[Mr.Boss]

I know, this is not gonna happen in near future. Still, let's see what are the possible options we have to push our market towards well built, safer cars.

Long back cars are meant to be Luxury and meant only for the rich crew. When 'Pleasure car' became an affordable 4 wheeled private means of transport things started seeing the other end of spectrum. We wanted a lot more than just a means of transport, we wanted a lot of bells and whistles, we wanted everything at a cheaper cost. And where did we end up with? a 4 wheeled paper box with more features ignoring essential features and safety. And we are proud to say " We have Millions of happy customers today" than "We will have millions of customers alive tomorrow"

This is not something we are unaware and I don't want to beat the dead horse again. Coming to the subject, what can force our market to move away from these tin cans?

Only 'education' on safety will not workout here, especially for the one upgrading from a 2 wheeler anything that has 4 wheels with a windshield and roof is safer than his current mode of transport. Also I repeat again, unless we change, OEs won't stop manufacturing low safety rated cars.

So what to do? Link the below w.r.t safety star rating

For Buyer:
- Road tax (higher tax for lower rating)
- Insurance (higher OD premium for lower rating)
- Fitness renewal (no fitness renewal for anything less than 3 star)
- RTO fee (higher fee for any RTO transactions like ownership transfer, hypothecation removal, etc)
- Loan interest rate
- Benefit on other taxes

For Manufacturer:
- Benefits for making safer cars
- Mandate the rule of higher star rating for facelift (Eg: Current gen has 2 star rating, facelift should have anything over 2 stars)

This will make people to spend a lot more than what they save in purchasing a lower safety rated car and once we realize the overall ownership cost is same, obviously a larger crowd should move towards safer cars.

Some of these are already followed elsewhere, and I'm sure again this is not gonna happen anywhere in near future in our market. But still...

Let's see what other options we have apart from the above list.

Disclaimer: this is no where connected to TATA and Mahindra vehicles scoring better GNCAP scores than other so called premium & high volume brands and I'm nowhere a 'fanboy' of any brand.

[WhiteSierra]

Originally Posted by Mr.Boss

For Manufacturer:
- Benefits for making safer cars
- Mandate the rule of higher star rating for facelift (Eg: Current gen has 2 star rating, facelift should have anything over 2 stars)

Any change should come from within, be it consumer or manufacturer. No amount of rules, regulations or obligations can make true difference until and unless a consumer feels to buy a safe car and a manufacturer wants their customers to have a safe car.

Most important point for the manufacturer : It should be moral responsibility of the car company to take care of customer's safety. When Tata and Mahindra can do it, why can't market leaders (in terms of sales volume) do it? Do they take their customers safety for granted? As an organization don't they have the moral values to see if they are providing a safe and quality product to their end users?


View of customer:
India is a very diverse market, few people buy a 1.2 lakh rupees worth iPhone, and few people buy 600 rupees chinese unbranded phone. Due to the vast population and different socio-economic segments, our market is also flooded with various types of cars. People are slowly learning the value of safety, but it should be vastly advertised. Tata motors is doing a good job by advertising how safe their cars are on social media targeting millennials / first time car buyers. I really appreciate TATA for Tiago, a 4 star entry level affordable mass market car. More manufactures should come up with entry level 4 / 5 star safety rating cars in entry level segment and I'm sure more people will buy these cars in future.



After receiving lot of flak for their poor safety rated cars, I'm sure Maruti and Hyundai will change their attitude towards customers' safety, and will make stronger and safer cars in future. Otherwise Tata and Mahindra will eat into their market share for sure. Tata and Mahindra are already leaders in commercial vehicles, if they concentrate well on PVs and flood different models at affordable price, it is game over for the big M and H.

[Mr.Boss]

Originally Posted by WhiteSierra

Any change should come from within, be it consumer or manufacturer. No amount of rules, regulations or obligations can make true difference until and unless a consumer feels to buy a safe car and a manufacturer wants their customers to have a safe car.

That's the problem here. We are good keyboard warriors to speak a ton about safety, build quality and what not. End of the day we will be happy customer of a brand that provides nothing more than widespread service network, highest sales volume (of course that's important to have, but not only that)

I agree with you, if we aren't concerned about our own life and safety why should the Govt take care of it?

Originally Posted by WhiteSierra

It should be moral responsibility of the car company to take care of customer's safety. When Tata and Mahindra can do it, why can't market leaders (in terms of sales volume) do it? Do they take their customers safety for granted? As an organization don't they have the moral values to see if they are providing a safe and quality product to their end users?

