logo
‘My electric car costs have surged now my son is learning to drive'

‘My electric car costs have surged now my son is learning to drive'

Telegraph4 hours ago
I've been through a lot with my electric and hybrid cars. Making the switch to an electric vehicle (EV) and installing a charge point at home for my second-hand electric Renault Zoe took months, and I've recently battled to find any insurer to cover my battered hybrid Toyota Auris.
We opted for these cars because we were keen to reduce our environmental impact, while reducing our fuel costs at the same time.
What I hadn't considered was what would happen when my children wanted to learn to drive – something that, it turns out, could cost us thousands because of the pricier driving lessons and expensive insurance required to get them behind the wheel of these vehicles.
We live in Hadleigh, Suffolk – my husband, Josh, a charity fundraiser, and I, a personal finance journalist, along with 17-year-old Finn, and 15-year-old George. Public transport is limited, so we're keen for them to pass their driving tests – but I had no idea how much more expensive we'd made it by opting for two automatic, environmentally friendly cars.
Pricier driving lessons
Manual cars are rapidly disappearing from our roads. In 2024, only 22pc of new car registrations were manual, according to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, and more young people are taking their practical driving test in an automatic as a result.
Already, almost 21pc of all passes in 2023-24 were in automatic vehicles, according to data from the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), compared with 17pc the previous year and just 5pc a decade earlier.
Much of this is being fuelled by the switch to EVs, according to the AA Driving School, which predicts that one in four driving test passes will be in automatic cars by 2026.
Seb Goldin, of Red Driver Training, said there had been a 16pc increase in automatic driving lesson hours at his firm between 2023 and 2024. 'This is likely accelerated by the accessibility when it comes to learning and the advent of electric cars,' he said. This trend is set to pick up pace over the next few years, due to the planned 2030 ban on sales of new petrol and diesel cars – but, as we've discovered, it's adding extra costs for learner drivers.
More expensive driving lessons are the first thing you'll notice. While specific prices vary depending on the area and the individual instructor, the AA Driving School quoted typical prices per hour for driving lessons as £40 for a manual car and £42 for an automatic in London, with respective prices at £38 and £40 in Edinburgh, and £35 and £36.50 in Cardiff.
Just a couple of pounds difference may not sound like much, but given it takes an average of 45 hours of driving lessons (if you can access an additional 22 hours of private practice) to pass your test, learning in an automatic could add around £100 before you can even ditch the L-plates.
Higher insurance costs
Once you're on the road as a new driver, the real costs kick in – particularly if you're driving an EV. The average annual premium for 17 to 24-year-olds driving manual vehicles was £1,260 in April 2025, according to data from comparison website Compare the Market, but it was £1,642 for electric vehicles – a chunky 30pc more.
Insurance premiums take into account the risk based on both the driver and the car they are driving, so younger drivers of EVs get clobbered both ways.
Julie Daniels, motor insurance expert at Compare the Market, said: 'Younger drivers face higher premiums because they are statistically more likely to be involved in a claim – and the expense of repairing EVs can amplify that risk'.
One in five new drivers crash within the first 12 months after passing their test, according to research by Ocean Finance, while around 37pc of 18 to 24-year-olds had at least one near miss in 2024.
Automatic and electric cars also tend to cost more to purchase and repair, which again increases insurance costs. EVs are generally newer cars, with fewer second-hand models on the market compared to internal combustion engine cars. Newer cars of whatever engine type tend to have more technical functionality than older vehicles, which affects their value and repair costs.
The type of driving licence you have can also push up insurance premiums. Craig Codell, electric vehicle product manager at Admiral, one of the UK's largest motor insurers, said this is because drivers with an automatic licence are more likely to make a claim than a driver with a manual one.
Given the continued shift towards EVs, I worry that younger people are being priced out of learning to drive, particularly if they only have access to an EV, and their parents can't spare the extra cash. Finn has been looking for a summer job to help fund his driving, but if we weren't willing to cover the insurance and lessons he couldn't just magic up hundreds of pounds out of nowhere.
'Our car insurance leapt from £406 to £2,019'
Back at home, it appears I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Either way, it seems we'll have to fork out more. We face higher costs of car insurance, and for each driving lesson if Finn goes for an automatic-only driving licence. Or, we'll potentially need to stump up for extra driving lessons if Finn learns in a manual car, but doesn't have access to a manual for practice.
It's frustrating that opting for more environmentally friendly vehicles should also land us with higher costs.
Plus, with our car insurance up for renewal, it became apparent that our current insurers were not exactly keen to add a 17-year-old with a provisional licence to our policies.
The renewal quote for our electric car with LV car insurance leapt from £392 a year to £1,134.
Meanwhile, Churchill, the insurer for our hybrid car, pushed the annual premium up from £406 to £2,019. If we'd stuck with a manual Volkswagen Polo, of the same age and mileage as our electric car, the quotes after adding Finn started from £587 for a standard policy.
The price rises seemed huge and made me think twice about whether we could afford to add Finn to our insurance. There's certainly no question of being able to cover him on both cars.
Both companies suggested using their temporary insurance policies to cut costs – where, for example, you can insure an additional driver for up to 90 days in the policy year, split across up to five separate occasions. But this didn't sound ideal for weekend driving practice.
Tech to bring prices down
Thankfully, plugging our details into comparison websites revealed some less eye-watering prices.
The cheapest option for both cars were telematics policies with Hastings Direct, often know as 'black box' insurance. Hastings Direct YouDrive came in at £569 for the electric car, and £490 for the hybrid.
With a telematics policy, the insurer monitors your driving, either by fitting an electronic monitoring device, providing a monitoring device to plug in yourself or using an app on your smartphone. The device or app then tracks aspects of your driving, such as when, where, how far and how fast you drive, and how aggressively you brake, corner and accelerate. Drive safely, and your insurer could potentially cut your premiums.
For the pleasure of driving without an insurer looking over our shoulders, I was quoted £610 for a stripped-down essentials policy for the hybrid, or £626 for a higher-rated policy with a lower excess. Premiums for the electric car rose to £749 and £802 for the same policies, but there were cheaper options elsewhere from around £650.
Based on the insurance costs, I've added Finn to the hybrid policy rather than the electric. It's a shame, because the electric car is smaller, and therefore easier for a learner to park – and it has lower running costs.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

