[AUTO] Trading Privacy for an Insurance Discount? - Comments Page 1

I recently switched insurance to The Hartford. While they did not offer a 'plug-in' device, they did say I could get a discount by using a smartphone app called Truelane. Are you familiar with it? It seems to be a completely unreliable app - I've had to uninstall and reinstall at least 4 times. Any thoughts?

quote->Do you allow your auto insurance company to monitor your driving?

HA HA HA ROTFLMAO
:-D When hell freezes over.

Thanks Bob. Looks like a milestone in the impending death of privacy.

These devices and options have been around for a few years now. I don't think the relatively small discount that could be possible is worth the risks.

I see those plug-ins as conditional veiled threats invading your privacy on a reward promise you might not ever see. If you haven't filed a claim or required your insurer to pay out on some boo-boo committed accidentally for over 2 decades driving, living then as far as I'm concerned that insurer can infer that you are capable of being responsible on your own & it does not need a damn glorified electronic snitch to monitor every moving or wakeful activity. What one chooses to do with his/her/their time as a freedom-loving individual not interfering in the lives of others is none of their damn business.

That is when I feel exceedingly glad I'm driving a 41 years old Mercedes 300D...

Dear Bob,
Thanks very much for this article. I have long thought that privacy concerns far outweigh the tiny bit of money that can be saved by using these intrusive devices.
So, I agree with Len. No way.

I'm not sure how much privacy any of us have left anymore, but I'm trying to limit what companies can collect as much as I can. My driving record should speak for itself. They don't need to micromanage me.

I recently changed insurance companies. And I too got the little thing mailed to me. I had just had a death in the family and the virus had just shut down my state. I was barely driving anywhere.

I never hooked it up. When the insurance company sent me a notice that I would have to pay the difference for no discount - I happily paid the money.

I am not happy with so many intrusions into my life. I lead a dull life, but I don't want the entire world to know that.

Not a chance!

I used to have AllState, for years, they offered me one of those and I took it. But in MN, we get snow, if your ABS ever kicks in? That's counted as hard braking. I hated that thing. Next renewal period I moved to USAA and have never looked back, if you're a veteran, you won't find a better company or rates than they offer. Great service too - and no gadgets.

It's hard enough to get insurance companies to pay out without adding to the loopholes. If some unsecured load on the vehicle in front of me decided to strike out on its own and I have to brake hard to avoid it why should that affect my insurance costs negatively? Given the circumstances of the hard braking (which the insurance company will never consider) I should be rewarded with being a good enough driver to avoid an accident rather than penalized for hard braking.
As for the terms, most I've bothered to read through state somewhere that the terms are subject to change without notice and it's my responsibility to stay up on the changes.
That's a hard pass for me.

I probably drive at work at least fifty times the miles I drive socially - I'm a professional driver - so how will any insurer of my car know how badly I drive at work?
These things are known as' black boxes' in the UK, and compulsory for some younger or multi-claim drivers, or they don't get insurance, but for most of us they're an unnecessary and unwelcome intrusion.
There's even a bumper sticker about - "Slow driver - Black Box fitted!"

If you turn off your smartphone, does it actually stop tracking your location, or do you have to remove the SIM card?

Bob - Thanks for another great article

I am less worried about privacy. I am more concerned that an insurance carrier will deny coverage following an accident, based on data provided by the monitoring device. It wouldn't take much, just a determination that you are over the speed limit, and a clause in the policy requiring you to obey all traffic laws and regulations.

For a future article, I am intrigued by the FIXD device. Does it have value for the average car owner, just in helping maintain proper vehicle operation?

A better option is a dash cam, so they can’t track you but you have evidence in case of accidents.

I had one for 3 months an received a 20% discount due to my good driving. I was able to log in and see all data right after returning home. When I saw "hard braking" listed I started noting the time when I braked for lights that turned yellow and I was able to correlate. They taught me to go through lights that I never would have, before. When I brought it to their attention, they called "BS". !

I never would have permanently installed one but a 3 month period seemed OK.

At one point in the '90s, Geico would penalize drivers who owned radar detectors.
A decade later, automotive 'black boxes' were introduced as EventDataRecorders (EDR).
By 2004, around 40 million (?) passenger vehicles were equipped w/EDRs.
Early last decade, Federal law for EDR (data collection) standardization stalled; while GM vehicles were mostly all equipped with OnStar.
The federal Driver Privacy Act of 2015 was enacted on December 4, 2015. It stated that the owner or lessee of a motor vehicle "is" the owner of the data collected by the EDR.
Late last month (that would be June 2020), a new law — the California Consumer Privacy Act, A.B. 375 — affords California residents an array of new rights, starting with the right to be informed about what kinds of personal data companies have collected and why it was collected, etc.
Today, with 82% of Americans owning smartphones; the bread-crumb trails that we leave behind are ginormous and CCPA is not even doing a good job playing catch-up!
Price of "FREE" has never been more expensive and costly.

I did not read all the comments but here is another thought. If you are involved in something requiring police involvement, suppose they notice a device in the OBDC port. They might need a court order but could use the data to charge you; certainly could influence the police report. This is a well known issue for dash cameras.We tend to only think of ways these devices benefit us, not necessarily how they might benefit someone else.

That data is subject to a subpoena in a civil case by a party that wants proof of where (and when) you have been. Your insurer could be subpoenaed for the data (if relevant in the case). It could be in a divorce or an auto accident dispute, or it could be in any other action. How about the case you filed vs. your employer---don't you think they would love to have a record of where you have been during work hours?

If the government did this, all hell would break loose, especially with the Fox so-called "news" crowd. Why is it OK for us all to be a frog in the pot of heating corporate water instead?