Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Businesses

Automakers Are Sharing Consumers' Driving Behavior With Insurance Companies (nytimes.com) 117

Automakers, including G.M., Honda, Kia, and Hyundai, have been collecting detailed driving data from millions of Americans through internet-enabled connected-car apps. The data, which includes information on speed, hard braking, and rapid accelerations, is shared with data brokers like LexisNexis. These brokers then provide the information to insurance companies, which use it to personalize coverage and set rates, The New York Times reported Monday. While automakers and data brokers claim to have drivers' consent, the partnerships are often obscured in fine print and unclear privacy policies. The practice raises concerns about privacy and transparency, as some drivers may be unaware that their driving habits are being tracked and shared with third parties.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Automakers Are Sharing Consumers' Driving Behavior With Insurance Companies

Comments Filter:
  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @03:46PM (#64307675)

    how do they know who is driving the car or the owner of the car?

    • How are they allowed to collect driving data without the owner's knowledge and agreement ?

      • by ewibble ( 1655195 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @04:19PM (#64307773)

        Even if they put this on the first line of the purchase agreement in bold letters, the drivers would still sign it. Drivers will buy the car they want the fact that it collects their info is a minor point and is unlikely to change their mind. What is a car purchaser going do do say no, and then go to the next car manufacturer that does the same thing anyway. Go without a car?

        Its an unfair clause and should not be allowed without it being opt-in. There is no need to provide that information to any third party for your driving experience so should not be done.

        • by MeNeXT ( 200840 )

          Cross out the clause on data sharing.

          • Cross out the clause on data sharing.

            IANAL but I'm pretty sure contract law doesn't work like that. Contract revisions have to be agreed upon by both parties. Furthermore, these days you're likely to sign all your paperwork on an iPad anyway, where your choices are either to sign the paperwork as presented or not buy the car.

            • That is how contract law works. You can strike and sign what you agree to. Whether they accept it is up to them. If they have no way of refusing the contract changes , then it already is not a real contract

              • It would work that way if a person who had the right to alter it could see it, but I doubt the sales person you are signing it with has that right, it means absolutely nothing, either way its not opting in, its opting out.

                And even say it is that way do you think the car company will stop selling your data, I doubt it. Yeah you could sue them good luck with suing a multinational car company I don't rate your chances.

              • It absolutely IS NOT how that works. Otherwise I would cross out the APR on a loan agreement and just write in whatever the fuck I wanted.

                If they have no way of refusing the contract changes

                It's called NOT SELLING YOU THE CAR dumbass. That's how they refuse it.

                You are literally trying to reiterate what was already said but in some "I'm going to try and split hairs here..." No dumbass, that's not how it works, the end.

                • What part of "Whether they accept it is up to them." do you not understand???

                  Either party is free to cross out whatever terms they don't want on a contract. The other party is under no obligation to accept. If the terms are reasonable then they will accept. If not then they won't.

                  > Otherwise I would cross out the APR on a loan agreement and just write in whatever the fuck I wanted.

                  Tell me you know nothing about mutual assent [cornell.edu] without telling me you know nothing about mutual assent. /s

                  You CAN write what

                • You know, I bring with me the Texas apartment rental form, prefilled out, with 0s for every charge.

                  Every single time, the agent blindly accepts it.

                  SEveral times, I’ve early terminated my lease and paid nothing.

                  It is legit how it works. You should try it.

                  I even do it with non-compete clauses and all sorts of stuff, including retaining my rights to software I write, in employment contracts. It’s worked for 15 years and only 2 or 3 companies ever caught on.

                  • by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
                    Well in that case the agent is not doing their job, not reading a contravt before they sign it seems rather negligent on their part if you ask me. I bet if more people started doing that, they would start actually reading the contract instate just singing like a zombie
                • They have already sold me the car. I modify and accept a contract later....Which is what makes an invalid contract, it should have been presented before the sale to be valid.

          • Cross out the clause on data sharing.

            Unless you're a good driver.

            The data sharing will result in lower rates.

            • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

              by Mattatron ( 781116 )

              Will it? Or will the current rates be the "good driver" rates and everything else be higher?

              • Will it? Or will the current rates be the "good driver" rates and everything else be higher?

                Insurance is a competitive business.

                If companies could arbitrarily charge higher rates, they'd already be doing it.

                • You’re categorically wrong.

