Mar 266 min read

How do you handle breakdowns for electric cars compared to traditional cars?

Updated: Oct 22

An electric car plugged into a charging station

Many insurance companies provide breakdown services as an extra option. We wanted to look at how handling breakdowns for Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) is different from internal combustion engines (ICEs). Insurance companies need to think about this when picking a breakdown service provider.

Battery Technology & Reasons for Breakdown

The most significant difference between BEVs and ICEs is the power source. While ICEs rely on petrol or diesel, BEVs are powered by batteries. This means that in the event of a power-train breakdown, the approach to fixing the issue can be vastly different. For ICEs, a mechanic may need to replace a part or refill a fluid, but for BEVs, the focus will be on the battery and its components. This requires different specialised knowledge and equipment, making it essential to have a trained technician on hand for BEV breakdowns.

Not everything is unique for BEVs, but the ability to diagnose the issue presents new challenges. According to the AA, the top one third of breakdowns for BEVs are the same faults as ICE vehicles – 12v battery problems and tyres. Other BEV faults are quite different and cover things such as charging equipment, warning lights, battery monitoring systems or key transponders. Later in the article we will explore some of these unique issues, but we will begin with training.

Training

Ensuring roadside patrols have the correct training to assess and fix BEVs is essential. IMI (Institute of the Motor Industry) accredited training (or equivalent) is essential for technicians working on BEVs. The IMI offers specialised training programmes that cover the maintenance, repair, and handling of EVs, ensuring that technicians have the necessary skills and knowledge to work on these advanced vehicles. This type of training is crucial as EV technology continues to evolve, and technicians need to stay updated with the latest advancements to effectively manage breakdowns for electric vehicles.

Level 1 gives basic knowledge of safe working practices, the dangers and the precautions required to avoid potential injury when near electric and hybrid vehicles. Level 2 training allows safe working on electric and hybrid vehicles that may have had damage to the high energy/electrical system. Level 3 enables patrols to work on the high voltage components or systems to repair EVs at the roadside.

Insurance companies should review what current levels of training their breakdown provider is training to and the amount of coverage across the patrols and their future training plans. IMI level 3 or equivalent should be a key aspect you are looking for EV vehicles roadside repairs.

Range

One of the primary concerns for BEV owners is range anxiety; the fear of running out of battery power while on the road. This can be a significant factor in managing breakdowns for electric vehicles. Unlike ICEs, which can be refuelled at any petrol station or with a fuel can at the roadside, BEVs require access to charging stations. In the event of a breakdown, the nearest charging station must be located to recharge the vehicle and get it back on the road. This requires a different approach to emergency services, as they must be equipped to handle BEVs and have knowledge of the nearest charging stations. We anticipate that, in the near future, there will be widespread mobile charging provisions which will offer the equivalent of a fuel can, but at present the offering is inconsistent.

Although important for an insurance company to consider, the issue needs to be put into context. In 2019 The number of ‘out of charge’ BEV breakdowns was 8% of all EV breakdowns four years ago and dropped to 4% of breakdowns last year. This year the figures have dropped further and are running at just 2.1% of BEV breakdowns. In Norway, which has a much higher concentration of EVs than the UK, the percentage of out of charges is just 1%. Running out of petrol/diesel is also consistently 1% of the AA’s workload, and the organisation believes that BEVs will level off to a similar rate over time as drivers become more familiar with how to drive a BEV and charging infrastructure makes recharging on the road easier. 

The AA says that in many ‘out of charge’ cases the vehicle is not actually out of charge, but the AA has been called out as the EV is low on charge. Procurato's primary research suggests that in some vehicles when approaching out of charge the vehicle slows down and what the customer needs is to be escorted to the nearest charge point if there is one within range. Our research also identified that the customer can be towed to a vehicle charging solution that is out of service or requires a network card that the customer does not possess, or the customer does not carry their charging cable.

Due to the challenges of towing BEV vehicles, patrols having emergency vehicle chargers should be a consideration when choosing a provider. If a provider has emergency vehicle chargers the next consideration is the kW of the devices. The higher the kW the faster the vehicle can be charged and the quicker the roadside fix for the customer.

For instance, a 5KW can increase the range by 10 miles approximately in 30 minutes. Procurato’s research suggests some providers are now exploring 7.5kW chargers which will reduce the time further.

An insurance company should assess the vehicle breakdown supplier's infrastructure concerning emergency vehicle chargers. They need to ensure that the supplier can effectively identify operational chargers, connect to charging networks, and assist customers in finding the right charging point according to their specific needs.

Vehicle Recovery

In the case of an emergency breakdown, the approach to handling BEVs will be different from ICEs. The basic issue for many BEVs is that they do not have a conventional neutral gear, which means you cannot disengage the gearbox from the drive train. As such, considerable damage can be done to a BEV if you attempt to tow it in the conventional way.

Although there is no absolute rule because BEV models and configurations are changing at great speed, the main challenge for insurers and fleets is identifying a recovery partner with sufficient breadth of recovery vehicle choice. In essence, it should be assumed that every EV needs to be uplifted onto a flatbed recovery vehicle and most recovery providers’ fleets are not configured to support this. An additional consideration is that BEVs tend to be heavier than ICE vehicles, meaning the recovery truck needs to be capable of pulling a greater weight than the 3.5t GCW (Gross Combination Weight) that many recovery vehicles support. Even the adaptions made to existing fleets are often insufficient. For example, the AA has developed a freewheeling hub mechanism which can be fitted to the rear wheels of broken-down vehicles which elevate them from the road but these are designed for patrol vans which are not able to pull the combined GCW of themselves plus an BEV.

For an insurance firm or fleet provider analysing a breakdown service provider, the type and pulling capacities of their recovery fleet for EVs, and the response time for deployment, should be key elements of scrutiny.

BEV's less reliable

According to Consumer Reports 2024 reliability owners’ satisfaction survey results show that BEVs are 79 percent less reliable than ICE-powered vehicles on average. Consumer Reports suggests that new technologies arising from the development of electric vehicles mean early adopters will have to deal with some kinks before reliability improves.

For insurers who provide their own underwriting or operate a profit share model with a breakdown provider they are likely to find that BEVs customers will cost them more. This all needs to be reflected in the pricing charged to customers for BEVs, the claims provisions made, and for capacity planning with breakdown providers for books with a large amount of BEVs.

Repairs

BEVs can be more complex to repair compared to ICE vehicles and BEVs require specialised knowledge and equipment. This means that when the breakdown cannot be recovered on the road the garage the customer is taken to must be equipped to handle BEVs and have trained technicians on staff.

An insurance company should carefully consider how the breakdown provider routes customers to repair solutions. For example, have they got their own repair network that has EV repair solutions, do they have a detailed database patrols can access to direct the customer etc.

Conclusion

Managing breakdowns for BEVs requires a different approach to managing ICE breakdowns. From the battery technology, training, recovery and even pricing, there are many key differences to consider. In addition, beginning to gather and monitor the data which identifies weaknesses and gaps in service provision will be key. Motor supply chain infrastructure has not evolved greatly for many years but small differences in vehicle manufacturing (e.g. the introduction of ADAS) had a surprisingly significant impact on repair costs and off-road-times. Procurato predicts that BEVs will have a similar but much more substantial influence.

As the popularity of BEVs continues to grow, it is essential for insurance companies and fleet providers to consider these changes when tendering their electric breakdown provision and for ongoing supplier relationship management with existing providers.

References