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.
In most places LIABILITY insurance is required, not theft/comprehensive. I expect you'll still be able to find liability insurance for those models even if nobody wants to insure them for theft.
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.
It looks like owners can add an immobilizer. The article quotes a State Farm document saying the vehicles become eligible if a "sales associate has verified the presence of a passive engine immobilizer."
State Farm is a company, and in business to make a profit. They aren't abandoning current customers, just putting the brakes on coverage for new customers with affected makes and model years.
They want evidence an immobilizer is installed, so with a simple modification people can get insured. But I'm not sure the government can force an insurance company to cover a vehicle anyways.
It’s simply because the insurance corporation is a corporation - and corporations exist to provide shareholder value before they provide customer service or labor rights.
Literally any decision a corporation makes is marketing for profit or a hedge against loss.
"Two State Farm employees told WWL-TV that the restrictions apply in Georgia, Louisiana, Oregon, Washington, and Pennsylvania. The restrictions do not apply to current policyholders, only to drivers who are looking for new policies."
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.
They won't do a recall unless forced by regulators. The sheer number of cars without immobilizers and the amount of money/work that would go in to installing them in cars that didn't originally have them would be quite crazy.
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.
"They won't do a recall unless forced by regulators."
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.
They are preparing a recall to install immobilizers on the affected models, but it sounds like they're moving too slowly.
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 work at a large insurer (not State Farm). The frequency of theft on Hyundai/Kias is actually insane. In metro areas where it's happening, it's 10x the theft rate of other makes in the area. We're talking a 5-10% chance of Hyundais being stolen per year.
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.
Can we please start clarifying makes and models? I understand this might empower people, but it's not every car they made or make.. I know my year and model isn't part of these insurance issues, but all I see is brand names.
A lot of TikTok posters made videos showing how to break into Hyundais and Kias as they lack immobilizers, so anyone looking for a car to joyride in or use as a getaway car during a robbery or a driveby could just steal one instead. You find a lot of abandoned Kias and Hyundais down in Hunter's Point in SF for that reason.
Hyundai and Kia cheaped out by not including a couple dollar part that makes it harder to hotwire. Apparently kids can hotwire them with a USB cable because they don't have the immobilizer. It affects several years worth of Kia and Hyundai models.
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?
Well, LA is the postal state code for Louisiana. Using LA for Los Angeles is just an initialism.
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.
I would not expect an international audience to know what the heck Louisiana might be, even if they could figure out that LA is the postal abbreviation for it. Would you understand if a title used "MZ" to refer to the Polish province with a comparable population and economic prominence?
Was there ever a class action started against the manufacturers of these vehicles for the never recalled/fixed "easy to steal" thing? I haven't been keeping up with the history.
I was (and still am) considering buying a Kia Forte, but only a 2023+ model with an immobilizer. There are rumors that Kia is planning to install immobilizers for free on impacted cars, but it's shocking that it's taken this long. I can't imagine how much reputational damage they'll sustain because of this.
> I can't imagine how much reputational damage they'll sustain because of this.
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.
Even if you have the immobilizer on your new car, if a potential thief thinks your car is one of the stealable ones, you may still end up with a broken window.
I have a 2022 Hyundai Tucson hybrid (which I love!) and your comment makes me wonder about another commenter's suggestion to get The Club. My car _has_ the immobilizer, but maybe adding a visual deterrent is a good idea.
... you're ignoring the underlying availability. The total number of Hyundais sold in the US is comparable to combined sales of Honda Civics and Toyota Camrys alone. The question is whether the risk of a Hyundai/Kia being stolen is disproportionately high, since that's what affects its impact on an insurer.
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.
I had a Hyundai car for over 10 years. It's a good car but my impression of it is that Hyundai knows exactly where to cut cost and substitutes just-good-enough parts. The car had many features over its competitors, but under the hood it's easy to see that the engineering focused on cost (reduction) over longevity. Why should a part last 400k when 200k is sufficient?
So I am not surprised to see a new car made in the 2010s can still be sold without a mobilizer.
Some car buying guides do advise getting insurance quotes before you buy. Theoretically, the risk should be reflected, so it should incentivize immobilizers.
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.
They tend to cut corners when they can. Some current models are catching fire and I believe the suspected source is they put smaller gauge wires on the trailer harness and this is resulting in fires. It's not just "the vinyl on the dash is lower quality", it's actually safety issues. There should be legal consequences.
>Why should a part last 400k when 200k is sufficient?
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.
Readit News
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.
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...
And there are plenty of other reasons that someone may not be insurable.
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.
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.
Deleted Comment
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
However, there's only 1 Kia on the IIHS "most likely to be stolen" list:
So, why are they still insuring Dodge Chargers?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.
Deleted Comment