                  They always give you the “good driver” rate and your price 99% of the time can only go up. It’s a complete scam due to plausible deniability.

              • by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
                You mean people actually beying charge for the risk the put the insurer in + a bit of a profit margin, their a business after all. Scandalous I tell you scandalous, call the press, Snark aside, but I don't see the problem, unless ofc you are nit as good a driver as you think you are....
        • It's done via software and a nag screen to agree to terms. Sometimes you have to do it every time you start the vehicle other vehicles would be after a reset or update and seemingly at random in between. People just instinctually press the agree button so they can use their entertainment and navigation system.
        • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
          its done by the app so it technically *is* opt-in. Dont use the app and go without remote start and door unlocks, opening the liftgate, etc. As soon as you install the app you are opting in, they wont let you ala carte the components within the app.
          • That's not opting in, losing functionality is does not need tracking, or for them to sell to third parties is not opting in, you could also say buying the car is opting in.

            They should say out of the kindness of your heart will you let us sell information about your driving habits to third parties. Or alternatively pay you an agreed some for it.

          • just say the owner of the car did not agree but just an allowed user of the car.

      • How are they allowed to collect driving data without the owner's knowledge and agreement ?

        Probably via that cool new car app they market to every new car owner, which of course obtains consent through the EULA no car owner bothers to read.

      • It's likely anonymized and delivered as aggregate and as the summary states it is agreed to through the fine print when they accept the terms and conditions. When you start modern cars for the first time or after a software update they nag you to agree to terms in order to use your entertainment and navigation system. On mine at least I can disable anonymized data sharing at the expense of some luxury features.
        • I don't care if its anonymized, it is them selling your data to make money. If selling tickets to movies I buy on blue ray is stealing then taking my data and selling it to insurance companies is stealing too.

      • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
        its collected by the same app that probably remote starts your car and unlocks the doors etc. Im sure its in the EULA, which puts you over a barrel. Want to use that remote start feature you paid for? Well we are forcing you to share your driving data for the privilege of using a feature you paid good money for already.
      • How are they allowed to collect driving data without the owner's knowledge and agreement ?

        Owners have almost certainly agreed. That is in the terms of service. There's also good reason for manufacturers to claim data on how their devices are used. That can lead to better devices.

        What absolutely must be done is a major fucking curb on the passing of this data to third parties which would weaponise it.

      • Just like any invasion of privacy these days. If there are actually laws, there is zero protection and enforcement of them. You just have to assume everything in the vehicle is monitored and sent up somewhere, or even the vehicle has an AI subsystem to go through the data to find the useful points to send to the insurance companies, then sell the vehicle to rubes^H^H^H^H^Hcustomers as "AI enabled".

        My question... is this just GM doing this crap, or is it more car makers? These need to be named and shamed,

      • It is clearly written in the user agreement

        "But the plans were on display..."
        "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."
        "That's the display department."
        "With a flashlight."
        "Ah, well, the lights had probably gone."
        "So had the stairs."
        "But look, you found the notice, didn't you?"
        "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard.'"

    • Drivers are not insured, cars are.

      • by MeNeXT ( 200840 )

        The insurance is issued to the car owner not the car. The car is not delinquent when a payment is missed. Most vehicle insurance covers the driver when they are driving other vehicles such as rentals. Read you policy, it may even cover you when riding your bike.

        • Not quite true. When you lend your car to a friend or family member the car is still covered by the owner's insurance. Rental companies also have to carry insurance on their vehicles. Using your insurance on a rental is often to get a discount the rental. It's why in many places it is advised not to bother with optional upgraded insurance on rentals since the car is already insured and you are protected by law.
          • Except, in many states-- despite your coverage-- the time needed to repair an out of service vehicle can be charged to you, which your insurer is not liable for.

            Read contracts carefully. Know what your policy does and does not cover if you rent, lease, or use an app for a Zip-like car.

          • Wrong. Rental companies self-insure, and they only carry insurance on their cars in states in which you've told them that you're driving. This means if you rent a car in Chattanooga, TN, and drive to Nashville, TN via I-24, you will have to add Georgia to your list of states because the interstate highway passes through Georgia just east of Chattanooga.

      • Drivers are not insured, cars are.

        If we’re merely insuring the car and somehow not against the driver, then perhaps you can explain why the 70-year old Corvette owner with a spotless driving record pays only $100/month, while the 18-year old in the same car will be charged 3x.

