Vehicle Theft

Debate between Liz Jarvis and Sureena Brackenridge

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Westminster Hall

[Liz Jarvis]

The hon. Member makes a good point.

This is also about the human impact of these crimes. I have heard from constituents, including NHS workers who have not been able to get to work or do the school run because their car vanished overnight. In one case, a couple told me that they saw a van pull up outside their property, and then someone get out and simply drive their car away. In April this year two constituents woke up to find that their brand-new car had been stolen while they slept. The insurance payout did not cover the real cost of a like-for-like replacement. The feeling of intrusion was significant for my constituents, whose sense of personal safety and security have been violated by the thoughtless crime that took place just metres from where they slept. The emotional toll was difficult for them both, and being without a car for several weeks was very disruptive: they had to cancel hospital appointments and other commitments, including collecting their grandchildren from school.

For tradespeople, the impact can be even more direct. A van is stolen every 52 minutes in this country, taking with it the tools of someone’s trade and their ability to earn a living. For many of my constituents, there is not always a bus to fall back on. With the 61 bus service cut in late 2025, there is one less option for residents who no longer have a car to rely on. Losing a car to theft leaves people feeling exposed and unsafe in their own homes. Their sense of security, once lost, is hard to win back.

To understand why this crisis is accelerating, we need to look at how these thefts are being carried out. The methods being used today bear little resemblance to the car thefts of a decade ago. The most common method now is relay theft, where criminals used a signal amplifier to capture a key fob signal from inside the owner’s home and then relay it to a device held next to the car. That tricks the vehicle into unlocking and starting without the key being present. Another method is controller area network bus injection, which involves physically accessing the vehicle’s onboard computer through an exposed entry point, using plug-in devices disguised as harmless electronics.

What should concern us most is how accessible this technology has become. These are not improvised tools: devices targeting high-end vehicles can sell for more than £20,000, so there is a serious criminal market built around vehicle theft.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Vehicle theft across the west midlands has fallen by 13.6% since its peak in 2022-23, which is welcome news for my constituency of Wolverhampton North East, but little consolation for a person whose vehicle has been stolen—it is a devastating experience. Does the hon. Lady agree that the Minister and all of us must continue to work with the police and manufacturers to ensure that vehicles are harder to steal?

[Liz Jarvis]

I absolutely agree. Working with manufacturers is key.

As this technology has advanced, prices have fallen, with cheaper devices including low-cost models from China now appearing in the UK, and yet videos demonstrating exactly how to use those devices remain available online. I urge the Government to press platforms to remove that content. As things stand, we are allowing criminals to access step-by-step instructions on how to steal a car. The scale of the shift is reflected clearly in the data: in 2019 signal manipulation accounted for just 14% of vehicle theft methods, but by 2024 the figure had risen to 58%.

Manufacturers have made real strides in vehicle security. The introduction of electronic engine immobilisers meant that the unauthorised starting of an engine became far more difficult, requiring a key to transmit a unique cryptographic code to the vehicle. However, in 2013 the long-term decline in vehicle theft reversed—a shift that coincided with the introduction of keyless and remote-start vehicles, which introduced a new vulnerability into what had largely been a successful security system.

That is the core of the problem: manufacturers can defend only against threats that they already know about. They are investing to keep up, but criminals are innovating faster than the manufacturers can build. The numbers make this vulnerability hard to ignore. Vehicles between five and 10 years old are the most likely to be stolen, as their fixed security systems cannot be updated to keep pace with current threats, leaving owners exposed to threats their vehicles were never built to withstand.

Some 73% of vehicles stolen between 2024 and 2025 were taken straight from their owner’s driveway or street, so a steering wheel lock or wheel clamp adds a visible physical barrier that can be enough to deter a thief, even if a vehicle’s electronic security has been compromised. Something as simple as parking in a well-lit area can make a difference, given that 80% of vehicle thefts take place between 6 pm and 6 am, with thieves relying on speed and the cover of darkness.

I welcome the provisions in the Crime and Policing Act 2026 to tackle the current technological nature of vehicle theft. For years, criminals have exploited gaps in the law, using signal jammers and relay devices to bypass security systems that drivers, understandably, assumed were protecting their vehicles. By legislating to criminalise the possession, manufacture, sale and supply of these devices, the Act closes that gap. Anyone caught with one now must prove they have a legitimate reason or face up to five years in prison and an unlimited fine.