Couldn't expect such morality from in a business. Successful business finds the gap or need of the market and target to fill the same.

Originally Posted by WhiteSierra

After receiving lot of flak for their poor safety rated cars, I'm sure Maruti and Hyundai will change their attitude towards customers' safety, and will make stronger and safer cars in future.

Do we still believe?

[ajaiD]

The sad reality is only when a high-up politician die's in a automobile accident does the gov wake up then after some lobbing by all the car makers it again goes back to sleep.

One can check this statement with respect to the BNVSAP.

[sumeethaldankar]

I think cars which are have poor crash test scores are sold even in developed countries like the USA as legally they meet all norms but in a crash scenario they end up doing poorly (example). So if developed car markets are not free from such vehicles it will be difficult for us Indians where old models are the dumping grounds to be free from such practices.

The onus I believe should be on the buyer. I had gone to Nexa 2 years ago to test drive a Ciaz, the sales man ended up showing me a S-cross as well and due to the build quality difference between the two I did not buy the Ciaz. Maruti had called up months later to ask what car I had purchased and what was the reason and I told them exactly same as above. Once the car companies figure out that customers are more inclined towards safety they will be forced to make safer cars.

For the big Indian manfacturers while they are doing well on safety the general perception is that they are not reliable and fuss free to own. Every garage guy I had spoken to in the last 5-7 years always said whoever buys a car of a certian Indian make always cries. This is what the big two Indian manafacturers need to change. For me a reliable car is also part of safety. I don't want a broken down vehicle with my family on-board stuck in the middle of no-where with no support/spares etc for miles.

[kiku007]

What do you safeguard the most? The thing you value the most.

When will the market move towards safer cars? When the value of life matters the most.

It's all too obvious on where India stands on the value of life. So there's no use Maruti or Hyundai-KIA.

[locusjag]

The OEMs ultimately give the customers what they want and it is a democratic process. It is democratic because it is a bludgeoning of all the people, by most of the people for the latter category of people. And most people simply don't care yet about crash safety.

The average Indian who buys a car is not that far removed from his/her roots in material poverty. They're likely trembling out of excitement and fear in having bought a car. They're most likely afraid of the fuel that's being guzzled by cars, vis-a-vis the 2 wheeler that they used to solely operate before. They're afraid of driving their car around without hitting somebody or damaging their car's body, ultimately being afraid of the repair bills. They're deeply concerned about servicing and spare part costs. And lastly, they spend time worrying about resale value.

Crash ratings simply do not come into it. Trust me.

[SmartCat]

When it comes to safety and emission norms, only Government regulation can push the manufacturers towards the right direction. That's because safety is an intangible benefit - you cannot "touch and feel it", unlike sunroof or engine power or smooth gearbox.

Customers always pay for what they see when they walk into a showroom. And most manufacturers will cater to what the customer pays for. No amount of "education" or "spreading awareness" by GNCAP or advertising campaigns by 4/5 star safety car manufacturers will help much.

[aaggoswami]

In my view, the answer is Economics.
The cost of ownership has to come down. With respect to per capita income even of car buying public, the percentage they are spending on cars is on higher side in my view. Maintenance costs are rising, Insurance has gone up like anything, fuel prices are very, very high too. Two things happen as a reason of high cost : ownership of a car is considered a success statement, focus on safety isnt as much as focus on lower cost of ownership. When around 70% of cars in India are bought on credit, and this includes bulk of mass market cars, one cannot expect safety to be top priority. Priority is to have something better and safer than a two wheeler and/or even public transport.

Just an example : success of Eeco in rural market. Rather than two wheeler, Eeco is better. Eeco is better than public transport when more entire family needs transportation. People even buy used Eeco, and then usually overload it. Lack of comfortable public transport, last mile connectivity is the reason. I dont think the emerging urban youth would aspire to buy Eeco. Things might be different for the urban landscape but the overall focus on cost remains high, so does focus even on resale. Very few cars under Rs. 10 lakh have side and curtain airbags, good engine and a nice safety rating. Tata might have it but it is blown away when it comes to hassle free ownership.

[Vijin]

I think it will be the insurance companies who will chime in eventually. Just like in developed markets they will start considering factors like how likely it is that a driver, passenger or pedestrian will be injured if the insured vehicle is in a road accident, how the risk of an accident is mitigated in cars. I dont see any other aspect motivating govt. regulations.

[aniyo]

India is a conservative country.
If we say the car is not strongly built response will be " then drive slow and carefully"
Most of the people who lose their live in accidents would have lost even if they had a slightly stronger build car. Most deaths occurs owing to poor medical infra, response time and medical negligence. Or they just went under the truck
For most first time car buyers they want a car that is reliable and trouble free. We dont have the luxury of car lease program that reduces the cost of ownership, neither is our income so high that we can just change cars.

