Is It Really The End Of Old Cars? Insurance Expert Reveals All 

I really am not generally one for 'conspiracy' theories and really tried to find a balanced and informed view point for this video.. but am really starting to wonder if all this technology is leaving us very vulnerable. I do NOT think this is a concerted, conjoined effort to control us but it seems we ourselves are laying the foundations for someone to misuse that technology in the future. Legislation currently protects us to a degree but legislation can be changed. What do you think?

The claims guru has more faith in politicians than I do. The automation of cars is the thin end of the wedge just like central bank digital currency and health passports

My daughter took out a "Black Box" reduced price car insurance; however, she lives in a part of London with a blanket 20mph limit and was continually being tailgated, beeped, finger-flicked, etc, for sticking to the speed limit. After 6 months, she got a letter from the insurance company saying that she would have to improve her driving due to frequent "speeding" at 22mph otherwise they would cancel her cover and refuse to insure her. This would obviously give her a major problem when trying to renew with a different company so she just cancelled the policy and took the cancellation fees as a loss. The black box is still wired into the car though and wasn't requested for return. We have taken a record of the IMEI number in case it is stolen and maybe that could be used to help trace it - but I have zero confidence that insurance companies or the police would be interested.

Thanks Jack for doing this video. Many salient points in the video and comments. For anyone who has worked on cars that are a few years old, modern sensors are a never ending source of frustration. Everything is built to a cost and fully integrated sensors will fail. There will be a time when the car is sending incorrect data that will affect your insurance premiums, refuse to start or move, or cause an accident. The end consumer who has no control will ultimately be finically responsible.

Even when data is made "anonymous" it's still possible to connect it to a specific individual to it by putting multiple bits and pieces of information together.

The government has pushed through with EV at a pace that every real domestic issue should have been tackled. The only reason is to push an agenda that asserts the government control over every aspect of our life. I understand this is about vehicles, vehicle types and insurance only the broader picture is how every aspect of our lives are controlled to the point we have no rights or freedoms thus heading to a bottlenecked existence under a dictatorship. Thank you for the video. This is 1 of a dozen issues pointing to us being forced in the wrong direction. EV by themselves have started showing how completely useless they are overall- Check any dealer that will repair your EV after you hit a pothole rendering your car a potential death trap. You you find any, it will be a write off. No body shop or service garage even have the equipment to deal with these issues that doesnt charge more than the value of a new vehicle. So how is this better for the environment and everyday people? No country has the infrastructure to support anything being forced on us with a target date of 2035. Big Brother in our pay, jobs, PRIVATE (joke) bank accounts and cars. Next we will be forced to have BBC regardless so the government that already has the station will use it to monitor in our homes. Invest in the communities, give back the appearance of hope and the people will respond in a positive manner. Shackle everyone in hopes you brainwash a generation of brainwashed children to follow the new regime and end up with a Guy Fawkes. He knew better, very few listened.

His thesis seems to be, "Don't worry, they are not allowed to do that, and they wouldn't anyway." Lol - I was born yesterday so I believe him completely.

A valuable topic to explore and well presented. My take away is to avoid buying new vehicle, but to keep one that I can still control and maintain. Classics may enjoy a long life yet.

The closing thought from Tim about influencing this stuff through the ballot box was, perhaps, the most concerning. I can't see either of the main political parties in the UK advocating for the motorist, despite what they may say.

If an insurance company is violating your right to privacy, you should see the problem right there.

I think a question I ask is will young people still care about learning to drive? It was a right of passage when I was growing up but my son isn't bothered about learning. I figured he would change his mind but he's 25 now and still not interested. If the enjoyment is sucked out of the process it will just become a part of a job I would imagine. You have ability to drive you get paid more, but I can't see why young people would be enthusiastic to learn because of the pleasure that we used to obtain from driving. Very very interesting show thanks both of you.

I think your classic cars being monitored by other cars all the time will only apply in built up areas Jack. Stick to the quiet roads you do test drives on and you'll be fine ;-) I still think it would be more likely that eventually insurance companies would want all cars (including classic cars) fitted with black boxes and there will be a campaign at some point to persuade us it will be in our interests to do so e.g. currently my energy company is constantly harassing me to install a smart meter as it is in my interest to do so apparently

The Insurance Guru is brilliant- he helped me to fight esure on a claim a few years back. Great value

Sounds like driving classic cars will be much more fun in the future. You can drive like you're on a rally stage, and all the autonomous vehicles will see you and do their best to get out of your way, while at the same time warning other autonomous vehicles that you are coming so they can get out of your way too!

