5 December 2018 13:30
Photo : Tesla.com
In a report published in November 2018, the insurance Bureau of Canada recommends that the insurance policy sole as well as model insurance for automated vehicles.
“The goal of the insurance policy a single is to allow injured persons to receive compensation and to leave the discussion on the product liability insurers and vehicle manufacturers or software providers,” says the IBC. If the technology proves to be the source of the accident, the insurer can ask the third party at fault a refund for any payment liability.
An insurance policy single covers a number of risks, ranging from liability, injury or cyber risks.
The TRAY also details in his report the various possible options regarding the appropriate insurance protection when this type of car will be in free circulation. In addition to that, we find the maintenance of the status quo and creating a font entirely without regard to fault.
A number of issues related to the responsibility
To rule out the first, the oca cites a study by the Brookings Institute in the United States, which indicates that the potential issues relating to liability may resolve by themselves with the system currently in place.
“The law on product liability has proven to be adapting remarkably well to the new technologies. The same principle applies to the automated vehicles. […] Given this strong record of adaptation to new technologies, there is no reason to think that the legal system will not be able to resolve the product liability issues that arise in relation to autonomous vehicles “, one can read in the study.
The organization recalls that the litigation surrounding product liability is more complex and may take several more years to resolve than the two to four years required to set an average claim for collision.
An injured person will be able to receive the allowances as is currently the case, but the litigation involving the responsibility of the entity in question of the failure of the vehicle may extend over a longer period of time. “Depending on the length of the dispute, a wounded person may exhaust the allowances for his medical treatment and to replace his income before the liability claim is resolved,” says the IBC.
Insurance without regard to fault
The BAC has decided not to recommend the insurance without regard to fault as a model of insurance for autonomous vehicles because this type of product ” only applies in a scenario where most of the vehicles on the road are fully automated “.
In reaching this conclusion, the agency cites a study by the RAND Corporation in 2016, which in turn had been suggested by the insurance without regard to fault as a hedge to provide for an autonomous vehicle. “The transfer of the responsibility of the driver to the manufacturer may render the insurance plans without regard to fraud more attractive. […] The systems of insurance without regard to fault are made to provide compensation to victims relatively quickly, and they do not depend on the identification of the person who committed the fault, ” says the study.
However, the BAC points out that it is impossible to apply this type of regime in a country where a cohabitation of fonts mixed without regard to fault and crime exists. “[…] A change on the part of all provinces to a plan of insurance without regard to fault in the near future, when autonomous vehicles are only slowly available for use, would represent a change in public policy major. This would come with significant risks due to the vulnerability of the insurance without regard to fault as to the fraud and its costs are typically high. “
On the other hand, the coexistence between the insurance policies unique and the fonts are mixed without regard to fault and offences is possible, believes the TRAY. “This co-existence is important because the automated vehicles and conventional are going to share the road in the years to come. “
Convention data sharing
The BAC also recommends that a convention of data sharing should be established between the insurers and the manufacturers of these vehicles. The convention would determine a specific set of data available to the vehicle owner and/or insurer to help determine the cause of an accident, whether the vehicle was in manual mode or autonomous at the time of the collision, and to know the interaction the operator had with the technology independently.
Such an agreement is deemed as “critical” by the BAC to allow for a speedy resolution of liability claims. “The process of sharing data should be streamlined to facilitate the transfer of data and to avoid an administrative burden on the shoulders of the manufacturers, vehicle owners or insurers,” says the organization.
Among the data that it considers important, the TRAY includes the location of the event, the status of the automatic mode (on or off), the archives of the interactions of the operator with the steering wheel, the brakes or the accelerator, the speed and the warnings or notifications that the operator would have received, including.