State Farm says 105 Kia, Hyundai models ‘ineligible’ for new insurance in LA
nola.com
nola.com
Insurance is required in the US. Hyundai has built cars they can legally sell in the US. I feel like the government has dropped the ball on this one, immobilizers should be required in all vehicles.
What if other insurers follow this move, and owners cannot insure their cars?
This actually shows how silly a law requiring insurance with only private options is.
And there are plenty of other reasons that someone may not be insurable.
Looks like Alaska provides exemptions too
And technically Virginia doesn't require insurance because you can opt out by paying a $500 fee, but at that point you might as well get some cheap car insurance.
(and beyond this you can 'self insure' in even more states)
However, lenders do require comprehensive, I wonder how they would feel about this if there is an existing loan on a vehicle and it becomes uninsurable.
"Theft" as an insurance type compensates the owner which is optional.
This article indicates the cost of a retrofit including labor is about $250: https://getjerry.com/questions/how-do-you-install-an-immobil...
Literally any decision a corporation makes is marketing for profit or a hedge against loss.
Looks like it's not just Louisiana. I wonder if they'll be extending this to other states, or if other insurers will be following suit? I haven't been following this issue, but I feel like Kia and Hyundai should be doing some sort of recall to fix the problem instead of allowing their customers to suffer, it can't be good for PR.
The insurance companies might also feel like they have media cover to do this, because how-to videos have become a social media trend. You can hotwire them more easily than a '90s car with ignition wires hanging under the dash, if you know what you're looking for.
Kia in particular might suffer some serious brand damage from this, combined with their multiple recent engine fire recalls.
I hate Korean cars but this really isn't on kia or Hyundai since the existing motor vehicle import laws in the usa do not require cars to have immobilizers installed. pretty much every other import and domestic car has been installing them by default for over 20 years.
Forced to by insurance companies, or forced to by bad press like this, can do the trick too.
I don't know about these states but I live in a state where insurance is mandatory. I don't know if there are flip sides of the laws mandating insurers to insure, but if not, if the entire industry in my state followed suit for these cars, it would effectively take the cars off the roads. I can promise you the manufacturers would take note of such an outcome.
"Starting Jan. 25, State Farm Insurance agents in Louisiana are no longer doing business with owners of 105 Kia and Hyundai models that have been blacklisted because they are vulnerable to theft, employees told WWL-TV."
Scanning over it again, it still seems the correct interpretation of the text as written. But it is an easy mistake for a journalist to make, if you know that it's theft-only from some other article then I'd be wrong about my state comment.
The idea that insurance can drive this would still stand though. An entire customer base being told they can't insure will get attention. It would need to be an industry-wide thing, though, or the customer base may just change companies.
Looking at the data by metro area is interesting, I wish I could share it. Hyundai/Kia thefts are low heading into 2020 or so, and then they absolutely skyrocket over the course of a few months. It doesn't hit every city at once - Milwaukee was hit first for example - but it's quickly spreading to every metro like a contagion.
Will be interesting to see if this policy spreads to other states, and whether these OEMs will do the right thing and issue a recall.
The confusion stems from both entities having valid reasons for using the abbreviation.
Typically, I will use LA for Los Angeles and La. for Louisiana if I must abbreviate throughout. However, when I can, I spell out the full name the first time, then abbreviate in subsequent mentions.
3.9m live in Los Angeles the city.
Or. Just accept that two places can have a similar abbreviation and that this sometimes will lead to a small bit of confusion.
I guess since Los Angeles the county has about as many people as Louisiana the state, people can quibble about which one is which, but style guides say i am correct, even if the wiki redirects "LA" to Los Angeles, and still manages to say "referred to by its initials, 'L.A.'".
How can i tell if my current vehicle(s) have an immobilizer?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_of_the_World_from_9th_Ave...
I bet not much, if any. There are many more significant scandals in recent automotive history that everyone has already forgotten about. Not many people are running down to their Kia lot based on their impeccable reputation, they're going there because they sell contemporarily styled cars with a decent feature set, accessible financing, and they're priced a few hundred bucks less than everyone else.