I live in London for under £500 a month including bills thanks to my clever rental hack – anyone can do it
I live in London for under £500 a month including bills thanks to my clever rental hack – anyone can do it

The Sun

time29 minutes ago

  • The Sun

I live in London for under £500 a month including bills thanks to my clever rental hack – anyone can do it

A WOMAN has revealed how she lives in London for under £500 a month including bills - saving her over £5k a year - by using a clever rental hack. Honora Pamplin, 27, lives in a spacious converted warehouse with four housemates in Walthamstow, east London. 5 5 But she pays just £480 - plus £15 a month for wifi - by being a 'property guardian'. This is an individual - or group of individuals - who lives in a vacant property to keep it in good condition and safeguarded from squatters or vandals. Honora said her license comes with no additional responsibilities beyond being a responsible tenant - and includes all her other bills and council tax. With the average price of a room rent in east London being £944, according to SpareRoom, she has saved £5k around since moving in last August. They have industrial aircon units and powerful heaters for when the weather gets too hot or cold and lots of space as well as two living rooms. Honora, an events campaign manager, originally from Galway, Ireland, said: "My lease was coming to an end last summer when I came across the concept of property guardianship. "A friend of a colleague said they had done it before so I went to view a place, almost out of curiosity. "It was so cheap that it felt hard to say no - my friend and I said we'd give it a go for a few months. "I'm still here now and I've had a great time - we have loads of space in a good location. "I've managed to save far more money for a holiday and a house deposit." I live in an abandoned hospital and it's terrifying at night - but it's a bargain a just £470 per month Honora was coming to the end of a tenancy with a friend in a two-bed flat in Walthamstow - where she had been paying £750 per month plus £200 bills. They decided to trial a property guardianship and moved into the ex-warehouse with four other housemates. The group furnished it themselves - similarly to moving into any other unfurnished rental. She said: "The back part is a locked warehouse the company use to store furniture - and we live in the front half. "We think it may used to have been offices but it has been converted into a kitchen, two living rooms, and bedrooms. "It came with white goods and we furnished it using a mishmash of furniture from our previous places, as well as Facebook Marketplace. "It's not the most cohesive decoration but I think we've done quite well making it feel homey." A potential downside is that they could be asked to leave with as little as 28 days notice, if the owner wishes. 5 5 However Honora said the property agent assured her they have no immediate plans to do that - and tenants usually stay a minimum of six months. She said: "They keep in good contact with us too, so it doesn't feel precarious." Pros and Cons of being a property guardian Being a property guardian means you can pay reduced levels of rent. But there are some downsides to be aware of too... Benefits Below market rent Electric, gas, water and council tax often included 28 days notice needed if you want to leave Access to unique locations Flexible agreements Drawbacks Limited Legal protection You're a licensee, not a tenant which gives you reduced rights under UK housing law. Easier to evict a licensee Basic living conditions Often properties are 'modified' for temporary living Not suitable for families looking for long term living No guests, pets, or children in many cases Some companies charge application or 'admin fees' It naturally as an 'industrial' look - with exposed pipes on the ceiling - but she said they enjoy it. And because of its original purpose, it comes equipped with a full air conditioning system as well as heating - meaning they're comfortable all year round. Honora said: "I don't know anyone in London who pays less than I do for their home." In addition, as someone who works in sustainability, she loves that being a property guardian is a way to repurpose buildings so they aren't knocked down and rebuilt. Honora said she has been able to save the extra cash for a holiday and plans to continue saving for a house deposit while living there. She said: "I understand maybe if you have a family you couldn't commit to something like this in case you do need to leave. "But if you're in a more flexible situation it's great. "I've never had this much space or paid so little money for it." 5

