Last month the New York Times’ Kashmir Hill published a major story on how GM collects driver behavior data then sells access (through LexisNexis) to insurance companies, which will then jack…
The article alleges, though without evidence, that the tracking is just an excuse to raise rates.
A quick search didn’t turn up quite the right statistics, but traffic fatalities have been seriously on the rise in the US. That probably implies higher payouts. (WP)
But also, when trackable unsafe drivers have to pay more (and trackable safe driver less), then the unsafe drivers will prefer to be untrackable. You may be on the receiving end of the recalculated actuary tables.
Untrackable might mean you get lumped with the worst actuary table in terms of risk as an unknown quantity or as a form of pressure to let them track you or as a way to create a defence moat of people (your rates will go up like these untrackable vehicles) if the government tries to intervene to stop them from basing rates to tracking.
You can be. Probably pretty cheaply. The problem is that there’s shareholders like you and I, then there’s Shareholders that make millions with a point or two tick up in stock value. The latter are the ones I’m referring to. You and I owning tens or a few hundred shares don’t rate.
I’m driving way safer and way less miles, combination of shorter commute and I don’t want to wear my truck out driving like an ass…I’m my rate is literally doubled
Mine nearly doubled over 2 years. They cited increased costs of parts and repair work. Might be true, might not be. Might be they increased prices more than their costs did.
My vehicle is not trackable but my insurance tripled in two years so there is more going on than data harvesting
The article alleges, though without evidence, that the tracking is just an excuse to raise rates.
A quick search didn’t turn up quite the right statistics, but traffic fatalities have been seriously on the rise in the US. That probably implies higher payouts. (WP)
But also, when trackable unsafe drivers have to pay more (and trackable safe driver less), then the unsafe drivers will prefer to be untrackable. You may be on the receiving end of the recalculated actuary tables.
Untrackable might mean you get lumped with the worst actuary table in terms of risk as an unknown quantity or as a form of pressure to let them track you or as a way to create a defence moat of people (your rates will go up like these untrackable vehicles) if the government tries to intervene to stop them from basing rates to tracking.
“Cost of living”. Sure people will start getting inflation beating payrises soon.
Cost of living for the shareholders.
Everyone should just become a shareholder, we will all be rich then…
You can be. Probably pretty cheaply. The problem is that there’s shareholders like you and I, then there’s Shareholders that make millions with a point or two tick up in stock value. The latter are the ones I’m referring to. You and I owning tens or a few hundred shares don’t rate.
I’m driving way safer and way less miles, combination of shorter commute and I don’t want to wear my truck out driving like an ass…I’m my rate is literally doubled
Mine nearly doubled over 2 years. They cited increased costs of parts and repair work. Might be true, might not be. Might be they increased prices more than their costs did.
Your car might not be trackable but do you use Google maps or Waze?
A lot more than i used to. I imagine there are hundreds of ways the public has layed themselves open for exploitation
Your phone isn’t trackable? You avoided all the license plate scanners? Your work/home has a higher rate of accidents between them?