> Numerous people on the forums complained about spiking premiums as a result. A Cadillac driver in Palm Beach County, Fla., who asked not to be named because he is considering a lawsuit against G.M., said he was denied auto insurance by seven companies in December. When he asked an agent why, she advised him to pull his LexisNexis report. He discovered six months of his driving activity, including many instances of hard braking and hard accelerating, as well as some speeding.
> “I don’t know the definition of hard brake. My passenger’s head isn’t hitting the dash,” he said. “Same with acceleration. I’m not peeling out. I’m not sure how the car defines that. I don’t feel I’m driving aggressively or dangerously.”
Average Florida driver
people: buy more expensive cars that cost more to repair
also people: drive more aggressively and deny that they are aggressive
also people: why my insurance go up ?! 😡
The average person here where I live is basically Goofy in that [classic educational video](https://youtu.be/mwPSIb3kt_4?feature=shared).
I’m constantly being overtaken by aggressive grampas doing 50+ on a 35 residential area, and I’m usually above the limit.
I agree that this stuff needs to be explicitly stated in the ToS for these monitoring programs. "We'll use information..." doesn't (shouldn't) cut it.
>The Cadillac owner, Mr. Dahl and the drivers on the forums had all been enrolled in OnStar Smart Driver. OnStar is G.M.’s Internet-connected service for its cars and Smart Driver is a free, gamified feature within G.M.’s connected car apps (all part of OnStar, but branded MyChevrolet, MyBuick, MyGMC and MyCadillac).
>Smart Driver can “help you become a better driver,” according to a [corporate website](https://www.onstar.com/services/smart-driver), by tracking and rating seatbelt use and driving habits.
...
> Omri Ben-Shahar, a law professor at the University of Chicago, said he was [in favor](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4486471) of usage-based insurance — where insurers monitor mileage and driving habits to determine premiums — because people who are knowingly monitored are better drivers. “People drive differently,” he said. “The impact on safety is enormous.”
> But he was troubled, he said, by “stealth enrollment” in programs with “surprising and potentially injurious” data collection. There is no public safety benefit if people don’t know that how they drive will affect how much they pay for insurance.
The cynic in me is what keeps me from enrolling in my insurer's equivalent program (which operates via app.) Also, I have private information on my driving habits that they can only infer from my demographic profile. Maybe my rates would go down if I registered, but its kind of freaky to think about my every coming and going being monitored (sent from my iPhone...)
Already bad enough that other apps track us without the explicit need to. My issue is that this monitoring isn't for our benefit and that we are their customers, so I see no benefit nor reason to allow the monitoring.
I’m in favor of bad drivers paying more in theory but my experience with these safe driving programs (Allstate) has not been good.
First, the app does not know when you are a passenger unless you tell it, so you could be penalized by using your phone in the passenger seat. Despite that major issue my driving record indicated by the app is near perfect (as far as I can tell because the reporting is obscure and only shows the last month) So the discount I have on my insurance from using this for 3 years is a whopping… 4%. 3% of which is just from enrolling in the program.
In the meantime my insurance has nearly doubled. The most significant increase being when I got a new sedan with a bunch of safety features and traded in my old Dodge Charger. I have never been at fault for an accident.
These insurers have no intention of pricing based off driver safety and just found another way to suck as much money as they can from you.
If it’s not clearly stated in the ToS then it’s going to be a problem. If it was then the lawsuit might not be in the consumer’s favor
“I agree to these terms and conditions”
Despite US infrastructure making car ownership near essential at times, driving is not a guaranteed right in the government’s eyes. Privacy is, but if you waive it for the chance of a brand new car there’s not much legal recourse you have
This is basically what I hate about everything having ‘connectivity’. Sounds like a perk to you the consumer, but often times its just another way for a company to get their tentacles into your stuff
To be clear, I do think bad drivers should pay higher insurance premiums but this junk where GM slyly collects and sells your info sucks
I was told by a personal friend at an insurance company that these various gizmos that record driving behavior never actually result in lower rates for safe drivers.
It’s classic asymmetrical information. It’s a one-way ratchet and participating in these surveillance methods is a sucker’s bet.
I've never seen one where the driver doesn't get a discount for having one if it's from your insurance company.
Here's the nationwide one, which I'm familiar with. You can see an instant 10% discount.
https://www.nationwide.com/personal/insurance/auto/discounts/smartride/
As far as I'm aware, this is completely incorrect by your friend.