Minister pressures water boss to refuse rise doubling salary to £1.4m amid furious row over exec pay and sewage leaks - but rules out nationalisation
Minister pressures water boss to refuse rise doubling salary to £1.4m amid furious row over exec pay and sewage leaks - but rules out nationalisation

Daily Mail​

time29 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Minister pressures water boss to refuse rise doubling salary to £1.4m amid furious row over exec pay and sewage leaks - but rules out nationalisation

Southern Water's chief executive should refuse a pay rise that almost doubled his income to £1.4million, the Environment Secretary has said. Steve Reed told the BBC 's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg that Lawrence Gosden's £691,000 salary increase was 'outrageous' and implored the company to 'think about how this looks to their customers'. It comes amid a furious row over the pay and bonuses enjoyed by executives at water utilities which oversaw huge spikes in sewage leaks last year. The number of serious pollution incidents caused by water firms rose by 60 per cent in just 12 months, the Environment Agency revealed on Friday. Asked whether Mr Gosden should turn down the pay rise, Mr Reed said: 'I think it would be right if he did .. I don't think Southern Water has performed well enough for that kind of pay increase to be merited.' He added: 'Trust between the customers and the water companies is at the lowest point probably ever, and by paying their senior executives rises of that kind, what message are they sending to their customers? 'I really would urge them to think about this very, very, very carefully.' The Government is bracing for the release of a landmark review into the water industry, which could reportedly lead to the abolition of embattled water regulator Ofwat. The Independent Water Commission, led by former Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe, will outline recommendations to turn around the floundering sector in its final report on Monday. The review was commissioned by the UK and Welsh governments as part of their response to systemic industry failures, which include rising bills, record sewage spills and debt-ridden company finances, although ministers have ruled out nationalising companies. The Government will respond to the recommendations in Parliament later on Monday. The review reportedly includes proposals to establish a new system of regulation, which is currently split between Ofwat, the Environment Agency and the Drinking Water Inspectorate. Ministers will announce a consultation that could lead to axing Ofwat, which oversees how much water companies in England and Wales can charge for services, according to the Guardian. Ofwat has faced intense criticism for overseeing water companies during the years that they paid shareholders and accrued large debts while ageing infrastructure crumbled and sewage spills skyrocketed. In an interview with the Sunday Times, Environment Secretary Steve Reed suggested he was in favour of a new model where regional boards managed water in their areas, including representatives from water companies, local authorities and other organisations. He said: 'I think the catchment-based model has a lot to commend it. Because if you can manage what's going into the water better, you can clean up the water faster.' But speaking to the BBC he again ruled out the possibility of nationalising the water industry, saying it would cost too much and take years during which pollution would get worse. The Environment Secretary told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: 'Nationalisation would cost upwards of £100 billion that we'd have to take away from the National Health Service and schools to give to the owners of the companies that are polluted.' He added: 'If we try to unpick the current model of ownership, it would take years, and during that period, pollution would get worse because the companies wouldn't invest knowing that they were going to be nationalised. The EA report found there were 2,801 sewage leaks last year, up from 2,174 in 2023. Just three firms were behind 81 per cent of the most serious - Thames, Southern and Yorkshire. The agency revealed consistently poor performance from all nine water and sewerage firms in the country despite its expectations for pollution incidents to decrease. Meanwhile, just two companies – Northumbrian Water and Wessex Water – had no serious incidents last year, meeting the Environment Agency's expectations to see a trend to zero serious pollution incidents by 2025. It also follows a report released by the Public Accounts Committee earlier on Friday, in which the cross-bench group of MPs called the level of pollution 'woeful' and recommended an overhaul of the regulation system. Under the Water (Special Measures) Act introduced by the Government last year, the watchdog will have greater powers to take swift action against polluting companies. To boost funding for water regulation, the Environment Agency is also consulting on a new levy on the water sector to recover the cost of enforcement activities, while the Environment Department (Defra) last week confirmed a 64 per cent increase in its funding from 2023/24. A Water UK spokesperson said: 'While there have been some improvements, it is clear that the performance of some companies is not good enough. 'This is finally being put right, with a record £104 billion investment over the next five years to secure our water supplies, support economic growth and end sewage entering our rivers and seas. 'However, fundamental change to regulation is also needed. We hope that the recommendations of the Independent Water Commission next week will ensure the sector continues to get the investment it needs to drive down pollution incidents.'