        Auto Insurance is warped far beyond just the car. Otherwise cars would be called “property”.

    • Does Who's driving it matter? The insurance is on the car, sure pricing is in part driver related, but in general the risk involved is based on what happens when the car is on the road. And if that is mainly not you, but your children or spouse. That I guess their quote better reflects the risk?
      • by flink ( 18449 )

        The insurance is on the car but cars don't have driving records that follow them around? Whose record should the data be applied to if multiple people drive it?

        • This gives them insight into the risk of a certain geography to set rates by. If they can see certain areas have people driving like maniacs or poorly designed infrastructure that causes accidents they can justify raising the rates on people most likely to be driving in that area. Alternately they could lower them.

          Individualized tracking is usually opt-in for a discount on your insurance and used to be it's own device but has now migrated to an app.
      • Does Who's driving it matter? The insurance is on the car, sure pricing is in part driver related, but in general the risk involved is based on what happens when the car is on the road.

        If risk was all about a car being merely “on the road”, then the 70-year old Corvette owner would be paying the same as the 18-year old Corvette owner.

        Risk, is quite literally all about the driver.

    • The insurers don't actually care. They use
      well crafted lies to justify higher premiums.

      An actuary only needs the vehicle's primary zip code and
      commuting distance to calculate a *fair* premium.
      Then the finance person looks at the insurer's investments
      (that's where your premiums go), and adjusts the premium based
      on how well the insurer is doing with its investments.
      (ie. if the stock market crashes, expect higher premiums).

      • That's a pretty accurate description of how insurance works.

        I'm just curious where you think lying comes in?
      • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        An actuary only needs the vehicle's primary zip code and
        commuting distance to calculate a *fair* premium.

        Well sure I guess you build a really crappy model on very few inputs if you want to. Have been insurance industry adjacent for a large part of my career; this is bullshit any of the non-cutrate plays legitimately use more than zip code and miles driven.

        Then the finance person looks at the insurer's investments
        (that's where your premiums go), and adjusts the premium based
        on how well the insurer is doing with its investments.

        Well yes, and no. Most insurers design on premiums vs benefits being more or less revenue neutral game over time. Adjusted to accommodate state laws, market conditions, competition, etc. The profit part of their operation comes from investing the premiums i

    • by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @03:58PM (#64307711) Homepage

      In the case of GM, they're really aggressive about getting your personal information when setting up OnStar. When I recently snagged a pretty good deal on a used Bolt (one of the recalled ones that got a battery replacement), the dealer tried the whole "Let's go out to the car and set up your OnStar account" thing.

      I told them "I've got other stuff I need to do today. I'll set it up myself later." I never did set it up, because without the subscription it is completely useless. So far, car's been working fine without the snoopware setup.

      • by postbigbang ( 761081 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @05:14PM (#64307979)

        Except your insurance company knows your VIN and can cross reference your "anonymous" data with your insurer's db.

        Don't kid yourself. You must not use any app, and must disconnect both antennas in your car, thus disabling both the radio and OnStar. Worse, using the entertainment system in some cars can render the telemetry data once the service dept logs into your car.

        Even used cars from the 2000s have this data. You need to look at every model to determine what your data exposure risks are.

        IMHO, no used car should have data sent without specific consent. Otherwise, many theories of invasion of privacy come to mind.

        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          Worse, using the entertainment system in some cars can render the telemetry data once the service dept logs into your car.

          This is a big one - your car might not be able to transmit the data in real time, but the data can certainly be recorded via logs that get downloaded by the service techs and then uploaded when they do a scan of your car.

          And lots of modules contain lots of juicy data - your ECU and powertrain modules often contain information about your driving habits - in a way the powertrain "learns" h

        • IMHO, no used car should have data sent without specific consent.

          You're playing cat and mouse with the cause rather than dealing with the impact. Stopping users handing over data won't happen. Even in privacy loving Europe. What absolutely needs to exist are strict laws with severe punishment for handing over the data to 3rd parties.

          I don't care if telemetry is collected from my car for the purposes of improving the car (especially in the days of software updates for cars). What I care about is that this data absolutely never fucking leaves the car company's hands and th

          • \Kleptocracy is a horrific robbery, and the sale of telemetry data is a prime example. No matter the jurisdiction, removal of private information, and not simple anonymizing is terribly important.