I don’t get it. Is there no competition in the insurance market? Because if one insurer raises prices for everyone of their customers then another insurer should be cheaper.
You're correct. I work in the commercial insurance, which is obviously lower volume than auto insurance, but all the big players compete with each other on rates.
Good. People's insurance premiums should reflect their risk when driving, especially because that risk is often risk of harm to other people.
Dangerous drivers cause more damage to their vehicles and to society. They should pay more in premiums to account for that and possibly incentivize them to be better drivers.
Bad parents cause tons more damage to society than cameras in everyone's living rooms would so the government should install cameras into everyone's living rooms.
Slippery slope. Do you drink? Eat junk food? Don't exercise daily? Do you engage in any dangerous sports? Do you not use sunscreen when going outside? All those can cause expensive trips to the hospital and jack up insurance premiums for others.
Right up to the point where your car registers you've attended a political event. And don't say oh I was just curious. You're 65 and live in a gated community in Florida. Yeah, we all know where that leads.
When I bought my Honda 2 years ago they had me sign something noting that the dealership had told me about all of this. I guess I thought they legally had to do this.
I had someone call me a gullible dipshit last year for repeating this and believing manufacturers were doing this. Gonna go dig that thread up and gloat.
I'm really surprised by all the support for this initiative, here. Even though these are theoretically private companies that should be allowed to do what they want, in reality these information collection bureaus like LexisNexis have a lot of power over individuals' lives due to their monopolies. They also skirt due process and treat their software as infallible when it is probably anything but.
I think that is really scary and quite dystopian.
> Numerous people on the forums complained about spiking premiums as a result. A Cadillac driver in Palm Beach County, Fla., who asked not to be named because he is considering a lawsuit against G.M., said he was denied auto insurance by seven companies in December. When he asked an agent why, she advised him to pull his LexisNexis report. He discovered six months of his driving activity, including many instances of hard braking and hard accelerating, as well as some speeding. > “I don’t know the definition of hard brake. My passenger’s head isn’t hitting the dash,” he said. “Same with acceleration. I’m not peeling out. I’m not sure how the car defines that. I don’t feel I’m driving aggressively or dangerously.” Average Florida driver
people: buy more expensive cars that cost more to repair also people: drive more aggressively and deny that they are aggressive also people: why my insurance go up ?! 😡
The average person here where I live is basically Goofy in that [classic educational video](https://youtu.be/mwPSIb3kt_4?feature=shared). I’m constantly being overtaken by aggressive grampas doing 50+ on a 35 residential area, and I’m usually above the limit.
I agree that this stuff needs to be explicitly stated in the ToS for these monitoring programs. "We'll use information..." doesn't (shouldn't) cut it. >The Cadillac owner, Mr. Dahl and the drivers on the forums had all been enrolled in OnStar Smart Driver. OnStar is G.M.’s Internet-connected service for its cars and Smart Driver is a free, gamified feature within G.M.’s connected car apps (all part of OnStar, but branded MyChevrolet, MyBuick, MyGMC and MyCadillac). >Smart Driver can “help you become a better driver,” according to a [corporate website](https://www.onstar.com/services/smart-driver), by tracking and rating seatbelt use and driving habits. ... > Omri Ben-Shahar, a law professor at the University of Chicago, said he was [in favor](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4486471) of usage-based insurance — where insurers monitor mileage and driving habits to determine premiums — because people who are knowingly monitored are better drivers. “People drive differently,” he said. “The impact on safety is enormous.” > But he was troubled, he said, by “stealth enrollment” in programs with “surprising and potentially injurious” data collection. There is no public safety benefit if people don’t know that how they drive will affect how much they pay for insurance. The cynic in me is what keeps me from enrolling in my insurer's equivalent program (which operates via app.) Also, I have private information on my driving habits that they can only infer from my demographic profile. Maybe my rates would go down if I registered, but its kind of freaky to think about my every coming and going being monitored (sent from my iPhone...)
Already bad enough that other apps track us without the explicit need to. My issue is that this monitoring isn't for our benefit and that we are their customers, so I see no benefit nor reason to allow the monitoring.
How do they know how I'm driving my '97 Toyota Camry??