Nigel Farage says ministers are 'defrauding' taxpayer out of billions to fund green energy - as he says water firms should be part-nationalised (at a cost of £50billion)
Nigel Farage says ministers are 'defrauding' taxpayer out of billions to fund green energy - as he says water firms should be part-nationalised (at a cost of £50billion)

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Nigel Farage says ministers are 'defrauding' taxpayer out of billions to fund green energy - as he says water firms should be part-nationalised (at a cost of £50billion)

Nigel Farage today accused ministers of 'defrauding' the taxpayer by pouring tens of billions of pounds into green energy. The Reform UK leader used a BBC interview to question why money was being used to underwrite wind and solar schemes 'for literally zero effect' on global CO2 emissions. Mr Farage distanced himself from Reform mayor and ex-Tory MP Dame Andrea Jenkyns, who this week said she did not believe climate change existed. But he said that even if humans were affecting the global weather system it did not justify the spending on green energy or axing high-pollution industries like steel making. Last week Reform's Deputy leader Richard Tice wrote to firms giving them 'formal notice' that the party would axe deals aimed at offering sustainable generators protection against market volatility. Speaking today on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Mr Farage said: 'We have got ourselves stuck in this mindset: we believe man has an influence on changing the climate, I didn't deny that, I think that man does – it is impossible to think that seven or eight billion people can't have some effect. 'But whether that is a reason to transfer manufacturing to other parts of the world, whether that is a reason to have the most expensive energy prices for industry in the world and to make the poor poorer in society, for almost o benefit whatsoever, I doubt it.' However he also faced accusations that Reform's plan to part-nationalise UK water firms would cost taxpayers as much as £50bn. He insisted the proposal to put 50 per cent of firms into public ownership would cost 'a lot less' than the amount estimated by Defra and regulator Ofwat, saying they were 'part of the problem'. But despite repeated questions he could not put a figure on how much Reform's plan would cost, saying it 'depends what deal you do with the private sector investors'. He added: 'We don't know what negotiations we're going to have, but it doesn't need to be a big sum of money if you incentivise private capital to come in and do the job properly.' It came after Environment Secretary Steve Reed again ruled out the possibility of nationalising the water industry, saying it would cost too much and take years during which pollution would get worse. He told Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: '(Full) nationalisation would cost upwards of £100 billion that we'd have to take away from the National Health Service and schools to give to the owners of the companies that are polluted.' He added: 'If we try to unpick the current model of ownership, it would take years, and during that period, pollution would get worse because the companies wouldn't invest knowing that they were going to be nationalised. 'So instead of me sitting here telling the public that we're going to halve sewage pollution over the next five years, I would instead be sitting here saying we're going to play around with ownership and pollution will get far worse.' Mr Tice wrote to energy companies urging them not to invest in the latest round of green energy contracts, known as Allocation Round 7 (AR7). Mr Tice said he had put the companies on 'formal notice' that their investments were 'politically and commercially unsafe' as a future Reform government would seek to 'strike down all contracts signed under AR7'. But he later told the BBC that Reform would not renege on contracts, only oppose any 'variation'. Reform has made opposition to net zero a major part of its platform since the last election. Earlier in the year Mr Tice pledged to 'wage war' on the policy while Greater Lincolnshire mayor Dame Andrea told Times Radio on Thursday she did not believe climate change was real. In a report published last week, the OBR estimated tackling climate change would cost the Government £30 billion a year, largely in lost income from taxes such as fuel duty. But it also warned that failing to act presented a 'more significant fiscal cost' because of damage caused by climate change.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store