For many people car will be 1.5-2 times their yearly salary and hence people stick to low maintenance and high FE cars

Places like Europe where a lot of things are taken care by government like medical, schooling and average higher income ensure people can demand a lot of stuff. Education also plays a role

In India, people who buy 2nd or 3rd car rarely go for Maruti, see the volumes of Maruti in 10L above segment.

Indian middle class is a myth and our cost of manufacturing is crazily high. People who buy Maruti are the one who either cannot afford to experiment or don't really care too much want a point A- point B car.

Once we have the income levels and the appetite to demand good cars will follow suit. Also the government does nothing with the taxes they collect. Unless government changes which is highly unlikely, we will not get great cars. I have resigned to tis fate

[GTO]

There is only one thing that can move the needle - strict government legislation & implementation. BS6 anyone? Do you think OEMs would wake up one morning, and start producing cleaner cars because of their conscience? No. How did ABS become compulsory in this country? The law.

In many developed countries too, a strict law + proper crash testing are the only way that safer cars have been made accessible. In USA, ESP became standard only after the government said it should be.

Good luck with consumer awareness. It'll take you 100 years. When it comes to purchase decisions, 99% of the country will happily pay 50,000 rupees less for the same car with an unstable structure & lesser safety kit. It is the government's job to protect its citizens.

Until the government acts, bad press & shaming manufacturers is our best hope!

[OSH]

IMO just the goverment's regulation on safety will face a lot of backlash. The reason being that many people including some members here, don't seem to like a lot of intervention from the government in the auto sector. Forget the people, even manufacturers may crib about it for obvious reasons. If the government decides to promote safe cars, the better thing to do is, provide the manufacturers with some sort of incentive in case their car is well rated in the crash tests.

Just for example; maybe a policy should decide which NCAP will/can be the rating agency and then set slabs for the lets say tax benefits. Something like;

• Cars with 3 stars or below are not eligible for any tax benefits.
• 4 star rated cars will get a x% tax rebate.
• 5 star rated cars will get a xx% tax rebate.

AFAIK hybrids and EVs are also promoted using some sort of tax incentives. A similiar policy can be formulated for promoting safety. Even if these incentives reduce the cost of safe cars by 50k-80k, imagine the pricing advantage these safe cars will enjoy compared to their competition.

[anandhsub]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

When it comes to safety and emission norms, only Government regulation can push the manufacturers towards the right direction. That's because safety is an intangible benefit - you cannot "touch and feel it", unlike sunroof or engine power or smooth gearbox.

Absolutely agree. There are a few areas where I feel Govt intervention is a must. That's what we pay taxes for.

Healthcare, and as a corrolary road safety, is definitely one area which isn't going to improve without the Govt taking action.

[saikarthik]

Originally Posted by Mr.Boss

For Buyer:
- Road tax (higher tax for lower rating)
- Insurance (higher OD premium for lower rating)
- Fitness renewal (no fitness renewal for anything less than 3 star)
- RTO fee (higher fee for any RTO transactions like ownership transfer, hypothecation removal, etc)
- Loan interest rate
- Benefit on other taxes

For Manufacturer:
- Benefits for making safer cars
- Mandate the rule of higher star rating for facelift (Eg: Current gen has 2 star rating, facelift should have anything over 2 stars)

Brilliant options if you consider the stick method is the way to go and looking at the scenario in India it has to be the stick than the carrot. Indian market has had safer options at affordable range with a slight premium over the unsafe cars.
But the mindset has been towards the low cost of ownership and initial investment - this is valid on one part due to the per capita income. The other part is where we need to worry which is conscious choice of making a wrong decision besides the ability to spend money on right thing.

Originally Posted by WhiteSierra

Any change should come from within, be it consumer or manufacturer. No amount of rules, regulations or obligations can make true difference until and unless a consumer feels to buy a safe car and a manufacturer wants their customers to have a safe car.

True. But lack of options due to enforcement of safety will push people to buy safer cars as the whole market has to shift to new level. And I know its a bit autocratic in nature, but there was always a good amount of time given to change by own will before such enforcements are made. And yes, the enforcements have to be reasonable.

Adding to your example of phone selection, I have seen people making purchase of Rs.1 lakh iPhone and going for a unsafe car quoting Rs. 20,000-30,000 difference or few features. I am not against the purchase of a costly phone, just that people have to realize the importance of safety as first priority than a luxury.