Insurance car tracker will be spy for police
Discussion
Great article here in the Times: www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2388996,00.html
So we were right. This system will be used against motorists. How long till it's mandatory? After all, "It is only right for people who have been breaking the law and driving dangerously to be prosecuted" says the insurance company. Perhaps they even get paid for the information?
Times said:
POLICE will be able to tell whether drivers who crash were speeding by checking the black boxes being fitted to thousands of cars by Britain’s biggest insurance company.
Norwich Union is installing satellite tracking devices to customers’ cars so that it can charge them an insurance fee for each mile they travel.
Rather than paying a fixed annual premium, drivers will pay different rates according to when and how far they travel.
Those who drive between midnight and 5am and from 7am to 10am will pay a higher rate because the company has calculated that crashes are more likely to happen during these periods.
The system uses satellite positioning to check a car’s location throughout its journey. The information will show how fast a vehicle was travelling before a crash and whether it was accelerating or decelerating. Police will also be able to check a motorist’s behaviour during an entire journey to see whether there is any evidence of speeding or aggressive driving.
The company, which expects to fit the boxes to 100,000 cars over the next year, said that the information would be given only to police investigating a crash and would not be used to issue speeding penalties.
Motorists will be able to request information about their driving to defend themselves against false accusations of speeding of dangerous driving.
Police have already requested information from Norwich Union about two crashes involving drivers taking part in trials of the pay-as-you-drive technology. In one case, police are understood to be checking claims that the driver, who was killed, was travelling too fast. Both cases are still under investigation.
A Norwich Union spokesman said: “We have to provide the data if the police request it but only if it is part of an investigation. It is only right for people who have been breaking the law and driving dangerously to be prosecuted. But we do not use the system ourselves to check speed and it is the insurer’s job to pay out on claims regardless of liability.”
The AA Motoring Trust said that some drivers would be suspicious. Andrew Howard, head of road safety, said: “Norwich Union must make it clear to drivers that information about their speed could be handed to police if they have a crash. Some won’t like the idea but it could improve safety because people are more likely to drive carefully if they know the system is looking over their shoulder.”
Rob Gifford, director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said that the system would make it easier to prosecute dangerous drivers. Only one in nine road deaths results in a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving. He said: “This should provide important corroborative evidence for police. It will be especially useful now that anti-lock brakes mean there are few if any skid marks from which to determine speed.”
Drivers who use the system will receive a bill itemising each journey. Travelling between 7am and 10am will cost 12p a mile on urban roads and 1.5p a mile on motorways. Between 10am and midnight and 5am and 7am the rates will be 7p and 1p. Norwich Union set the rates after studying 5,000 drivers in a two-year trial. It found that drivers in the morning weekday rush hour were 50 per cent more likely to be in a crash than those driving at weekends or in the evening.
Norwich Union is installing satellite tracking devices to customers’ cars so that it can charge them an insurance fee for each mile they travel.
Rather than paying a fixed annual premium, drivers will pay different rates according to when and how far they travel.
Those who drive between midnight and 5am and from 7am to 10am will pay a higher rate because the company has calculated that crashes are more likely to happen during these periods.
The system uses satellite positioning to check a car’s location throughout its journey. The information will show how fast a vehicle was travelling before a crash and whether it was accelerating or decelerating. Police will also be able to check a motorist’s behaviour during an entire journey to see whether there is any evidence of speeding or aggressive driving.
The company, which expects to fit the boxes to 100,000 cars over the next year, said that the information would be given only to police investigating a crash and would not be used to issue speeding penalties.
Motorists will be able to request information about their driving to defend themselves against false accusations of speeding of dangerous driving.
Police have already requested information from Norwich Union about two crashes involving drivers taking part in trials of the pay-as-you-drive technology. In one case, police are understood to be checking claims that the driver, who was killed, was travelling too fast. Both cases are still under investigation.
A Norwich Union spokesman said: “We have to provide the data if the police request it but only if it is part of an investigation. It is only right for people who have been breaking the law and driving dangerously to be prosecuted. But we do not use the system ourselves to check speed and it is the insurer’s job to pay out on claims regardless of liability.”
The AA Motoring Trust said that some drivers would be suspicious. Andrew Howard, head of road safety, said: “Norwich Union must make it clear to drivers that information about their speed could be handed to police if they have a crash. Some won’t like the idea but it could improve safety because people are more likely to drive carefully if they know the system is looking over their shoulder.”
Rob Gifford, director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said that the system would make it easier to prosecute dangerous drivers. Only one in nine road deaths results in a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving. He said: “This should provide important corroborative evidence for police. It will be especially useful now that anti-lock brakes mean there are few if any skid marks from which to determine speed.”
Drivers who use the system will receive a bill itemising each journey. Travelling between 7am and 10am will cost 12p a mile on urban roads and 1.5p a mile on motorways. Between 10am and midnight and 5am and 7am the rates will be 7p and 1p. Norwich Union set the rates after studying 5,000 drivers in a two-year trial. It found that drivers in the morning weekday rush hour were 50 per cent more likely to be in a crash than those driving at weekends or in the evening.