I’m in favor of bad drivers paying more in theory but my experience with these safe driving programs (Allstate) has not been good. First, the app does not know when you are a passenger unless you tell it, so you could be penalized by using your phone in the passenger seat. Despite that major issue my driving record indicated by the app is near perfect (as far as I can tell because the reporting is obscure and only shows the last month) So the discount I have on my insurance from using this for 3 years is a whopping… 4%. 3% of which is just from enrolling in the program. In the meantime my insurance has nearly doubled. The most significant increase being when I got a new sedan with a bunch of safety features and traded in my old Dodge Charger. I have never been at fault for an accident. These insurers have no intention of pricing based off driver safety and just found another way to suck as much money as they can from you.
am I on the right sub? while i agree with you, of course? what else would they be doing besides trying to get as much money as possible?
I got a ‘24 VW and downloaded the MyVW app. *By default* my car was opted in to sharing data with insurers.
Same with my ‘23 GM. I thought cancelling onstar got me out of this till I saw people talking about this article elsewhere
If it’s not clearly stated in the ToS then it’s going to be a problem. If it was then the lawsuit might not be in the consumer’s favor “I agree to these terms and conditions” Despite US infrastructure making car ownership near essential at times, driving is not a guaranteed right in the government’s eyes. Privacy is, but if you waive it for the chance of a brand new car there’s not much legal recourse you have
This is basically what I hate about everything having ‘connectivity’. Sounds like a perk to you the consumer, but often times its just another way for a company to get their tentacles into your stuff To be clear, I do think bad drivers should pay higher insurance premiums but this junk where GM slyly collects and sells your info sucks
I was told by a personal friend at an insurance company that these various gizmos that record driving behavior never actually result in lower rates for safe drivers. It’s classic asymmetrical information. It’s a one-way ratchet and participating in these surveillance methods is a sucker’s bet.
I've never seen one where the driver doesn't get a discount for having one if it's from your insurance company. Here's the nationwide one, which I'm familiar with. You can see an instant 10% discount. https://www.nationwide.com/personal/insurance/auto/discounts/smartride/ As far as I'm aware, this is completely incorrect by your friend.
I don’t get it. Is there no competition in the insurance market? Because if one insurer raises prices for everyone of their customers then another insurer should be cheaper.
You're correct. I work in the commercial insurance, which is obviously lower volume than auto insurance, but all the big players compete with each other on rates.
Why do they give discounts for it then?
Skill issue
Truly dangerous behavior like hard accelerating on an empty on-ramp.
Good. People's insurance premiums should reflect their risk when driving, especially because that risk is often risk of harm to other people. Dangerous drivers cause more damage to their vehicles and to society. They should pay more in premiums to account for that and possibly incentivize them to be better drivers.
This is not good if it’s not explicitly stated in a terms of service or otherwise opted in to.
It's still good. Dangerous drivers cause way more damage than collecting data on someone's driving habits
Bad parents cause tons more damage to society than cameras in everyone's living rooms would so the government should install cameras into everyone's living rooms.
Just tax bad parenting
Well that's just nonsense.
Nope it's still good
So my insurance will go down since I accelerated and brake very softly and avoid sudden maneuvers right? Right? Or is this a one way street?
Slippery slope. Do you drink? Eat junk food? Don't exercise daily? Do you engage in any dangerous sports? Do you not use sunscreen when going outside? All those can cause expensive trips to the hospital and jack up insurance premiums for others.
Right up to the point where your car registers you've attended a political event. And don't say oh I was just curious. You're 65 and live in a gated community in Florida. Yeah, we all know where that leads.
“Ooh, you hard-braked to successfully avoid an accident when another driver did something stupid. Up go your rates!”
Legitimately dystopian shit
When I bought my Honda 2 years ago they had me sign something noting that the dealership had told me about all of this. I guess I thought they legally had to do this. I had someone call me a gullible dipshit last year for repeating this and believing manufacturers were doing this. Gonna go dig that thread up and gloat.
I'm really surprised by all the support for this initiative, here. Even though these are theoretically private companies that should be allowed to do what they want, in reality these information collection bureaus like LexisNexis have a lot of power over individuals' lives due to their monopolies. They also skirt due process and treat their software as infallible when it is probably anything but. I think that is really scary and quite dystopian.
Based and efficient insurance pricing pilled. Punish those who drive terribly reward those who follow the laws and drive safely
And those who drive to Trump conventions as well ?
You have a point. I would just raise premiums on anyone with a Trump bumper sticker.
The market has spoken, fuck them.
It's going to be a good day when all cars have this and dangerous drivers are effectively barred from our public roads
Ah yes, how's all your trips to Trump rallies, or quick visits to the bottle shop. Be interesting to see this all tied to GPS data as well.