However, if you’re risky enough that no insurance company will touch you, but you are able to financially mitigate your risk to other drivers, many states will allow you to fulfill your legal insurance requirements by self-insuring. So it’s technically not correct (in many states) to say that you have to buy insurance. You usually just have to be able to prove you can afford the risk of a (minor to moderate) accident. For example, in California, you can deposit $35k at the DMV and drive with no insurance.
1. Chevrolet Pick-Up (Full Size) 48,206
2. Ford Pick-Up (Full Size) 47,999
3. Honda Civic 31,673
4. Honda Accord 30,274
5. Toyota Camry 17,270
6. GMC Pick-Up (Full Size) 15,599
7. Nissan Altima 14,108
8. Honda CR-V 13,308
9. Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee 13,210
10. Toyota Corolla 12,927
However, there's only 1 Kia on the IIHS "most likely to be stolen" list:
1. Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat
2. Dodge Charger HEMI
3. Infiniti Q50
4. Dodge Challenger
5. Land Rover Range Rover four-wheel drive
6. Land Rover Range Rover Sport 4WD
7. Nissan Maxima
8. Kia Rio
9. Dodge Charger
10. Honda Accord
State Farm is not saying “we won’t insure cars on the most-stolen list”. They are saying “we won’t insure these specific models”, presumably because they’ve determined that they can’t offer a policy at a profitable price that people will buy.
After the fact, we can look at how often cars are stolen to add context to the conversation, but it’s a mistake to conflate that extra context with the actual decision.
So I am not surprised to see a new car made in the 2010s can still be sold without a mobilizer.
But if few people actually do it, then it weakens the incentive a lot. Also, there are dozens of competing factors that weigh into a car-buying decision, so that dilutes the impact too.
Because the 400k car costs 10% more to make but white collar types who will inevitably trade them in after 3/36 will pay 30% more for them so they can brag to their coworkers about how responsible they are by buying a reliable new car.
There's two and a half brands that run on this model.
I grew up in a Toyota household, and before the Hyundai I drove a Toyota. The prices for the 2 cars are the same (in fact the Toyota was a bit cheaper after inflation), but the Hyundai had more modern features.
The part/design quality for Toyota and Hyundai were especially apparent because of my experience. I still like the Hyundai though- it never had any major malfunction so Hyundai had put effort into its drive train.
Seems weird not to provide liability coverage for these cars, am I missing anything?
> The majority common law rule among the 50 states is that the owner of a stolen vehicle will not be held liable for damages when the vehicle is stolen and then involved in an accident that causes injury or property damage.
> After an accident, typically the at-fault driver is responsible for the cost of any injuries and damages. However, when the driver of a stolen vehicle is to blame for what happened, neither the owner of the stolen vehicle nor his or her insurer will be liable. The owner of the vehicle may only be responsible for damages in an accident caused by someone who was permitted to borrow the vehicle.
> The thief will be responsible for the losses due to his or her negligent behavior. Yet his or her insurer may deny coverage since their policyholder was engaged in illegal activity at the time the damage was caused. This can make recovering compensation from the driver of the stolen vehicle very challenging. It may not be possible to locate the thief, but even if found and identified, he or she may not be covered under any insurance policy.
https://www.gregmonforton.com/blog/liable-damages-caused-by-...
They don't want that liability.
In my newer vehicle, the Catalytic converter is actually in the engine bay. This has an emissions benefit in theory[0], since the cat will heat up faster. But as a side effect, GL trying to get it out. [1]
[0] - I say 'in theory' because some folks have had issues with unburnt fuel getting into the Cat and -then- combusting, which is of course bad for the converter and shortens it's life.
[1] - Probably also means replacing it legitimately is a stupid amount of labor though.
Depends on whether it's buried or not. Many transverse 4-cylinders mount them in the front of the engine and they're actually very easy to get to.