By on July 17, 2007

onstar2.jpgFirst, it was the OBD-II black box that records your speed just before an accident. Then it was GPS systems in rental cars keeping track of where you drive and how fast you drive there. Now the finance and insurance companies want their piece of the privacy intrusion business. According to the Detroit News, GMAC Financial Services' insurance unit is asking drivers with OnStar-equipped cars to let them track how many miles they drive, dangling the carrot of lowered insurance rates in front of them. OnStar president Chet Huber says data on when or where the car is driven wouldn't go to the insurer. (Yet.) The article makes no mention of whether or not OnStar would share driver information with any local, state or federal agencies and, if so, under what circumstances.  

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

21 Comments on “Big Brother is My Co-Pilot...”


  • avatar

    I eagerly (ha!) awaiting the day I buy my last new car – which will be decided by the level of nannyism inherent to the vehicle. Which means my last new car will be a left-over last year’s model, of course.

  • avatar
    shaker

    I, for one, welcome our new satellite-based overlords…
    Every time I have thought about buying a GM car, I’m reminded that it’s almost impossible to get one without OnStar these days; thus, I look elsewhere.

  • avatar
    Redbarchetta

    I hate having On-Star in our Cadillac. I feel like someone is watching me even though I cancelled the subscription. Call me paranoid but they seem like modern stability systems where the OFF button only turns them half off, I still get weird things coming from that OnStar button and it has been years since we had the service.
    OnStar and disposable junk are the reasons I wont even look at GM for another car, well that and about a donzen other reasons, but I really hate OnStar.

  • avatar
    Megan Benoit

    Lowered insurance rates? For driving less? That is a steaming load. At our old place in downtown Atlanta, my husband drove just 2 miles to work, while I drove 15. His drive was infinitely more dangerous — people running stop lights left and right, construction workers all over, stupid tourists randomly stopping in the middle of the roads. Me, I was on the interstate the whole way, smooth sailing. He was at far more risk than me, even though I drove more.

    Methinks they’d be more interested in tracking driver speed, rather than miles traveled. “Hey bud, we clocked you at 80mph the other day… yeah, those low low rates? Not so much anymore.” Just try arguing with them that everyone on 75 drives that fast.

  • avatar
    LoserBoy

    Elsewhere on the Internet, I read a comment saying OnStar was GM’s admission that they can’t keep their cars from breaking down, so they might as well make it easier to call a tow truck. (I know, I know, but it’s funny.)

    This recent development doesn’t bother me, for some reason. It sounds voluntary, like the discount my dad got back in the day for affirming that he didn’t use a radar detector.

    I’m not sure why they want this data, though. Is there some reason why looking at the odometer isn’t sufficient?

  • avatar

    This needs a proper editorial. This system exists in Ontario. They don’t only record distance, they record speed as well as hard braking incidents.

  • avatar
    Orian

    Besides the government’s use, the main reason they want this data is profit. If the insurance company can monitor you 100% of the time you are driving, they can change your rates depending on the way you drive.

    While this sounds like an ok idea, you have to realize this is an industry that wants to take money but has problems paying out at times when they are legally bound too. They also like to try and mandate what you can and can’t do and people have let them get away with it for a very long time.

  • avatar
    radimus

    Yet another reason NOT to get a vehicle with OnStar.

    I was listening to a podcast some time back where a lady was recalling a situation when OnStar was used. She was a passenger and a lady friend of hers was driving. Her friend pressed the OnStar button for some reason, exactly what I forget. I think they were lost. Anyway, a man answers the phone and her friend talks to him about the situation. During the entire call her friend was the only one talking. The passenger remained silent. Just before he hung up, the man asked “Is there anything else I can do for you two ladies?” The passenger was completely dumbfounded that he knew she was there when she didn’t say a word.

    Barring a hidden video camera, which I doubt is the case (too high a bandwidth requirement), the only thing I can figure is that the system always records a past time interval of cabin audio and uploads it to the OnStar rep when the call is made.