So we were right. This system will be used against motorists. How long till it's mandatory? After all, "It is only right for people who have been breaking the law and driving dangerously to be prosecuted" says the insurance company. Perhaps they even get paid for the information?
General Motors (Vauxhall/Opel) vehicle's already do record the last 30 secs.(IIRC)of goings on in the vehicle including speed in the engine computer (ECU ).I have never heard of it being used in the UK/Europe by the police, but in the USA the police won a big court case to force G.M. to release the software to decode the info to help in the prosecution of driver involved in a fatal crash.
BIG brother is creeping up on us all.
BIG brother is creeping up on us all.
Peter Ward said:
Great article here in the Times: www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2388996,00.html
So we were right. This system will be used against motorists. How long till it's mandatory? After all, "It is only right for people who have been breaking the law and driving dangerously to be prosecuted" says the insurance company. Perhaps they even get paid for the information?
Times said:
Motorists will be able to request information about their driving to defend themselves against false accusations of speeding of dangerous driving.
Police have already requested information from Norwich Union about two crashes involving drivers taking part in trials of the pay-as-you-drive technology. In one case, police are understood to be checking claims that the driver, who was killed, was travelling too fast. Both cases are still under investigation.
...
Rob Gifford, director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said that the system would make it easier to prosecute dangerous drivers. Only one in nine road deaths results in a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving. He said: “This should provide important corroborative evidence for police. It will be especially useful now that anti-lock brakes mean there are few if any skid marks from which to determine speed.”
Drivers who use the system will receive a bill itemising each journey. Travelling between 7am and 10am will cost 12p a mile on urban roads and 1.5p a mile on motorways. Between 10am and midnight and 5am and 7am the rates will be 7p and 1p. Norwich Union set the rates after studying 5,000 drivers in a two-year trial. It found that drivers in the morning weekday rush hour were 50 per cent more likely to be in a crash than those driving at weekends or in the evening.
Police have already requested information from Norwich Union about two crashes involving drivers taking part in trials of the pay-as-you-drive technology. In one case, police are understood to be checking claims that the driver, who was killed, was travelling too fast. Both cases are still under investigation.
...
Rob Gifford, director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said that the system would make it easier to prosecute dangerous drivers. Only one in nine road deaths results in a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving. He said: “This should provide important corroborative evidence for police. It will be especially useful now that anti-lock brakes mean there are few if any skid marks from which to determine speed.”
Drivers who use the system will receive a bill itemising each journey. Travelling between 7am and 10am will cost 12p a mile on urban roads and 1.5p a mile on motorways. Between 10am and midnight and 5am and 7am the rates will be 7p and 1p. Norwich Union set the rates after studying 5,000 drivers in a two-year trial. It found that drivers in the morning weekday rush hour were 50 per cent more likely to be in a crash than those driving at weekends or in the evening.
So we were right. This system will be used against motorists. How long till it's mandatory? After all, "It is only right for people who have been breaking the law and driving dangerously to be prosecuted" says the insurance company. Perhaps they even get paid for the information?
So, quote me really happy at the cost of getting to work ...
It seems odd since the casualty figures clearly show th afternoon and evening as the time of highest risk - but NU's 'research' suggests it is morning commute time for accident claims. Does that mean that people are more likely to have less severe accidents in the morning and fewer by more severe accidents later in the day?
And if this is targeted at young drivers what about the proposal fropm one of NU's competitiors that they should be prevented from driving at night?
Something inconsistent in this.
Also interesting, though sad, that one of the drivers in the test has been killed in a road accident. I wonder how they selected them?
Two other observations.
Firstly I was under the impression that accident investigators had several more accurate ways of judging vehicle speeds these days than attempting to measure skid marks - is Rob Gifford out of touch?
Secondly I do like the idea of using the 'data' to defend oneself "against false accusations of speeding of dangerous driving." but I think the chances of such evidence being accepted are, shall we say, less than remote.
Whilst I am aware of a couple of devices that log journeys the maximum resolution they could achieve using GPS last time I looked was about 1 record per second with a time lag. Unless they suddenly became home office approved I can't see that being acceptable to an organisation hell bent on obtaining speeding prosecutions.
But realistically the insurance companies are unlikely to need the amount of data that a reading every 1 second would provide for their billing purposes. Even every minute might be more than they require. Hardly good data for a motoring defence.
Last time I browsed a couple of years ago the devices were still being produced with restricted memory - about enough to hold 330,000 records max. So that is either 330,000 minutes or 330,000 seconds before the data from the device would need to be downloaded and sent to the insurance company. If recording every second that is around 4 days or, if the device is clever enough to only write records when the car is moving, around 96 hours of driving.
In the USA information about the way a vehicle was being driven before a crash has, reportedly, been taken from the vehicles 'black box' component of the ECU (or whatever - air bag monitor I think) which can record things on a 'loop' of about a minute (iirc) as well as the max revs and speed info that service monitoring electronics might offer.
Somehow I feel sure that the information released to the press and reported by the busy Times journalist may not tell us everything we may want to know about the system.
