Carmakers face 2-years in UK prison for misleading claims around self-driving cars

Businesses that market unauthorised vehicles as self-driving in Great Britain face criminal prosecution carrying a maximum penalty of two years in prison, a fine, or both, under new regulations laid in Parliament on Tuesday (7 July).

The Department for Transport outlined the Automated Vehicles (Marketing Restrictions) Regulations 2026 alongside the publication of the government’s response to its protecting marketing terms consultation.

The regulations, made under section 78 of the Automated Vehicles Act 2024, reserve eight terms for vehicles that have been authorised or listed as capable of safely and legally driving themselves.

The protected terms are “automated”, “automated driving”, “autonomous”, “autonomous driving”, “drive autonomously”, “drive itself”, “driverless” and “self-driving”.

The protection extends to different parts of speech and other grammatical forms of these terms. The words “automated” and “autonomous” are only protected when used to describe a vehicle as a whole or its overall driving capability, and remain permissible for specific parts or features, such as automated windscreen wipers or autonomous emergency braking.

The regulations are subject to the negative procedure and are expected to come into force on 7 January 2027, giving industry six months to adapt.

Valid concerns

The government said misleading marketing of automated vehicles was dangerous because it could mislead drivers into thinking they did not need to pay attention to the road.

It said the problem risked worsening road safety as more manufacturers offered high-end driver assistance systems, and could undermine trust in and adoption of self-driving technology.

The consultation found 68% of respondents agreed that certain terms should be protected for authorised self-driving vehicles, with support ranging from 69% to 77% across the six main terms proposed. Respondents included safety groups, insurers, vehicle manufacturers, legal bodies and private individuals.

The government cited a 2025 Ipsos survey of 2,186 people across the UK, which found that around half or more thought a “self-driving” car (57%), a “driverless” car (58%) or a car that “drives itself” (57%) would be able to operate with no attention or only some attention from a human.

The report found the people most confident in their knowledge were those most likely to overestimate a system’s capability.

Notably, one vehicle manufacturer opposed the regulations, arguing that “self-driving” had become an umbrella term for technologies offering varying degrees of automation and that the existing confusion offence under section 79 of the Act, alongside consumer protection law, provided a more effective safeguard.

The government rejected this, stating that a vehicle only met the self-driving test under the act if it could travel safely and legally without being monitored or controlled by an individual.

Consultees suggested additional terms for protection, with “autopilot” the most common answer, alongside “robotaxi”, “chauffeur” and “AI driver”.

The government has not protected these terms but said marketing using them would fall under the section 79 confusion offence if it was likely to mislead end-users into thinking an unauthorised vehicle could drive itself. It said it would keep the list under review.

Now read: Every UK vehicle manufacturer says Britain is behind its EV targets