            The creep of creeps peeping into personal lives must stop.

      • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
        is there no app to warm up the car on cold winters or remote unlock the car incase some dumbass locked their keys in the car? Thats usually how the car phones home.
        • Yeah, Chevy has an app for the car, but thus far I haven't run into any use case where having the app would serve a useful purpose so I never installed it on my phone. Certainly Google probably knows my driving habits when I'm using their mapping software, but that's pretty much unavoidable in any car.

      • Onstar works even without a subscription. I guess they pay a flat fee for low-speed access to cellular broadband networks. Amazon used to do the same for its Whispernet for Kindles.
    • The Honda App requires registration and login. That's probably how.
    • They don't care. They aren't trying to prosecute you for bad driving. They are simply trying to charge you more money if the vehicle that they insure gets driven badly. If you let knuckleheads drive your vehicle then you probably should be charged more in insurance.

      • by dfm3 ( 830843 )
        So if I drive carefully, stay off of high-accident-prone roads, hypermill, and don't turn or brake aggressively, my insurance company is going to reach out to me and lower my rates, right... right?
        • Well, yeah

          https://www.progressive.com/au... [progressive.com]

          • by dfm3 ( 830843 )
            That's different though, in that case it's consensual in the sense that I'm signing up for that program, versus haven given my "consent" in the form of a clause buried in some click-through EULA.
        • Believe me, I would be upset if I found out that my auto maker was using my driving data against me. That's part of the reason that my daily driver is a 96 Honda Civic. I drive carefully (as evidenced by the fact that I have been driving the same car for nearly 30 years), but that doesn't mean that I want anyone keeping tabs on how I drive. I especially don't want someone keeping tabs on how I drive without my knowledge. Worse, the automakers are profiting by sharing that information and I don't get a c

    • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
      the article says the data is fed from the car to the app on the smartphone. So most likely they can tell based on whose smartphone is driving? I suppose it wont matter if you drive like shit and your wife drives like a saint. Its a blended rate most likely based on the percentage of time you drive (like shit) vs the other driving style. If 65% of the time the car is driven like shit, then it probably wont matter that 35% of the time a safe driver is behind the wheel.
      • the article says the data is fed from the car to the app on the smartphone.

        And another reason not to have a "smart" phone. Nothing like a good 'ol flip phone to keep the snooping at bay.

    • by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @05:37PM (#64308057)

      >"how do they know who is driving the car or the owner of the car?"

      And why is braking, cornering, or accelerating "hard" considered "bad driving"? That is exactly what these people have to deal with when they put an insurance-company-provider's datalog device in their cars.

      Without any context, they are pulling presumptions out of their asses. Many of the best drivers could very well be labeled as bad based on some stupid formula. And yet the things that WOULD CERTAINLY define bad drivers- distracted driving, tailgating, changing lanes without looking first, not using turn signals, cutting people off, weaving, blocking the highway left lane, not maintaining proper lanes at multilane signals, braking unnecessarily while trying to merge from an on-ramp, blowing through lights and stop signs, driving well below the speed of general traffic, driving with headlights HORRIBLY aimed (or not on when needed), etc, etc... none of that will be detected or apparently matter. Unless you are caught, which is very rare because patrols only seem to care about speeding and not coming to an ABSOLUTE POSITIVE stop at a stupid stop sign where you can see clearly in all directions.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        A common problem is cars with small engines where you need to floor the accelerator to get up hills or get up to speed when joining a motorway. The black box records it as hard acceleration and the insurance company demands more money from a good drive. As such, I don't recommend black boxes, even if the offered premium is lower.

      • When 20% of severe accidents have strong braking involved, it becomes a "truth" that hard braking should be penalized by insurance rates.

        Humans are incredibly fucking stupid. So eager to believe that a piece of information can define Reality completely. It takes energy to fully model things in your head. They don't want to spend the energy and choose to believe superstitions like "hard braking is bad".

    • They're taking your DNA from skin cells on the steering wheel as you drive. It was all in the agreement you clicked through.
    • Car insurance actuarials are calculated by zip code. If people drive like absolute lunatics in a particular zip code, insurance premiums go up in that zip code.

  • Just creating a list of brands to never purchase. Bear with a moment. That was G.M., Honda, Kia, and Hyundai? Okay, got it. Thank you.

