So Americans are fine allowing a company to obtain your driving data including not only HOW you drive , but where you go, where you stop, and how long youre there? Wow , really? I for one will not give up my privacy for this company or any other. Americans are upset our phone records are traced and this doesnt bother them? It should !
Do you think they will refine Snapshot to pick up on whether the driver is on their cell texting while driving? That should be a consideration since it is “distracted” driving.
Adam you won’t give up your privacy? How many social media accounts do you have? When was the last time you used a search engine? Talk about lack of privacy!
All of this data collection isn’t just to lower premiums. Progressive and others will be (and have already been) aggregating this data to understand consumer behaviors in order to sell it to the highest bidders: retail companies and advertisers. They want to know your route to work/school, how long you’re sitting at certain traffic lights, where you usually stop on the way, etc. And Americans will consistently give their consent if the collection of this data turns into discounts or rewards for retailers along their normal routes. Everyone’s privacy is already gone, whether your phone or car is on. It’s scary to think about how much we agree to give away for the price of a discounted large coffee.
The technology though is ingenious. Ingenious yet horrifying.
Yes, that Privacy Law that was passed years ago has done wonders for our privacy, hasn’t it? Every privacy notice I get in a policy says they value my privacy and are committed to not sell it etc. I think some companies might be in trouble for violating it like Progressive does.
“We’re starting to get to what I’m going to call the ‘statistic of one.’ We’re actually rating you as an individual,” he said.
If you’re doing that, it’s not insurance anymore, it’s the movie Minority Report and the “guilty” will soon find insurance unaffordable and/or unavailable.
That’s exactly what insurance is? Pricing the risk relative to the insured population. Data also suggest (see NAIC/CIPR study series) UBI modifying risky driving behavior. The “guilty” would be choosing to remain guilty. Renwick is simply doing what any good CEO would do in a highly competitive environment; avoid being last to market and getting adversely selected.
I was referring to this specific statement, not the overall inclusion of individual risk characteristics in premium determination:
“We’re starting to get to what I’m going to call the ‘statistic of one.’ We’re actually rating you as an individual,” he said.
In the movie I mentioned, the government is able to predict if an individual will commit a crime and arrest them before they do. In the extreme, if telematics and “big data” allow for more accuracy in individual pricing, at some point the individual will bear the brunt of his or her own loss predictability and the spread of risk may decline to the point that insurance becomes unaffordable or the individual is uninsurable from an underwriting standpoint and so insurance becomes unavailable.
This already exists in some measure. For example, I’ve been hit twice on my homeowners premium due to credit score. In both cases, it was in error. On one occasion, they had someone else’s credit score figured into our premium calculation. The impact? $1,000 on a previous $1,400 premium. That’s a big hit on one rating factor. The other time, it was a $700 hit on a $2,300 premium.
Reflecting individual risk characteristic into rating is generally a good thing, but it can be taken too far and, at some hypothetical point, it no longer is really insurance as we have known it at the consumer level.
Jim, Progressive has always took the problem customer and they price it accordingly. What is dishonest about them is offering the Snap Shot, telling everyone how wonderful it is and offering an up front discount and then jerking it away when they don’t like the driving habits of the insured.
There is no upfront discount for taking the Snapshot. Either you earn a discount or you don’t. Your rate doesn’t increase in either case. That’s how it is in Michigan at least…
Michigan, perhaps you missed the recent article on the Snapshot issue. They would sign up people, put the device in and then didn’t like what they were seeing on driving habits and other issues like tickets on MVR’s and accidents and so they are increasing rates on the Snapshot crowd.
September 23, 2015 at 2:38 pm
Ricky Bobby says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
I wonder if anyone is, or should be, concerned that all the information/data that is collected is fully admissible to the Courts? I guess it depends on what side you are on as to whether or not this will help or hurt you. Sometimes, less data recorded is better.
So Americans are fine allowing a company to obtain your driving data including not only HOW you drive , but where you go, where you stop, and how long youre there? Wow , really? I for one will not give up my privacy for this company or any other. Americans are upset our phone records are traced and this doesnt bother them? It should !
Do you think they will refine Snapshot to pick up on whether the driver is on their cell texting while driving? That should be a consideration since it is “distracted” driving.
I have nothing to hide and love to save money. If this saves me some cash, monitor me going to Kroger for all I care!
Adam you won’t give up your privacy? How many social media accounts do you have? When was the last time you used a search engine? Talk about lack of privacy!
All of this data collection isn’t just to lower premiums. Progressive and others will be (and have already been) aggregating this data to understand consumer behaviors in order to sell it to the highest bidders: retail companies and advertisers. They want to know your route to work/school, how long you’re sitting at certain traffic lights, where you usually stop on the way, etc. And Americans will consistently give their consent if the collection of this data turns into discounts or rewards for retailers along their normal routes. Everyone’s privacy is already gone, whether your phone or car is on. It’s scary to think about how much we agree to give away for the price of a discounted large coffee.
The technology though is ingenious. Ingenious yet horrifying.
Yes, that Privacy Law that was passed years ago has done wonders for our privacy, hasn’t it? Every privacy notice I get in a policy says they value my privacy and are committed to not sell it etc. I think some companies might be in trouble for violating it like Progressive does.
Comment removed for impersonation.
Hey dufus, have you heard about moniker theft to post your garbage? Post on your own moniker and leave mine alone. Booger, you are a disgrace.
Hey Adam, simple solution… Don’t sign up for the Snapshot program.
“We’re starting to get to what I’m going to call the ‘statistic of one.’ We’re actually rating you as an individual,” he said.
If you’re doing that, it’s not insurance anymore, it’s the movie Minority Report and the “guilty” will soon find insurance unaffordable and/or unavailable.
That’s exactly what insurance is? Pricing the risk relative to the insured population. Data also suggest (see NAIC/CIPR study series) UBI modifying risky driving behavior. The “guilty” would be choosing to remain guilty. Renwick is simply doing what any good CEO would do in a highly competitive environment; avoid being last to market and getting adversely selected.
I was referring to this specific statement, not the overall inclusion of individual risk characteristics in premium determination:
“We’re starting to get to what I’m going to call the ‘statistic of one.’ We’re actually rating you as an individual,” he said.
In the movie I mentioned, the government is able to predict if an individual will commit a crime and arrest them before they do. In the extreme, if telematics and “big data” allow for more accuracy in individual pricing, at some point the individual will bear the brunt of his or her own loss predictability and the spread of risk may decline to the point that insurance becomes unaffordable or the individual is uninsurable from an underwriting standpoint and so insurance becomes unavailable.
This already exists in some measure. For example, I’ve been hit twice on my homeowners premium due to credit score. In both cases, it was in error. On one occasion, they had someone else’s credit score figured into our premium calculation. The impact? $1,000 on a previous $1,400 premium. That’s a big hit on one rating factor. The other time, it was a $700 hit on a $2,300 premium.
Reflecting individual risk characteristic into rating is generally a good thing, but it can be taken too far and, at some hypothetical point, it no longer is really insurance as we have known it at the consumer level.
Jim, Progressive has always took the problem customer and they price it accordingly. What is dishonest about them is offering the Snap Shot, telling everyone how wonderful it is and offering an up front discount and then jerking it away when they don’t like the driving habits of the insured.
There is no upfront discount for taking the Snapshot. Either you earn a discount or you don’t. Your rate doesn’t increase in either case. That’s how it is in Michigan at least…
Michigan, perhaps you missed the recent article on the Snapshot issue. They would sign up people, put the device in and then didn’t like what they were seeing on driving habits and other issues like tickets on MVR’s and accidents and so they are increasing rates on the Snapshot crowd.
I wonder if anyone is, or should be, concerned that all the information/data that is collected is fully admissible to the Courts? I guess it depends on what side you are on as to whether or not this will help or hurt you. Sometimes, less data recorded is better.