Quite a few thoughts on this excellent piece: Surely if 'interconnected cars' are going to be such a fantastic thing, we will only need fire and theft insurance🤷 Yet we all know most insurance companies a parts of larger financial institutions whose only SIM is to make as much money as possible with the minimal risk ..... so premiums will NOT reduce! As for Alcoguard how do you regulate who provides the breathe sample...and does it tackle the equally important issue of driving under the influence of drugs (recreational or prescription). I think as you highlighted with introduction of average speed cameras it's opening a Pandora's Box!

Just to add: in italy there are already signs about this topic. The Movein blackbox that controls how much km you do in your old car in exchange for a slight discount on the insurance and limits you to 9k km then you will get fined. Also on the south of italy insurance companies started to negate insurance for 20yo cars (which are partially historical here).

My only real concerns here are; the potential to take away our ability to control where we go and what we do, that the system will be more open to abuse by any party, and we will have to reply on the technology around us working without fault 100% of the time. Great discussion, lots of good and not so good, makes you think doesn't it, what will the future hold...

This Guru's assertion that EU directives don't apply to UK as we are no longer in the EU is a red herring. The UK car market is far too small for manufacturers to produce UK-only cars. That's why Euro 5 emissions rules still apply to any new car you buy in UK today, as will Euro 6, 7, 8 etc etc.

Too many variables to be totally autonomous imo. Not only that the current UK road network is an absolute mess. Current vehicle sensors in cars are shocking. Handful of times now I've been driving work vehicles on the motorway and the brakes slam on for no reason. Very dangerous.

Tim contacted me to try and 'debunk' some of this stuff after my video on the whistleblower hit 400k views, but we couldn't get our schedules to align before Christmas, however I do now find it quite funny that the 'debunk' is more 'yeah this is all happening but it's OK because I have a northern accent'. 2024/25 are going to be interesting.

Well, we better learn how to use the 3 sea shells....

I think that given the fact insurance companies leverage the usage of a black box for young drivers against premiums that aren't financially ruinous, how long before they demand that people do share that data (that can be bypassed GDPR with explicit consent) in return for premiums they can afford. Manufacturers may not want to work with insurance companies but they're not the ones underwriting the policy. I don't want to get all grassy knoll but insurance companies have the power to let you drive legally or not so why would they not demand you consent to their data harvesting requirements.

Im pretty tired of loosing autonomy to risk mitigation. Life is inherently dangerous and taking freedoms away in the name of safety leads only to one place. Dystopia is already here lol

Nobody is taking my classic car away from me.

Very interesting couple of videos, thanks. This splits into two areas, Control (which at present remains largely untested because so few cars are actually controlled), and Monitoring, which is almost certain to happen if technology continues to develop.

I had concerns when the 1st video went live. It felt like there was more to this and this sort of thing was maybe not quite missinformation but certainly missing a level of detail. Very glad you posted this follow up with a balanced view and more explaination. That Guru guy seems quite level headed.

Good job we are in a free country 😅, its scary how much personal information companies have and how the hell do they get it! ...... Excellent stuff as always Jack buddy 👍

What the Guru says is based on legislation that is in place now, but who knows what is coming

Could a government shut off your car in the future? Well in 🇨🇦 they already happily shut off your bank account so....

I worked at HPE on a project where we tried to help lease companies and car companies to add value and possibly monetise data from vehicles to give very high resolution detail of driving conditions. The platform was able to take this data and make it anonymous and then allow other companies purchase the data to add value using it. Consider all of the data a modern car collects, for example the wipers are on, the headlights are on, the traction control has activated several times and the very local outside temperature is very low. This data could be used to warn other drivers of low visibility and a risk of black ice or poor traction. There is so much value that can be obtained from connected vehicles but it is SO important that this must be controled and not abused. Our platform provided that capability.

Here in Canada, we have amber alerts for missing children and other situations. Possibly, if a person is suspected to be operating the vehicle in question then it could be shut down. The same might apply to a stolen vehicle. On a positive if it is known that a person has several DUI charges and has a suspended licence and no insurance and continues to drive the vehicle it could be immobilized. But we know that the police and insurance companies don't make mistakes. Unlike the movie Brazil. Also insurance companies use different standards than the traffic laws. So you may be in a situation where you were not charged in a collision or for excess speed, they may increase your premium regardless. And one is not open to defence, unlike in court. And you won't get far taking an insurance company to court. And the manufacturers will be reluctant to market cars made too difficult to insure.

I work in manufacturing, autonomous and interconnection is good when everything works but the day it fails it can be catastrophic and fatal, now you can imagine it on the motorway and things go south.

Personally, I'm not reassured at all; it's the classic balance between "rights" versus "freedoms." In other words, how much risk are you willing to accept to preserve your freedoms? Of course, today these decisions are largely taken out of our hands and governments inevitably opt for more control, as and when new technologies become available. Not to mention the potential for these new technologies to go horribly wrong or to be hacked by "bad actors." Great interview, Jack.

“ under EU directives “ , I thought we left. Big Brother , Nanny State it’s all here.

Interesting video, aligns with views of a lot of people I've interviewed at various OEMs. Suspect it'll be cost of fuel which will be a nail in the coffin for a lot of older cars, sadly.

Interesting exchange on a few oddball and serious questions but I think there was one huge thing that was ignored in the discussion. It largely revolved about the data security of the individual in terms of what an insurance company may or may not gain about the vehicle and “ Passenger” I don’t think going forward we need to talk about a “driver” being insured. This leads me to the elephant in the discussion - that we will not need to own a personal vehicle. You will request a car on an app - say -Uber - for a car - it will arrive at the time requested to your location - the hirer /“passenger” “ will use it as they require, return to a destination anywhere any time - the cost being deducted per mile from your credit card - job done!!!!

One act of parliament like " online harms" is all is needed to change who and how car data is handled. Read how nefarious online harms bill actually is little to do with protecting children. Built in software backdoor for governments to do whatever they like.

Mmm. Can't say that my mind has been put at ease by anything discussed. I got the impression that this was a damage limitations exercise for the insurance expert. I still think we need to be concerned about this. Just in case it turns out to be true, which I have a horrible feeling that it will.

The fact he can create a business fighting insurance companies on behalf of the (supposedly) insured just further reinforces my choice to never have anything to do with insurers in any situation in which I can possibly avoid it.

In the future, the goverment will be the "insurance company" - Here in the US we're already seeing this for property insurance... Even now, private auto insurance companies offer deivces that plug into your vehicle's OB2 port to monitor driving behavior in order to earn a discount, but what will prevent them from requiring it (or contectivity via cell phone app while driving) to obtain and hold a policy in the future? Answer: only a matter of when, not if.

Very interesting discussion Jack. As your guest said, much of the technology is here already and deployed but next step however is connecting this technology together and that worries me. It’s not so much the privacy issue, but more than reliability of the tech that we are putting so much faith into, it’s already proved with self driving not to be as reliable as we were told, what happens when we’ve got devices talking to other devices without human intervention? There must be millions of lines of code in most cars these days, what’s to stop external actors building in ways to control these devices (they stopped being cars, long ago)?

These sensors may be on the cars now but they are currently rubbish...my crash avoidance system is so random that i simply don't trust it so I turn it off. These systems need to massively improve before they can be trusted in every occasion. I think this guy is missing a few issues. The kill switch could be linked to your green social score so imagine youve done too many miles, the car could refuse to start... nothing to do with insurance. Also, this assumes you own the car, what if this is all written into your hire agreement?..you can rent the car but agree to the insurance/ car/government dept. remotely controlling your usage??

nice one guys. good to see a guest on the channel too.

I'm so thankful that you're bringing things to mind that one is beeing snared to every day concerns never could be attentiv off. And i am so grateful that you forgive my poor knowledge of the english language, do you?

The first death(s) caused by autonomous car(s) will be an interesting insurance claim. Lots of this stuff is decades away even if it happens. I'll be 6ft under by then. Good luck

I suspect the if people are politically exposed, such as the many people involved in politics who have had banking issues in recent years, private companies could choose to withdraw services such as EV charging, so perhaps that might be a more likely way of limiting someone's use of a car.

It's good to know that the Ins. companies won't lobby the govt. for access to all info provided by 'smart cars', or pass legislation requiring all licensed vehicles and drivers to carry 'full info' tracking devices when operating on public highways. Yep, govts. are totally against the "for your safety, comrade" concept.

Well done Jack, a great insight there. You have a talent for doing interviews. Best wishes for the new year. I look forward to updates on your De Tomaso.

