Insurance Companies putting a GPS in your Car

[Boges]

How does tracking everything someone does in their car prevent fraudulent claims? People can still stage accidents if they want.

I'm very skeptical that all these insurers are so eager to get all your information to lower your rate. They admitted today that there's no way you can get the full discount if you drive more than 15,000 kms a year, regardless of your driving habits.

[bleeding heart]

I'm very skeptical that all these insurers are so eager to get all your information to lower your rate.

OK, now here we agree.

[GostHacked]

How does tracking everything someone does in their car prevent fraudulent claims? People can still stage accidents if they want.

I'm very skeptical that all these insurers are so eager to get all your information to lower your rate. They admitted today that there's no way you can get the full discount if you drive more than 15,000 kms a year, regardless of your driving habits.

Always question why the carrot is being dangled in front of your face.

[Michael Hardner]

How does tracking everything someone does in their car prevent fraudulent claims? People can still stage accidents if they want.

I'm very skeptical that all these insurers are so eager to get all your information to lower your rate. They admitted today that there's no way you can get the full discount if you drive more than 15,000 kms a year, regardless of your driving habits.

Not just fraudulent claims, but lying about mileage for example. There are likely people who lie about their mileage and as such are ripping off the system.

[GostHacked]

Not just fraudulent claims, but lying about mileage for example. There are likely people who lie about their mileage and as such are ripping off the system.

So go after the fraud. Stop penalizing everyone for some things a minority of the population do.

[Boges]

Not just fraudulent claims, but lying about mileage for example. There are likely people who lie about their mileage and as such are ripping off the system.

People lying about their commutes aren't what's jacking up rates. It's people staging accidents then bilking the health benefits for every cent the policy allows.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2012/02/23/car_insurance_scam_37_arrested_in_project_whiplash_raids.html?app=noRedirect

Edited October 7, 2013 by Boges

[gunrutz]

So lets say you spped ocaisionally, or you accelerate quickly ocaisionally, or who knows what else, lets say then that you are involved in accident, who doesn't believe that the lawyers involed would use any information, including your tendancy to speed or you tenadancy to accelerate quickly against you?

These things even track how quickly you stop, so no coming to a quick stop for a yellow for you, that might cost you, just coast through. Heavy traffic? Well you had better clog up the highway at the speed limit and try not to slow down too fast when you are cut off, o and be careful when merging, don't break that acceleration limit. So eventually everyone will need to have one of these just to protect themselves from ridiculously high rates from not having one, i mean, what about your drivning habits are you trying to hide anyway, and to protect yourself form others who have them, i mean, they must be a good driver if they have one of these boxes, what are you trying to hide? They couldnt have been at fault, what are the odds? unfortunately these trackers don't track the intelligence of the driver who has them, and quite often it isn't the speeder who is doing the dangerous thing.

Then of course everyone's rates will continue to rise for 'other reasons', by then no one will bother to question those who sold us out to the insurance companies for a small break in rates, all the while those companies will be making more than ever. Seriously people, do you think they are doing this just to keep the rates low for us? If i was running those companies it's exactly what i would do, it makes complete sense.

[Michael Hardner]

So go after the fraud. Stop penalizing everyone for some things a minority of the population do.

The costs to detect it through other means would cause rates to rise as well.

[Michael Hardner]

People lying about their commutes aren't what's jacking up rates. It's people staging accidents then bilking the health benefits for every cent the policy allows.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2012/02/23/car_insurance_scam_37_arrested_in_project_whiplash_raids.html?app=noRedirect

Perhaps, but the article you quoted doesn't say that explicitly.

One would presume that tracking mileage will help control costs, and as such reduce rates for everyone who opts in.

[Michael Hardner]

So lets say you spped ocaisionally, or you accelerate quickly ocaisionally, or who knows what else, lets say then that you are involved in accident, who doesn't believe that the lawyers involed would use any information, including your tendancy to speed or you tenadancy to accelerate quickly against you?

i mean, they must be a good driver if they have one of these boxes, what are you trying to hide? They couldnt have been at fault, what are the odds? unfortunately these trackers don't track the intelligence of the driver who has them, and quite often it isn't the speeder who is doing the dangerous thing.

Then of course everyone's rates will continue to rise for 'other reasons', by then no one will bother to question those who sold us out to the insurance companies for a small break in rates, all the while those companies will be making more than ever. Seriously people, do you think they are doing this just to keep the rates low for us? If i was running those companies it's exactly what i would do, it makes complete sense.

Well, your post is a little strange to me.

