GM says it is “actively evaluating” its privacy policies in light of recent reports.
Much like every other aspect of modern life, “always-online” is a notion modern car owners must contend with, whether they like it or not. However, the New York Times broke a story two weeks ago of automakers — including but by no means limited to General Motors — sharing connected vehicles’ driving data with third-party brokers that made it available to insurers. The problem with that, as the piece breaks down, is insurance companies’ resulting actions, particularly using data manufacturers share to hike rates or flat-out reject coverage for drivers. Now, General Motors announced it has stopped submitting driving behavior to the two data brokers mentioned in the earlier report. (Again, today’s coverage comes from the New York Times.)
Though several automakers also share at least some driver data to brokers like LexisNexis and Verisk, the primary focus has been OnStar’s “Smart Driver” feature. For years, General Motors shared information about drivers’ trips, including distance, speed, acceleration and braking habits, with those firms. One destination for the captured data was LexisNexis’ Telematics Exchange, which the company says is “a portal for sharing consumer-approved connected car data with insurers.” Several End User License Agreements and privacy policies, however, bury details of what telematics are collected anytime a driver sets off on a trip, and how it may be shared with third policies (which then have their own chain-of-custody policies, EULAs, and so the cycle goes on).
The NYT piece profiles Florida owner Romeo Chicco’s experience, wherein LexisNexis kept a lengthy report on how he drove his 2021 Cadillac XT6. After several insurers rejected him for policies outright and one insurer who did take him doubled his rates, his subsequent discovery of the LexisNexis report detailed 260 trips over six months, wherein several instances of hard braking and hard acceleration led insurers to conclude he engaged in risky driving behavior.
Chicco filed a federal complaint seeking class-action status against General Motors and LexisNexis Risk Solutions in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida earlier this month. In the lawsuit, he alleges both parties violated his privacy as well as consumer protection laws.
It is unclear at the moment whether higher insurance rates or rejection of coverage counts as an injury which the courts could redress, so we will have to wait and see how that complaint plays out. In the meantime, though, General Motors ostenstibly cut ties with both LexisNexis and Verisk in response to the earlier report, resulting backlash from drivers and the pending litigation. “Customer trust is a priority for us,” the company said in a statement, “and we are actively evaluating our privacy processes and policies.”
As a result of these reports, other automakers are also under more intense scrutiny regarding their data collection practices. Manufacturers like Ford, Kia, Mitsubishi and Subaru, which were also outlined earlier this month, say they either share limited (and anonymous) data points with third parties, or more detailed reporting expressly requires drivers to opt-in to having their data collected, usually through an in-car prompt. However, the intense focus on OnStar’s Smart Driver program may compel drivers to look more closely at what specific data their cars are collecting on them (or it should, at least).