Switching off a car remotely has already happened I'm afraid, a news story in America just before Christmas where a car was stolen and reported to the Police who ended the pursuit by remotely deactivating the vehicle, no mention of the vehicle manufacturer or how it was done but this technology is already here 😮

Surely if you are the only person insured to drive that car they can identify you. And they can identify your car - if it's speeding for instance. Surely more and more cars will be on cloned plates too - 'unconnected' cars that is. You need to change 'revel' to 'reveal' btw.

It's not just cars and the fact that even non connected cars like classics will be monitored by all the connected cars around them, it's people as well. Most have a smart phone but people like me who don't have any mobile phone will still be tracked traced and identified by an absence of mobile signal and all the facial recognition cameras in the streets. The future sounds bloody horrific. So glad I'm heading into my late 70's.

Regarding GDPR, the data can only be anonymised by default, but you CAN grant permission for your data to be identifiable. If you can only get insurance if you grant permission, the current GDPR protection is completely eliminated. It's one step away.

Always thought they will get people out of cars with insurance hikes , still so many foreign friends 36:07 driving old cars with no insurance or license

15 years ago I was working in a Government Department where there were discussions going on about “black box” technology in hire cars used by staff. The concern from staff representatives was staff privacy and obviously the official side’s view was safety and control. In the end it was an accepted (begrudging) safety measure. The headline figures used in the final discussions were speeding figures picked up from users’ black boxes…. Max speed on M4, by a Civil Servant: 104mph Max speed throughout the department, a military officer: 114mph “l was late for an important meeting” was the excuse. I now get almost all of my fun on the water under power or sail. Jack, you should try it 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

John Deer, the farming equipment manufacture in America, has and does use, the telematic system to switch off equipment if payments are not paid. Usually happens when vehicle is parked up, and will now not start. Bricked is the term used.

In the US. there was a person, who had family sitting in his Car, and pairing his Mobile. He immediately got a notice from his Insurance, it has been changed, because this other person using the car..while not even driving it...

The end game! We loose and you might have to put your car in the garage and a window in your living room so you can still see it and remember how it used to be when you could afford it!

An excellent video Jack. So I can be driving round in my non connected car enjoying life but be grassed up by a team of Tesslas. How depressing. Car fanatics really are on borrowed time.

Salient point of the video: 31:42 - "Insurance is based on risk" In a connected car, I expect premiums go down when I drive in "low risk" areas in a "low risk" way, just as it currently is today. Right now, a mature driver in an classic car living out of the city has lower premiums than a 25yr old driving a sporty hot-hatch living in the city. No extra data needed, just your post code, your age, and your VIN. Connected cars will give the insurance industry more data to charge more competitive premiums for high vs. low risk drivers. The bit I hadn't considered that the video brought up, was that "connected" cars on the road would also be able to assess risk of other cars on the road. Even if you decide to opt-out of a connected car, everyone else's car will have seen what happened, and will know how you drive. At that point, data-sharing contracts between manufacturers/insurance companies become a valuable commodity. I hope that becomes a line item on the purchase agreement. As for conspiracy-theory stuff about the government shutting down your car, just ignore it - if you're up against a nation-state-level security agency, you've already lost. Why bother hacking into your car when it's just as easy to insert a device to cut your brake lines, or simply abduct you in the middle of the night with a swat team?

What you've overlooked in this upload is that insurance won't be linked to the car it'll be linked to the individual. In the future they'll know each individual in your car and charge them for any journey they take. It'll even apply when you walk. Yes, they'll find a way for charging to walk through certain areas.

To be fair I think he did debunk the content of the letter and there isn't anything he said here that isn't an obvious development for the future. In fact much of the technology is already in existence today. GDPR [provided it stays] will prevent non anonymised data going between parties.

Very good video, these insurance "queries" seem to me to be really intrusive. The character John Malkovich plays in Red and Red 2 being determined to be off grid is a fine example. This noseyness is frightening. I think all the political parties will do the same thing, nothing. I do think though older cars are controlled by the driver and we should all be wise to remember that. Very interesting video Jack. Best wishes. Ben 🇬🇧🇮🇹🚌🚐

old cars are the most environmentally friendly of all. We need to keep them going !

I drive older cars and find insurance cost fall once the car hits 20 years old. I pay £142 fully comp on a model year 2000 Peugeot 406 coupe 2.9 litre, that's with a regular insurance company the Halifax via a price comparison website.

Basically the key point is insurance companies make money based on our negligence absolutely fascinating

Tim the insurance expert needs a stronger bookshelf. There's going to be a hell of a lot of uninsured drivers going around .

