Car insurance monitoring device

mooseknuckle · #1 07-13-2013, 05:47 PM

I'm sure some of you have seen the commercials for these things? Maybe more of a US thing, for now. What are your thoughts on this device they plug into your vehicle that monitors your driving habits and then they base your insurance rates on it? Definately one for the "do nothing wrong and you have nothing to worry about crowd". I see this becoming a trend.

leeaspell · #2 07-13-2013, 06:19 PM

So do you just unplug it if you want to speed?

mooseknuckle · #3 07-13-2013, 06:32 PM

Good question? That's what I'm getting at, there are a lot of questions. Again I'm guessing it will be manditory within 10 years.

FishingMOM · #4 07-13-2013, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mooseknuckle

Good question? That's what I'm getting at, there are a lot of questions. Again I'm guessing it will be manditory within 10 years.

I dont like the idea of big brother sitting behind my wheel with me.
Nor do I like the idea of big brother in other aspects of my life either. At the rate we are going they should have a way to monitor everything.

Wild&Free · #5 07-13-2013, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FishingMOM

I dont like the idea of big brother sitting behind my wheel with me.
Nor do I like the idea of big brother in other aspects of my life either. At the rate we are going they should have a way to monitor everything.

If you never read the Motor Vehicle Act before signing for your license you're in for a surprise then. As the legislature can change the act and our previous consent to abide by it carries over to the new version.

It would most likely be hardwired into your cars computer system so 'unplugging' it to speed would be unlikely. It would also have to be installed by someone certified, and there would some some clause about penalties if the device is tampered or altered in anyway.

Honestly, I'd rather see roads and cars with more sensors and automation. Take the human factor out of driving and you eliminate drunk driving and human error altogether. Not to mention tailgaters, convoy runners, hurry up to slam on the brake drivers and all the other annoyances that people do on the road.

BBKiller · #6 07-13-2013, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mooseknuckle

Good question? That's what I'm getting at, there are a lot of questions. Again I'm guessing it will be manditory within 10 years.

No Way No How Something like that will be going in my vehicles.
What a scam and half. I see tons of people that im sure would be Driving "great" according to a computer But when you see them on the road, Now thats a whole different Ball game. Computer can Only monitor so much of a drivers ability and unfortunately to me What it could monitor seems the lesser of the problem.

mooseknuckle · #7 07-13-2013, 09:32 PM

I just thought it was an interesting topic for discussion. Something like 4 billion insurance companies profited last year, I think this technology is just another way to Wiesel a few extra bucks from average joes pocket. I hope it doesn't catch on.

1000yards · #8 07-13-2013, 09:33 PM

I thought that was just a physical representation of the insurance plan being adjustable,
No idea they actually had a chip,
Not a chance in hell that is going in my car.
I pay based on my proven record, they should be more concerned about getting drivers without any insurance off the road before they constrict us law abiding drivers first

BBKiller · #9 07-13-2013, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

If you never read the Motor Vehicle Act before signing for your license you're in for a surprise then. As the legislature can change the act and our previous consent to abide by it carries over to the new version.

It would most likely be hardwired into your cars computer system so 'unplugging' it to speed would be unlikely. It would also have to be installed by someone certified, and there would some some clause about penalties if the device is tampered or altered in anyway.

Honestly, I'd rather see roads and cars with more sensors and automation. Take the human factor out of driving and you eliminate drunk driving and human error altogether. Not to mention tailgaters, convoy runners, hurry up to slam on the brake drivers and all the other annoyances that people do on the road.

Great Idea, Because Technology is 100% reliable Right ? Then some douche Relies On His fancy car to get Him where he need, Not paying attention, Car Technology Fails and Then In turn Cause a fatal accident. I can see it already. Humans Should be more responsible and pay more attention. Ultimately in a way we are getting a lot better, especially the newer generations as they mature will and do understand The ways of the past were not Generally "smart". Then again as an ever growing population there are going to be more and more of them douches Ruining it for everyone.

Wild&Free · #10 07-13-2013, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKiller

Great Idea, Because Technology is 100% reliable Right ? Then some douche Relies On His fancy car to get Him where he need, Not paying attention, Car Technology Fails and Then In turn Cause a fatal accident. I can see it already. Humans Should be more responsible and pay more attention. Ultimately in a way we are getting a lot better, especially the newer generations as they mature will and do understand The ways of the past were not Generally "smart". Then again as an ever growing population there are going to be more and more of them douches Ruining it for everyone.

Look into automation in industry and the amount of injuries and fatal accidents it has prevented. Yes technology fails, but it doesn't get drunk, or high, or impatient, or stressed, or tired, or complacent. Technology does not start with bad habits observed as a child, or ones developed independently. You're also assuming there would be no safeguards, or secondary systems to handle a malfunction when on the road.

Either way, I'd rather have an automated car, then my insurance company riding shotgun all the time.

colin455 · #11 07-13-2013, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

Either way, I'd rather have an automated car, then my insurance company riding shotgun all the time.

What makes you think there will be a difference? With OnStar in every vehicle, infractions will be logged on your record in real time.
I have a 1968 Chevy II I working on. The only microchip in that baby is in my phone. Which gets left at home more and more.

mooseknuckle · #12 07-13-2013, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin455

What makes you think there will be a difference? With OnStar in every vehicle, infractions will be logged on your record in real time.
I have a 1968 Chevy II I working on. The only microchip in that baby is in my phone. Which gets left at home more and more.

Good point have a couple vehicles that were made long before any computer! Those I have to insure through hagerty.

Wild&Free · #13 07-13-2013, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin455

What makes you think there will be a difference? With OnStar in every vehicle, infractions will be logged on your record in real time.
I have a 1968 Chevy II I working on. The only microchip in that baby is in my phone. Which gets left at home more and more.

An automated vehicle, which is programmed to follow a set of rules of the road is going to be breaking the law and getting me ticketed for it?

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy driving, in the country and on not so busy town streets and low traffic highways. I'm usually the only idiot on the road for the most part. Get me into the city, or on the QEII there's thousands of other idiots I have to worry about.

OnStar is only in GM and affiliates, not every vehicle btw. I've also never heard of anyone (yet) being charged with a driving infraction by a report from their car manufacture... not good at attracting new customers or retaining old ones.

FishingMOM · #14 07-13-2013, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

You're also assuming there would be no safeguards, or secondary systems to handle a malfunction when on the road.

Either way, I'd rather have an automated car, then my insurance company riding shotgun all the time.

Tell me where the secondary system was .......
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/high...-life-17082081

or
http://www.wallstreetinsanity.com/te...-malfunctions/
or
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...an-driver.html
Or
http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoram...175025695.html
Lecerf told French media he set the car's cruise control to about 60 mph -- and instead, it sped up to about 100 mph. As he attempted to slow down, the car went faster, hitting 125 mph.

BBKiller · #15 07-13-2013, 10:51 PM

Exactly, No way im trusting my life with a computer or someone else's computerized car driving around that has a "driver " with his head up is Rear end.

Wild&Free · #16 07-13-2013, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FishingMOM

Tell me where the secondary system was .......
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/high...-life-17082081

or
http://www.wallstreetinsanity.com/te...-malfunctions/
or
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...an-driver.html
Or
http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoram...175025695.html
Lecerf told French media he set the car's cruise control to about 60 mph -- and instead, it sped up to about 100 mph. As he attempted to slow down, the car went faster, hitting 125 mph.

Cruise control is not automated driving. It's an aid.
Secondly I've already admitted to technology failing, and I'm sure I can find a much larger number of incidents involving human error then technological malfunction.
Third, a fully automated system should be designed with the ability to take manual control, as well as secondary systems in case of primary failure. To my knowledge there is only one fully automated vehicle on the road, it's in California, and has driven from Berkly to LA and back several times without incident. Southern California traffic conditions taken into account I'd say that's pretty darn good.

The fact that automobiles are designed and built with cost savings over complete safety is why these things happen.

From my experience with safety in the workplace, it is better to prevent the worker from getting anywhere near an area he/she will put him/herself in harms way then designing a system that eliminates the hazard.

Humans cause more traffic accidents then mechanical/technological failures. Take humans out of the equation and you'll end up will less accidents. That's all I'm trying to get at here. I understand the idea of driving equating to freedom and independence, and how many people are very resistant to any changes in regards to that feeling but as someone who never owned a vehicle until he was 30 I don't see it that way at all.

Wild&Free · #17 07-13-2013, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKiller

Exactly, No way im trusting my life with a computer or someone else's computerized car driving around that has a "driver " with his head up is Rear end.

I'd rather trust a computer then an alcoholic who's down at the bar every night and has the RCMP drive by complacent all the time.