Paragraph 1: If they're tracking your driving to that level of detail, they would be able to track your speed for an accident, and as such they wouldn't need to use your past behavior against you - they would have blackbox type data about your accident.

Paragraph 2: They're providing a service, so your rights to privacy are limited anyway. If they offer me the option to put a black box in my car 24/7 to track my driving, with a promise of a 50% reduction in rates, well guess what I'm going to do. So sad for you if you want to pay for the right to speed.

Paragraph 3: This paragraph ignores market forces, as well as the interventionist impulse of governments when faced with the possibility of non-competition.

[Icebound]

Smart meters for electricity, GPS tracking for insurance purposes, etc. etc, .... are all excellent, perhaps necessary, technologies for eliminating fraud, ensuring fairness, and keeping cost under control.

The problem is that the technology is being implemented ass-backward.

No service provider needs to know anything about HOW I use his service... all that information can be calculated IN MY HOME, (or on my car) and a final total forwarded to him. He can upload updated rates or firmware revision to my calculating device but downloads NOTHING from it, except a FINAL TOTAL of what I owe...

Now, if he does not trust the "security" of the device that he installed in my home..... well, then.... that tells us something about whether such tracking devices should exist in the first place.

In detail....

There is no need... with todays technologies... for the power company to know when, or even how much, electricity I used, in order to bill me. The "smart-meter" in my house could contain all the information necessary to do the calculations and simply send a number at the end of the month to the utility...."this guy owes $256.31" or whatever.

Similarly, the "tracking device" installed in the car can, at the end of the month or whenever... simply calculate... "based on this guys driving habits, he should pay <whatever> for next month's coverage...." Nothing else need be uploaded. (....Sure, insurance is meant to be "in advance" so last month's activity may not be a good indicator of next month's coverage... but the actual gps information does no better. From the insurer's point of view, it will actually round out in the long run... from the insured's point of view, it may be a pain to be paying a big premium for the month right after retirement, just because I did a lot of high-mileage commuting the month before.... but it, too, will average out in the long run.....)

[Michael Hardner]

Similarly, the "tracking device" installed in the car can, at the end of the month or whenever... simply calculate... "based on this guys driving habits, he should pay <whatever> for next month's coverage...." Nothing else need be uploaded.

You're right, nothing else needs to be uploaded. But for those of us who would like to volunteer our detailed driving information in exchange for lower rates, it would be mutually beneficial to have that option.

[GostHacked]

The costs to detect it through other means would cause rates to rise as well.

You realize that modern vehicles have a black box that records things during an impact? Technology already exists to determine this. So there really is no extra cost. Analyzing the black box can determine what happened in a crash.

[Michael Hardner]

You realize that modern vehicles have a black box that records things during an impact? Technology already exists to determine this. So there really is no extra cost. Analyzing the black box can determine what happened in a crash.

I suppose the idea for reduced rates in exchange for access to data came from such developments in technology.

[bush_cheney2004]

I suppose the idea for reduced rates in exchange for access to data came from such developments in technology.

Sorta....the technology was added to automotive products concurrently with engine/drivetrain computer controls and event sensing/sequencing for safety systems (e.g. airbag deployment). The data exists and persists because technology uses it in real time and for car diagnostics. Government mandated the requirements that led to many such systems (e.g. OBD II ), and now the ambulance chasers and insurance companies want to use such data for their own purpose(s).

Many people are unaware that their car or truck has an easily accessed data port that can be queried by consumer scan tools or PC based applications. They wil drive around for weeks/months with a MIL/CEL light on with no idea how to easily turn it off.

[Bonam]

I think there is plenty of precedent for companies offering free/cheaper services in exchange for access to data/information that they can collect from you. Not much else to say really...

[Icebound]

You're right, nothing else needs to be uploaded. But for those of us who would like to volunteer our detailed driving information in exchange for lower rates, it would be mutually beneficial to have that option.

I am only saying that there should be NO NEED for you to "volunteer ..your ... information".

Their software ON YOUR CAR could identify what sort of risk you are, and just give the insurer that one output..."this guy is a 3 out of 10", or whatever. Whether you are a 3 because you commute 4 hours a day on heavy traffic.... or because you take many long trips to your mistress at 2:00 in the morning.... does not need to be any of their business.... Their software has taken that into account, but the insurer does not need to know the specifics.

NOW... if you want to dispute the software's findings, THEN you would have to go through an arbitration which WOULD open the raw data, but that would be up to you.

[Michael Hardner]

I am only saying that there should be NO NEED for you to "volunteer ..your ... information".