Insurance companies may not have access to your vehicle’s data under current protection legislation but when autonomous cars become available, I suspect the state may well insure them on the basis that no individual will be paying a premium to an insurance company for a vehicle they don’t and can’t drive. Then all your data linked via the car will be accessed by the state for any purpose they choose

I've not news for you. The ability to remotely take control of your car has been around for well over 20 years. I was helping my neighbour move a car away from debt collectors posing as bailiffs, who had come to collect it. I won't bore you with the details (long story), but suffice to say that as I started to drive it away, this "bailiff" pressed a button on something in his hand, which instantly cut out the car and I wasn't able to restart it. I've since discovered that what they did, whatever device they used at that time, was illegal but the fact that it was even possible at that time shocked me nonetheless. The car? Not the latest model, not a 2020 car, not even a 2010 car, but a year 2000 VW Passat. All of this will happen, the speed camera example was a good one but again you can go back a lot further than that - seatbelts were never intended to be mandatory. And they'll get away with it too, because like everything else they will play the health and safety card making it near impossible for the public to object to it and making those who do appear to be reckless individuals who don't care about other people's safety.

As long as there are rich and somewhat powerful people owning classic cars, I really don't see it happening. Wishful thinking perhaps because the EU has already destroyed so much... Fingers crossed. Thanks for the video and best wishes for the New Year from the Netherlands

So it seems that criminals will go back to driving Jaguar mk2s again. 😀

London Buses tfl already has facial recognition cameras both inside and outside. They caught Levi Bellfieild with them.

I have a few cars and None are newer than 2008 , no telemetry for me thank you 😂. About 7 years ago I was given a 2014 jaguar Xf to use as a replacement while my own was being repaired, fortunately it was my friend who arranged it through his company and after a few weeks he called me to let me know he’d deleted the tracking info showing how fast I’d been travelling up the m6 … 😳 and asked me to “ keep it down “ 😂😂😂 The police already use our ring doorbell from Amazon without our authority

Anonymously my arse. If you are the only registered keeper then it's more then likely it's you driving.

I watched both videos - all I can say Jack is you should get back to reviewing cars - asap.

Wherever we have new motoring technologies to catch speeders etc we also have technology that can get around it. So never worry.

My Insurers are so crooked that they now ask if you have reversing sensors to make reversing safer and then charge you extra in case they get damaged in an accident. I rejected a car with sensors and bought one with no sensors and saved almost £60 off my insurance. Same car just no sensors. I will not be renewing with them next time round.

The ability to remotely turn off a vehicle exists and has been used for a few years now a farmer friends tractor or combine refused to start it was almost new he contacted the main dealer to be told he had missed two payments so they had disabled it

This is very interesting,I like the guy,he talks a lot of sense.

I work for an insurance company and I think people are generally overestimating the power they hold. Ultimately people don’t need to buy from any one particular company and competition should keep consumers in control as long as there are no rule changes.

If you get a ticket in the US, the insurance company pulls the data of your driving during that ticket and adjusts your insurance premium. It is already happening here. The data is linked to the insured driver.

Stick with car videos, Jack, and don't worry yourself about "leaked" letters. The UK car insurance industry is different to Germany, and Germany is different to Italy etc etc. What may or may not apply there will not necessarily apply in the UK, as far as insurance on classic cars goes in the future, based on your "experts" theory of interconnected autonomous cars, they surely will not require insurance, who would be the insured??? which means the only market will be you and your Pantera 😉. More Pantera, please, theirs already enough doom and gloom, we need you to let your enthusiasm shine through the darkness

In some ways I get how this Big Brothering would be beneficial, in principle .. The Geofence idea -- if it was not abused -- would be a fantastic way of promoting safety of certain areas .. However, I still maintain that insurance companies are 100% there to (a) take as much money from people as they can and (b) pay out as little money as they possible can .. So thinking of their intentions as benevolent in any way is something I just can't do

Ironically the add that came up before this video was for insurance.

The only way of prices is up.......not to lower them

What if one could insure oneself from getting hit by these cars. They'd have to choose between hitting this highly insured person vs these two with no such insurance... what a lovely future

Isn't it wonderful to have someone on here who's an expert and knows what he's talking about. As opposed to a load of RU-vid influencers that have opinions and thrive on rumour and miss information.. As the man said a load of bollox.😂😂

In Poland from what I remember the insurance is on the car not the driver. I can drive any car from the get go as long as it is already insured. I was really shocked after moving to the U.K. and discovering I have to get the insurance every single time I drive another vehicle so I guess we are a step closer for AV 😮. Fortunately everything else is not😊

If the insurers were worried about Classic cars not complying then they would already have penalised cars which are not subject to an MOT. Am I missing the point here ?