    That really sucks. The Kia EV6 was close to the top of my list of next vehicles to purchase, but now it's on a different list.

    • You'd pretty much have to sit out the EV resurgence if you insist on having a vehicle which lacks telemetry gathering capabilities. I'm also fairly certain even among ICE cars your options are pretty limited these days, unless you're okay with something like a Mitsubishi Mirage.

      It's also kind of odd that Tesla isn't mentioned in TFS. Apparently they just claim that while their cars are capable of collecting the data, they aren't selling it. Tesla will use the data though, if you sign up for their insuran [tesla.com]

      • I just buy a car that's too old for that stuff. I leave all that snooping bullshit where it belongs, in a camera/microphone/GPS that I paid for and carry everywhere I go.

      • Pretty sure Tesla insurance is backed by Liberty... working in the insurance industry I can guarantee that Liberty is in on any "analytics" they can get their hands on.

    • Every brand will have at least one model with this capability soon enough so you should make a list of models instead. If you want to be totally safe from it, you need a car that doesn't have a cell modem (or the ability to connect to a wifi hotspot).

      • Every brand will have at least one model with this capability soon enough so you should make a list of models instead.

        Agreed...however, it seems that nobody wants to actually compile such a list. The one that *supposedly* does so is Mozilla, but their list is so comprehensive that it's basically impossible to make a distinction. The 1999 Toyota Camry I formerly had an ODB2 port that allowed that collected data to be downloaded by an ODB2 scanner, and Toyota's privacy policy at the time, apparently, technically allowed them to collect that data if you brought it in for service.

        That's not *remotely* the same as the amount of

        • by GuB-42 ( 2483988 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @05:48PM (#64308095)

          Again, if you've got a car manufacturer that's making 2024 model cars without a cell modem, or with an easily-removed modem, I'd love to hear about it...

          Dacia doesn't make cars with a modem, in fact, many don't even have an infotainment system. The latest model can communicate with your phone (which becomes the infotainment system), but it is entirely optional.

          I don't think Dacia sells in the US, but it is popular in Europe because these are cheap, reliable, non-nonsense cars. Tech-wise, they are usually one or two generations late, which can be an advantage as they are built on proven technology, but don't expect high performance or anything fancy, at all. They also have what may be the cheapest electric car on the market (less than $20k).

  • by mschuyler ( 197441 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @04:18PM (#64307765) Homepage Journal

    I was on such a system for a couple of weeks before I discovered and stopped it. My "driving philosophy," such as it is, is to drive in a manner so that I do not impact others. In other words, I drive in a civilized manner. Yet I was astounded to discover that I was being dinged for "hard braking." ??? I find that absurd. I brake so softly that the car comes to an even stop and does not jerk either the car or the passengers. And that's the problem. Who makes up the parameters of what constitutes "hard braking," or any other measurement? And for that matter, isn't "hard braking" sometimes necessary to prevent an accident when someone else is performing badly? Doesn't that signify attentive driving? And in the absence of a court-ordered ignition interlock, doesn't this amount to prior restraint? We need to tell these people, including OnStar, to go pound sand.

    • My "driving philosophy," such as it is, is to drive in a manner so that I do not impact others. In other words, I drive in a civilized manner.

      Hopefully your"civilized manner" lands somewhere between slow AF and every road is a race track, and not in the former category.

      • by mschuyler ( 197441 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @05:12PM (#64307973) Homepage Journal

        "Civilized" means keeping up with traffic as much as anything else. It also means being courteous. It also means not in the latter category. If you want to drive fast, find a racetrack and show us how cool you are.

        • by dbialac ( 320955 )
          Good to hear. Too many slow AF drivers cause a lot more traffic congestion than the overly fast drivers, but both cause accidents. Too many slow AF drivers think they're good drivers while a line of 20 cars waits on them. Too many fast AF drivers take too many risky moves that cause accidents that don't necessarily directly involve them..
    • by PPH ( 736903 )

      Not hitting the homeless fent addict who steps out from between parked cars.

  • They are almost certainly selling it to them.

    What is wrong with western capitalism is that we give businesses similar rights of humans, while removing nearly all responsibilities.
    The only time that European nations punishes businesses with real money and going after ppl is when foreign esp if it is a company ahead of their own. For America it is just if foreign but even then America’ business “punishments “ is minor amounts of $.
  • While automakers and data brokers claim to have drivers' consent..

