have to record and retain customer telephone calls for a year after their final contact with a customer.
This month, CMCs began applying for a ‘temporary permission’ to operate. This will allow them to continue operating until they are fully FCA-authorised during one of two waves running from April until the end of July.
Commenting on the new rules, Martin Bamford, chartered financial planner and managing director for Surrey-based Informed Choice, said: “Regulation of CMCs by the FCA from April is a positive move for consumers and should herald the end of the sharp practices we have seen from some firms. The call recording and storage rule is especially important, as it will give consumers and regulators access to the real picture of any promises made by CMCs.
“The majority of retail consumers do not need to use the services of CMCs and pay their excessive commissions, as the retail financial services complaints system is designed to be consumer friendly. I don’t believe FCA regulation will signal the end of the CMC sector, but it will dramatically reform remaining firms.”
Aamina Zafar is one of the UK’s leading financial journalists. She has previously worked as a senior reporter at FT’s Financial Adviser. The award-winning journalist writes regularly on the IFA community, mortgages, pensions and financial regulation.
“The new rules will ensure firms are transparent about their estimated fees before the customer signs on the dotted line, and notify customers of free statutory ombudsmen or compensation schemes. It’s vital that customers have the information they need to make informed decisions. We will take action against those that break the rules.”
This article is care of https://www.adviserpointsofview.com
This article can be found here.
#Car #tax rates will increase by up to £65 from April 1 this year – here’s how much it will cost you
Standard tax rates will see minor increases on April 1, while owners of new cars could be forced to pay up to £65 more for the most emitting vehicles
DRIVERS are set to face another car tax hike this year, with charges due to increase again in April.
Last year's Autumn Budget revealed VED rates would rise from April 1 to account for inflation.
And while the spike will cost the majority of drivers just £5 per year, some motorists could see as much as £65 added to their annual bill.
Buried in the small print of the Budget, the increase will affect owners of both new and old vehicles.
Those with cars first registered between 1 March, 2001 and 1 March, 2017 will see a maximum £15 added to their standard annual rate, while new vehicles registered after April 1 this year could see their first year rate up to £65 higher than it would have been in 2018.
For drivers of older vehicles, those with emissions below 120g/km won't see any increase, along with zero-emissions new cars
Cars first registered between March 1, 2001 and March 1, 2017 are still taxed based on the old system, which sets annual standard rates according to emissions levels.
These charges will be affected by the 2019 inflation adjustment, adding £5-£15 depending on the vehicle's VED band.
But first year rates for new vehicles will see the biggest increases this year, with petrol, diesel and hybrid cars emitting CO2 readings higher than 225g/km hit hardest.
Vehicles producing 226-255g/km will be charged between £55-£65 more, while those under 190g/km will see £40 added.
Those reading 171-190g/km will be charged an extra £25, and anything under 170g/km won't incur additional costs in excess of £15.
You can find out which tax band your car or a car you are looking to buy falls into by visiting the Gov website.
Tax rates changed in April 2017, with the new scheme introducing a flat-rate charge for most cars after their first year of registration.
New vehicles registered after that date pay a first year rate based on their emission level, then incur a standard charge in following years of £140 for petrol and diesel cars, and £130 for hybrid motors.
Both these standard rates will also be upped by another £5 from April 1 this year.
Drivers of vehicles worth more than £40,000 are also required to pay a premium tax of £310 for the first five years at the standard rate - and that will increase to £320 from April, too.
The most emitting new cars will see an increase of £65 for first year VED
Any vehicles first registered before 1 March, 2001 are still taxed under an even earlier system, which applies charges based on engine capacity.
In this scheme, cars with engines under 1,549cc pay £150 a year, with anything over that charged £245 a year.
Vehicles still paying these taxes won't be affected by the 2019 changes.
This article is care of the SUN, this article can be found here.
That holiday trip over the river and through the woods to grandmother’s house could turn into nice little gift for automakers as they increasingly collect oodles and oodles of data about the driver.
Automakers are collecting valuable pieces of information thanks to the internet connections, cameras and sensors built into most vehicles in recent years. The online access makes it possible for cars to be unlocked remotely if the keys are lost. It’s how safety features can be upgraded wirelessly and maintenance schedules adjusted based on performance.
But these digital peepholes are also offering a windshield-size view of people’s lives. That’s creating the potential for intrusive marketing pitches and government surveillance.
No serious incidents have occurred in the United States, Europe and Japan, but a red flag has already been raised in China, where automakers have been sharing location details of connected cars with the government.
“We are not that far away from when 100 percent of all new cars will come equipped with data modems,” Navigant Research analyst Sam Abuelsamid predicted. “Having the potential to collect more data about people in their cars means there is going to be potential for abuses, too.”
Here are some key questions about the auto industry’s acceleration down the data-collection highway:
Q: What kind of cars collect data?
A: In 2016, about one in every five cars sold globally could be plugged into the internet, according to BI Intelligence. By 2020, about three out of every four cars sold will be online.
So if you are driving a 2009 Toyota Corolla, you probably only have to worry about the tracking and data collection being done by the smartphone resting on the cup holder. But as those older models go to the scrapyard, it will become difficult to avoid a vehicle set up for gathering data that will be sent to automakers.
Q: Which automakers are leading the way in this trend?
A: General Motors accounted for 46 percent of connected-car shipments last year, according to the market research firm Counterpoint. They’re followed by BMW (20 percent), Audi (14 percent) and Mercedes Benz (13 percent). In addition, Tesla’s Model S sold since 2012 all come with connectivity. The firm said the biggest markets for connected car sales last year were China (32 percent), the United States (13 percent), Germany (11 percent) and the United Kingdom (9 percent).
Q: Do I own data that’s collected?
A: Under U.S. law, it’s unclear.
Drivers own the data stored in the “black boxes” that monitor vehicles in a crash. Police and insurers need a driver’s consent – or a court order – to get that data. But there are no laws addressing data collected by automakers through vehicle internet connections.
So far, few automakers will share their data in the United States without the owners’ consent, Abuelsamid said. Twenty companies – including GM, Toyota, Ford, Hyundai and Mercedes-Benz – signed a voluntary agreement in 2014 to get permission before sharing a driver’s location, health or behavior with third parties. The agreement doesn’t require approval from drivers for data to be shared with emergency workers or for internal research.
One of the most notable exceptions is electric car maker Tesla Motors, which has released data publicly to reveal – sometimes within hours of a crash – how fast a driver was traveling and whether the company’s semi-autonomous Autopilot system was engaged after a collision.
Q: In what ways are automakers passing along data when drivers allow it to be shared?
A: They’re giving the data to insurers to determine the premiums that should be charged, if a driver consents. This could be good if data indicates drivers are cautious, adhere to speed limits and seldom log lots of miles. But insurance premiums could jump for drivers who are prone to speeding or frequent hard braking – all of which could be interpreted as raising the risks for accidents. Insurers would also know whether your seat belt is fastened.
Q: Can I stop an automaker from collecting my data?
A: Most automakers let owners decline, or opt out of, data collection, but that’s usually buried in the fine print. Otherwise, permission is assumed. Also, unlike smartphones, some data collection may be required to ensure that cars operate safely and can receive essential software updates. That’s especially true as more vehicles come with features such as semi-autonomous driving. And it could be necessary in order to have self-driving vehicles.
Q: Should I be worried about automakers using my data in ways that are annoying or compromise my privacy?Probably, if what has happened with smartphones is a reliable gauge.
As automakers collect more data about drivers, they’re more likely to look for ways to profit. The built-in display screens and mapping software would seem to be ideal spots for posting advertisements, similar to what Google, Facebook, Amazon and many other internet companies already do.
The business consultancy McKinsey has estimated automotive data could be worth $450 billion to $750 billion worldwide by 2030. Ford Motor CEO Jim Hackett may have foreshadowed what’s coming as he boasted in a recent interview about how much the automaker already knows about its customers who get their loans through its financial services division. All the lending information has allowed Ford to learn how much money people, where they live, where they live and whether they are married.
“We’ve never ever been challenged on how we use that,” Hackett told a Freakonomics podcast last month.
AP Auto Writer Tom Krisher in Detroit contributed to this story.
This article is care of www.claimsjournal.com
This article can be found here
Here to help ensure consumers are treated fairly by insurance companies.