Sounds like Demolition Man is coming true....

The path to 1984 won't be quite as straightforward as some people wish or believe it will be. It has been happening for many years though. Our government has compromised our privacy already without us even knowing. Today, you can apply for a passport and the photograph from your driving licence can be automatically used, so there is one link few people think about because it's convenient for them. Your health records are digitised, every time you visit your GP with a sniffle, or perhaps an alcohol problem, that data is recorded. Unlike the commercial rivalry between insurance companies and manufacturers there is no rivalry between government departments sharing your data to achieve their objectives. The problem, as I see it, isn't with manufacturers and insurers, it's with governments compelling them to hand over data on you either routinely or ad hoc e.g. in the event of a crash or a criminal event. Who, for example, will control the infrastructure to run fully autonomous vehicles? Will manufacturers or insurers do that? Unlikely as it would be a bun fight to profit from it. It's likely to be controlled by governments who are known for their technical illiteracy and utter incompetence. Look what happened to the integrated NHS database billions were wasted on, and the Inland Revenue database more billions were wasted on. Then there's the cost. Who will shoulder the burden of implementing a nationwide autonomous network, and how will that work in the north of Scotland where cellphone coverage is patchy at best even now? Now convince me that autonomous cars will work across inhospitable parts of Russia, Africa and the Americas. The public will of course be expected to pay for it but with ballooning national debts the expense will be harder to justify as time goes on when growing numbers of people are sleeping rough and overall poverty is rising, especially amongst the elderly. Then there's the simple problem of powering all this from dwindling fossil fuel reliance. We know we are facing problems with renewable energy. If we keep going on the path we are on (we won't) we will face electricity rationing. So what is shut down first? The Heat Pumps people rely on to keep body and soul together, or maintaining an autonomous transport system? I suspect our government, in its infinite stupidity, would favour the latter, but that would only last so long. The fact is, as Casey Stoner once said to Valentino Rossi (paraphrasing) 'Your ambition got the better of your ability'. Our technocracy is like a child. We have only had it widely available for 40 years or so. Our industrial revolution has taken 250+ years to mature. I remember being assured that TV aerials on our roofs were the devils spawn and the means of mind control. We have gone from A Sinclair computer very few people understood to a laptop in every home, each of which with more computing power than required to send a man to the moon, and the majority of users browse the internet and watch TicToc videos. The technical and digital possibilities are endless, and that's its Achilles heel. Everyone want's a slice of the digital pie but, at the end of the day it doesn't come down to Orwell's political vision of the world, it comes down to the energy we have available to power it.

I'm already in a position that neither LV= or Direct Line will offer insurance on all of my cars. They work on dealing with the bulk of the market rather than those of us on the edges. I can still find some mainstream insurance though, failing that I can go for specialist products. I don't see this changing. Where there is demand there is a business opportunity and someone will offer cover.

Yes the future isn't as rosy as the past.

As long as I can remember, I've always thought that people of the future will think it crazy that people of our time were allowed to operate motor vehicles on public roads at high speeds and be completely free to go any speed at any time, and crash into anything we like, as hard as we like.

"You need to elect a political party that will protect you"! LOL!!!

I know that in the US we already have on-star, which is a system that can be used to track and disable vehicles as a factory feature.

Tim sums this up perfectly at the end when he says we need to elect government that will protect us. That is absolutely spot on. I'm not hopeful though given the last 14 years.

How does this technology fit in with a social credit score? … I’m sure if you had float the idea of a lock down to an expert in 2019 they’d of said it could never happen

Please stop this stupidity. The insurance industry is not going to sacrifice 80% of its income until you buy a connected car. Yes you can see that there will be some accident avoidance but set against the higher values of new cars and the high cost of repair due to technology, this is not a 'coming soon' feature. By the way, I have only 40 years experience in the insurance industry at a senior level and I have never worked for an insurer. Get back to the classic car reviews

In order for this to happen in the US the government would have to change the definition of what is an automobile. If they were to try to push this agenda without doing so then they would need to get rid of the law mandating the insurance.

How would you join a Motorway from a slip road if there is a train of cars following closely? There would be no gaps.