    Oh, they do. Every time the app addict jumps in their new car and loads the kewl FOMOcar app they market to every new car owner.

    ..the partnerships are often obscured in fine print and unclear privacy policies.

    Oh, they are. In the EULA no one reads.

    Nope. The app addicts don’t care. Maybe we should stop pretending they do.

  • Hold on! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @04:51PM (#64307887)

    You're telling me that the exact thing that people feared about connected cars turned out to be entirely legitimate?! Next you will tell me that fears about Intel's Management Engine being cracked [wikipedia.org] were legitimate! /s

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Monday March 11, 2024 @05:05PM (#64307941)

    ... for keeping my 2001 Honda Civic Ex (132k miles) and 2002 Honda CR-V Ex (59k miles), both 5-speed manuals -- no telematics.

  • Especially if they also have the dangerous driving data stored somewhere it can be retrieved by the police & prosecutors with a warrant.
    • by JustNiz ( 692889 )

      I totally amazes me how some people not only do not defend but actively want to give up their own rights to any privacy, and move towards an obvious end state that makes Orwell's 1984 look like Disneyland.

      • It totally amazes me that people can't distinguish between more effective & efficient law enforcement that still respects people's privacy, i.e. requiring reasonable suspicion & a warrant for search & seizure, vs. a fictitious totalitarian state.

        Why would it be a terrible thing for car companies to collect data on car usage for their own R&D & marketing? (BTW, I'm against any data being sold or shared with others since this is definitely an infringement on privacy, IMHO.) And if a cr
  • From the article (which is available here; https://archive.ph/9wDpJ#selec... [archive.ph]

    "I went through the enrollment process for Smart Driver; there was no warning or prominent disclosure that any third party would get access to my driving data."

    "The Cadillac owner in Florida said he had not heard of Smart Driver and never noticed it in the MyCadillac app. He reviewed the paperwork he signed at the dealership when he bought his Cadillac in the fall of 2021 and found no mention of signing up for it."

    "An employee famil

    • by PPH ( 736903 )

      The Cadillac owner in Florida said he had not heard of Smart Driver

      Cadillac, Florida. Is he sure it wasn't called Senile Driver?

      I remember when GM first offered its OnStar system for its luxury brands. It was advertised as a service for people who forgot where they parked their cars.

  • I just contacted Hyundai Canada, and made it abundantly clear that I do not consent to them, or anyone else sharing, selling, trading or otherwise revealing *any* information concerning me, my driving habits, or the driving habits or behaviour of anyone driving my car to anyone, but most particularly any insurance companies.

    I will be sending them a registered letter to this effect as well. I also requested a written statement from them saying that they will not do this.

    It will be interesting to see what happens. (I have a good friend who is a lawyer, and he also has a new Hyundai -- he and I are eagerly awaiting their response.)

    • I just contacted Hyundai Canada, and made it abundantly clear that I do not consent to them, or anyone else sharing, selling, trading or otherwise revealing *any* information concerning me, my driving habits, or the driving habits or behaviour of anyone driving my car to anyone, but most particularly any insurance companies.

      I will be sending them a registered letter to this effect as well. I also requested a written statement from them saying that they will not do this.

      It will be interesting to see what happens. (I have a good friend who is a lawyer, and he also has a new Hyundai -- he and I are eagerly awaiting their response.)

      Hyundai's response will look something like this. https://imgflip.com/memegenera... [imgflip.com]

    • I just contacted Hyundai Canada, and made it abundantly clear that I do not consent to them, or anyone else sharing, selling, trading or otherwise revealing *any* information concerning me, my driving habits, or the driving habits or behaviour of anyone driving my car to anyone, but most particularly any insurance companies.

      ROFLMAO

      Yeah, you needed to do it, but the naivete demonstrated is absolutely adorable. Good luck bro. :)

  • Cars get to tattle on drivers that do really dumb shit. Their rates go up. Should also be a feature for you to directly report other drivers to their insurance

    I'd love to tattle on the shmuck that shot around me on a single lane double yellow line type road because I dared to actually slow down for the school zone we were going through - literally with school busses sitting there.

    Drivers are getting worse and worse, so maybe we really do need a system that hurts the ones who driver the worst.

  • Don't have or use internet-enabled connected-car apps. Can't tattle on me. Good drivers suppose to get lower insurance, yet I have never heard of it happening.

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Working...