  • avatar

    yet another reason to not get a gm vehicle

  • avatar
    LoserBoy

    radimus:

    Isn’t it more likely the speaker said “we’re lost” or “Susie and I can’t find Such-and-such Street” at some point and the pod lady simply forgot?

  • avatar
    vtech

    My car’s smart airbags detect the weight of the passenger. perhaps that’s sent to onstar. Mind you some person’s idea of a little ol lady may not be the same as anothers! :)

  • avatar
    chuckR

    Black boxes are a two edged sword in accidents. If you really aren’t at fault, its a plus. As it stands now, fault is determined by whose insurance company retains a better lawyer and more credible expert witnesses. And which one wants to dispose of a case more quickly.
    But I sure wouldn’t want it to be mandatory. In fact, a mid 50s flat fender Power Wagon would then look even more attractive to me than it does now.

  • avatar
    quasimondo

    There’s always the Crown Victoria which has all the latest throwback features, like power brakes and an automatic transmission. No OnStar here.

  • avatar
    labrat

    My favorite OnStar story:

    A few years ago, I remember reading some automotive publication where they were testing a new GM vehicle, I think it was a Chevy Malibu. After a vigorous run around the slalom course, the trusty OnStar voice kicked in and asked if they needed an ambulance. Apparently, the roll-over sensor was triggered by the slalom activity. Scary.

  • avatar
    Luther

    That 1981 MB 300D is looking better all the time….

  • avatar
    Redbarchetta

    I had an ’81 MB 300TD. I still miss that car and wish I had it every time I get in that infernal Cadillac. I miss the engine coming to life with the rumble and shake, tank feeling and how comfortable it was. I probably would still be driving it if it hadn’t thrown a rod right out the bottom of the crank case at 280,000 miles.

  • avatar
    rpn453

    My only experience with Onstar occurred in a friend’s Duramax Chev truck. We were out snowmobiling at another friend’s farm and one of the trucks was stuck while the Chev wouldn’t start, so we used it to contact Onstar. They couldn’t figure out where we were. We tried to explain and give them directions, but they were absolutely clueless. They also thought the closest dealership was a few hours away, when there was actually one within an hour that they couldn’t find on their records. We gave up on them and found a farmer down the road to help us out instead. I’d certainly never pay for Onstar!

  • avatar
    SunnyvaleCA

    Radimus, OnStar could perhaps send a signal indicating which airbags are shut off; if the passenger seat airbag were active, that would indicate two people.

    As for knowing the second person was also a woman, that’s easy: if the second person were a man, they wouldn’t have called to ask for directions! :-)

  • avatar
    Andy D

    Luther:
    July 17th, 2007 at 3:00 pm

    That 1981 MB 300D is looking better all the time……. X3,My stable is all 88 vintage. 2 528es, and a Grand Wagoneer.

  • avatar
    shaker

    SunnyvaleCA:
    “As for knowing the second person was also a woman, that’s easy: if the second person were a man, they wouldn’t have called to ask for directions! :-) ”
    Thanks for the LOL!
    If I were (somehow) to have a vehicle with “OnStar”, I would do my best to make it “OffStar”, by disconnecting the offending antenna.

  • avatar

    OnStar likes this because it is guaranteed business. “Now you can completely offset the cost of OnStar with an insurance adjustment.”
    I wish people would read the privacy agreements that OnStar provides instead of guessing about what they can do. OnStar is quite strict about what information (and under what circumstances) it can share.
    Let’s face it. We are all paranoid about what we don’t know about when the system can be used without our knowledge. I read this and expect to find that my rates can go up if I drive a long distance. There is no mention of rate increases…but why not? Is this a case where there is no flip side? Or is the insurance company just that hungry for new actuarial tables that can integrate mileage?

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
  • theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
  • A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
  • Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
  • Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber