Maybe They Can Add An Automatic Ticket Dispenser To the Dash?
 

I find this very scary!

I saw this today:


Insurance Cos. Try Out Auto Black Boxes

52 minutes ago

By MATTHEW FORDAHL, AP Technology Writer

- For two months, Jacob Sevlie's insurance company tagged along whenever he slid behind the wheel of his Honda Accord.

An electronic monitor the size of a matchbook closely tracked Sevlie's driving time and behavior. If he had a heavy foot or was a sudden braker, the auto data recorder would betray him.

Disconnected from the car and hooked to a PC, the device relayed Sevlie's digital driving diary to his auto insurer, Progressive Corp., with the click of a mouse during a pilot program earlier this year.

Although privacy advocates say the gadget smacks of Big Brother, Sevlie signed up and sent monthly data in hopes of saving money on his insurance bill. In return, he got a $25 stipend and the promise of a 15 percent rate cut when the program launches.

Mayfield Village, Ohio-based Progressive is now promising discounts of up to 25 percent as it expands the so-called TripSense pilot program to 5,000 Minnesota customers. Sevlie, of Bloomington, Minn., is among them.

Progressive says it will use the data only for potential discounts and not to penalize customers whose devices reveal risky driving habits.

The monitoring has the potential to cascade through the insurance industry, said Charles Samuelson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Minnesota.

"What happens is Progressive does this and gets a little bit of market share growth because they've lowered prices. Then it gets copied by other insurance companies," he said. "Pretty soon you don't have any choice.

"You have to surrender all that data to insurance companies or they won't insure you," he said.

Company spokesman William Perry says use of the auto data recorder will not be mandatory for Progressive customers.

"The key thing for us regarding the privacy aspect is the program is completely voluntary. It's not imposed on anybody," he said.

Julie Rochman, spokeswoman of the American Insurance Association, denied suggestions that the entire industry would adopt the monitors.

Most companies are comfortable with their current systems for measuring risk, which typically lump drivers into groups based on a variety of factors, she said.

"The bottom line is this is interesting, and they'll watch it," she said. "I'm not aware of any rush to do this kind of thing."

Drivers are under increased surveillance, by insurance companies and others. For example, cameras at intersections in many urban areas snap license-plate pictures of vehicles running red lights.

Many automakers already install so-called black boxes that record information for investigations into a crash or malfunction, although the data are not routinely transmitted. Last month, federal safety officials called on all automakers to install such devices.

From 1998 to 2001, Progressive ran a trial program in Texas that included a satellite tracking device to monitor where participants drove so they paid only for the insurance they used. The program was canceled because the gear was too expensive, the company said.

Insurers abroad are trying the data recorders, too.

In August, Norwich Union, the United Kingdom's largest auto insurer, announced it was testing a "pay as you drive" program involving 5,000 customers, under an agreement with Progressive. It tracks via satellite, like the Progressive program in Texas.

Robert Ledger, the U.K. program's director, says interest has been phenomenal: "We could have filled the pilot twice over with the amount of requests we've had from interested motorists."

Progressive's latest test in Minnesota, however, doesn't track where people drive. Sevlie said that would have been a show-stopper for him.

"That would scare me," he said. "If they were to do something like that, I would probably not want to be involved."

Progressive's Minnesota program requires a device that's plugged into a car's diagnostic port, available on all recent models. Besides driving habits, the device monitors when it's connected and disconnected so drivers aren't tempted to unplug it before speeding up to 100 mph. If a unit hasn't been connected 95 percent of the time, there's no discount.

But critics fear the information _ or, worse, the lack of information from participants who don't want to send negative data _ might be used against them.

And after the data are collected, individuals have no say in how it's used, Samuelson said.

"Once you give them the data, they own it," he said. "They can sell that data to anybody they want to, and you have no claim on it."

Perry, Progressive's spokesman, said the company will only use the data to determine discounts. It won't be used to increase rates if it reveals a customer with a lead foot, he said.

"This is strictly a discount program. We're very upfront with how we will and will not use the data," he said. "The only way we will use it is to look at it and say, 'Based on this, we're going to take X percentage off of the cost of your insurance for that vehicle.' Period."

And if the data is subpoenaed in legal action related to a driver's behavior?

"Generally speaking, if we are subpoenaed, we comply with the law," Perry said.