Their software ON YOUR CAR could identify what sort of risk you are, and just give the insurer that one output..."this guy is a 3 out of 10", or whatever. Whether you are a 3 because you commute 4 hours a day on heavy traffic.... or because you take many long trips to your mistress at 2:00 in the morning.... does not need to be any of their business.... Their software has taken that into account, but the insurer does not need to know the specifics.

NOW... if you want to dispute the software's findings, THEN you would have to go through an arbitration which WOULD open the raw data, but that would be up to you.

Ok, so their software analyzes your driving information to provide a risk number ? Doesn't seem worth it for the consumer to gamble on their factor, only to find out that their rate could go up ?

[Icebound]

Ok, so their software analyzes your driving information to provide a risk number ? Doesn't seem worth it for the consumer to gamble on their factor, only to find out that their rate could go up ?

Up from what?

From where it SHOULD be, or from where it is "now"?

Rates have evolved to where they are now through a not-so-transparent evolution that has you paying some arbitrary rate which may or may not reflect your driving style.... and where you have no way in hell of knowing whether you are overpaying or not.

At least a consistent algorithm in all cars would treat all drivers the same.

But whether you pay more or not is not the question in this thread.... the question is whether you would "have" to provide personal information to get the desired result.... which is to calculate and charge a premium based on risk....

And my argument is simply that we are not using our technology correctly.... that we can still produce the result which the providers want.... and do it without showing them our detailed personal information. If only somebody would spend a little more effort instead of those quick-Band-Aid solutions that our western society is so good at.

...

[Boges]

Up from what?

From where it SHOULD be, or from where it is "now"?

Rates have evolved to where they are now through a not-so-transparent evolution that has you paying some arbitrary rate which may or may not reflect your driving style.... and where you have no way in hell of knowing whether you are overpaying or not.

At least a consistent algorithm in all cars would treat all drivers the same.

But whether you pay more or not is not the question in this thread.... the question is whether you would "have" to provide personal information to get the desired result.... which is to calculate and charge a premium based on risk....

And my argument is simply that we are not using our technology correctly.... that we can still produce the result which the providers want.... and do it without showing them our detailed personal information. If only somebody would spend a little more effort instead of those quick-Band-Aid solutions that our western society is so good at.

...

It would still be arbitrary because the companies will pay what the market will bare. We have a private system in Ontario where you can leave a company if they charge too much.

You'd really support companies charging you for infractions as you drive. You speed ONCE! they have the right to raise your rates, even if a cop doesn't issue a ticket. That's a total Big Brother mentality.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Boges

[Michael Hardner]

Up from what?

From where it SHOULD be, or from where it is "now"?

But whether you pay more or not is not the question in this thread.... the question is whether you would "have" to provide personal information to get the desired result.... which is to calculate and charge a premium based on risk....

And my argument is simply that we are not using our technology correctly.... that we can still produce the result which the providers want.... and do it without showing them our detailed personal information. If only somebody would spend a little more effort instead of those quick-Band-Aid solutions that our western society is so good at.

...

1. Where it is "now".

2. By "personal information", I assume you're referring to the more detailed information I was talking about.

3. I appreciate that piece of new information, and the idea that thinking about such things can produce more of a win-win.

[Boges]

1. Where it is "now".

2. By "personal information", I assume you're referring to the more detailed information I was talking about.

3. I appreciate that piece of new information, and the idea that thinking about such things can produce more of a win-win.

I'm think you're a bit trusting of these companies. Maybe initially it'll be a win-win but I suspect there will be unintended consequences of providing your insurers with this information.

[bleeding heart]

Just incidentally, there has been a lot of talk about auto insurance here in NB lately. It appears Nb-ers are being gouged, by rates that don't accurately reflect industry standards.

No one's noticed till now, because our rates are among the lowest in the country.

But before you think this is a contradiction, it's not: we have cheaper cars than the national average, lower accident rates, lower payouts for damages and accidents, and smaller (and fewer) lawsuits.

So the companies are indeed overcharging us, relative to the rest of the country--relative to their own standards--even though our rates are cheaper than most.

I bring it up only to say that that Boges reminded me: insurance companies are comprised of monumental a-holes.

So no, you cannot trust them.

[Bryan]

When you sign up for auto insurance, they ask you things like "How long is your commute?" "Where do you park every night?".

They do? I've been driving for 30 years, and I've never once been asked a single question about how or where I use my vehicle.

[Bonam]

They do? I've been driving for 30 years, and I've never once been asked a single question about how or where I use my vehicle.

Umm, whenever you sign up for insurance, you input information that answers those questions.

Address:

Annual Mileage:

Daily Commute or Pleasure Use Only:

Those have been on every single car insurance quote form I've ever filled out in either Canada or the US.