___

On the Net:

Progressive TripSense: http://tripsense.progressive.com

Well, this is yet another example of how technology is slowly and surely making inroads into the very private domain of people's lives. I would, for the present, leave in the middle whether that would have to be considered a good or a bad thing.
Insurers work on the ascertainment and the resulting statistics thereof of the element "risk".
If the "risk" is perceived to be "high", then it'll cost.
If the "risk" is considered low, well, then it should cost less to get that insurance primium that will help you in case you get into an accident in spite of the low probability that such would occur.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
And you can't blame "agencies", be they insurers or government authorities, for wishing to control the environment they are expected to perform in...
Technology makes it possible for them to "check it out".
I don't like it! You don't like it! It is against "freedom"! Some even go to the length of trying to get away from "society", and make some private little havens somewhere in the desert. They carry their own guns. I don't like you, bang, you're dayd. Freedom? I don't believe so.
I "like to think" (but is it really true?) that I drive safer at 100 mph than granny at 20, in which case this insurance monitoring would not be acceptable, and my driving statistics over 30 years' time are very good, so ... I guess there's a lot to discuss here. Generally, the "common good" wins over the "private whim"...
It's going to be a bleeding bore, living in the future....

Good update Harry.

It's coming...the world of Futurama! Someday we will go out in our vehicles, which will be controlled by one brain that will monitor all vehicle functions and regulate their progress, avoiding traffic tieups, collisions, scofflaws. THE WORLD WILL BE OURS, MEIN FUHRER!

Just think... no speeding or parking tickets, no collisions, no insurance companies required, no government income from fines and taxes.

Wait, no govt income, no insurance companies?! Now just hold on a minute! It's unamerican, unacceptible, unthinkable!

If we let these people run amuck, they may dig their own graves. The problem is they will take us down with them.

If I'm around when this happens, I think I'll just stay home.

Insurance companies exist to make money. They keep existing because they are good at making money.

If they are losing money because they don't know what their customers are doing, they are not being good insurance companies.

I think it's cool that I could get a discount if I'm not a risk, but I would be depending on what their definition of a risk is. I also expect that another company with higher premiums will say "we don't care how you drive". But their premiums will be REALLY high.

I would prefer though that instead of recording speed and that - which is an incomplete picture, is it raining, snowing, night etc? - that they install a breathalyzer and a simple reflex checker. Or maybe a camera 20 feet behind the car so they can see the stupid things people do.

I for one welcome our new insurance company overlords.

So my black box lets my insurance company know that I drive with a lead foot and at high speeds which is typical for traffic. Now this sends a potential red flag even though I have no tickets or accidents. Meanwhile Grandma’s black box shows no lead foot driving or high speed driving. But Grandma may be driving over the double yellow line or driving below traffic speeds or backing into my parked car. This program can’t differentiate between good drivers from bad. How does this help traffic safety or the consumer?
:mad:

At what point (year) do cars not have a suitable diagnostic port for one of these devices? The solution might be to simply drive old cars.

There is precedence for having these types of records subpoenaed. Some cars have little "black boxes" that can tell you your speed and how much braking was applied prior to an accident. I recall reading where this has been used in court to determine fault.

Jon

Paul,

Your comment on "Mein Fuhrer" is correct in more ways than you might know in this situation. I lived in Germany for years and you cannot believe the way they control drivers there.

Truck drivers have for years had to log their every movement. There is a recorder built into the dash of EVERY commercial truck that uses a round paper disk. This records how fast and how long you drive, when you stop, when you rest and so on. Any official can request this from any commercial driver and if its found that the driver went over the speed limit they get a ticket. No policeman ever saw them but they were snitched upon by the box. This was being done 20 years ago, long before GPS was used on vehicles.

In America we now have thousands of semi-trucks with GPS receivers on them. They are used for their dispatch to track them as well as for navigation. They also can be used to insure that they are not speeding and that they get their required duty rest.

Fast forward to a smaller rental car company in the NE. They rent out cars with GPS receivers on them and if the drivers go over 75 miles per hour, even if its legal, they get a massive fine. One driver did it 3 times a couple of years ago while having their car and found something like a $800 fine on it when the bill credit card bill came the next month. Rental car agency said "look at your rental contract" and sure enough in the "fine print" it was there ... He was suing them the last I heard but no idea if its been settled yet.

Big Brother has been with us for a long time and he is watching now!

JoeA

Don't worry about it.
Someone will develop the technology to produce false OBDII readings so you can get the discount and drive how you want.

JCM

Yep, that is so true. There is always going to be a way around this. That's why those disposable digital cameras aren't working out. It only took a month for somebody to figure out how to erase and reuse them.


Yeah right, they are going to spend millions developing this thing so they can make thier rates cheaper. I bet.

The real problem here is the cheap sheep who sells his liberty for a 15% discount.

People need to stand up like Howard Roarke and say "no." And I don't care if you give me free insurance, the answer is still no. Take your stinking pilot program and put it you know where.

Quality does only pertain to consumer goods, but to our lives. Our cheapness will do us in.

This is why I still think we should have a tiered licensing system.
That way, good drivers can drive fast and bad drivers go slow. If you are pulled over and are driving above the speed limited on your license, then you go to jail or get a huge fine.