Times said:
... it is the insurer’s job to pay out on claims regardless of liability
So why do they spend so much time trying to wriggle out of paying? Silly question, I know. LongQ said:
Secondly I do like the idea of using the 'data' to defend oneself "against false accusations of speeding of dangerous driving." but I think the chances of such evidence being accepted are, shall we say, less than remote.
Don't worry, they'll use (erroneously or otherwise) the Data Protection Act to get out of providing the Registered Keeper with the data. Regardless, you'll have to prove to NU that you were the driver at the time - and they would be within their legal rights to supply that data to the police (if asked). Streaky
Edited by streaky on Friday 6th October 21:26
streaky said:
Times said:
... it is the insurer’s job to pay out on claims regardless of liability
So why do they spend so much time trying to wriggle out of paying? Silly question, I know. Because it affect "profit margin"
Und then they load all premiums "because lots of people claimed for various things und not all for incidents involving their cars" streaky said:
LongQ said:
Secondly I do like the idea of using the 'data' to defend oneself "against false accusations of speeding of dangerous driving." but I think the chances of such evidence being accepted are, shall we say, less than remote.
Don't worry, they'll use (erroneously or otherwise) the Data Protection Act to get out of providing the Registered Keeper with the data. Regardlessee, you'll have to prove to NU that you were the driver at the time - and they would be within their legal rights to supply that data to the police (if asked). Streaky
So true.
NU on radio yesterday claiming they would never divulge information to police.... Vine for once tried to pin her down - und even agreed afterwards to a listener in call to show that it seemed to be a bit of good PR as she seemed to be full of "several wimmin whose premiums reduced by 47% as result of this scheme on a trial"
Ja - perhaps if they only used to go to shops, school run (of less than 10 minute work) -but what about those whose work ist much further afield und whose kittens go to school on school bus or even ride a bicycle or walk with their own pals - learning independence und responsibility for arriving on time with all their "clutter".
As aside - just heard this rather amusing letter to Wogan's show. Woman phoned to insure her car with NU.. told them her occupation was a "housewife" und so that they "did not upset her" - typed in the little box for occupation that her occupation was "domestic service"
(Ist in a way.. shhh! Mad Doc expect me to stir his tea und put his feet on cushions - Grrrr! ) 
Well you may already be driving a car with this technology fitted, I suggest you have a read of your car's owners manual, this is wants said in mine,"Event Data Recording,is capable of collecting and storing data during a crash or near crash event, information such as How various systems in the vehicle were operating, whether or not the driver/passenger seat belts were buckled, how far ,if at all the driver was depressing the accelerator and/or the brake pedal,how fast the car was travelling, and where the driver was positioning the steering wheel.
And who can access the data will, the courts, the police and goverment authorities.
So your own car can drop you in the s**t.
And who can access the data will, the courts, the police and goverment authorities.
So your own car can drop you in the s**t.
pod said:
Well you may already be driving a car with this technology fitted
If your car has an airbag, you already have a limited form of this fitted. They claim that the monitoring as done to decide whether or not to deploy, but it also stores for about 30 seconds. After a crash, the police can download the data to find speed and throttle / brake information. People (in the US) have been prosecuted on the evidence.
All rather Big Brother.
I shan't be insuring with NU, or buying a car with an airbag any time soon.
pod said:
Well you may already be driving a car with this technology fitted, I suggest you have a read of your car's owners manual, this is wants said in mine,"Event Data Recording,is capable of collecting and storing data during a crash or near crash event, information such as How various systems in the vehicle were operating, whether or not the driver/passenger seat belts were buckled, how far ,if at all the driver was depressing the accelerator and/or the brake pedal,how fast the car was travelling, and where the driver was positioning the steering wheel.
And who can access the data will, the courts, the police and goverment authorities.
So your own car can drop you in the s**t.
And who can access the data will, the courts, the police and goverment authorities.
So your own car can drop you in the s**t.
Pod
Is that in your Jag or Mini ?
have you ever tried crossing the forth road bridge with a gps system displaying live data several of them that i have tried have shown me with an instant speed of over 300mph not bad for a scania pulling a 38ton trailer and what do they do in remote parts of scotland where gps doesn't work or shows you veering off into a field what do nu do with this data do they just assume they should charge you the highest amount for that part of the journey ? no thanks
mds automotive said:
have you ever tried crossing the forth road bridge with a gps system displaying live data several of them that i have tried have shown me with an instant speed of over 300mph not bad for a scania pulling a 38ton trailer
I think Jeremy will want one on his show! Ist good news that Top Gear ist revving up for new series .. as the Hamster wishes.
mds automotive said:
and what do they do in remote parts of scotland where gps doesn't work or shows you veering off into a field what do nu do with this data do they just assume they should charge you the highest amount for that part of the journey ? no thanks
Satellites lose you in Cumbria too.. Apart from the spy in car element ..und danger that that this will be abused in same way as the scams are now abused .. (und the recycling ethic may rebound on itself too when people are fined for chucking the wrong rubbish in the wrong bin on the wrong day..
) ...ist wrong that people can be "tagged" like this. Next thing will be the "obedience necklace" which I seem to recall had Captain James T Kirk und his intrepidest crew not so boldly going anywhere.. (The good captain set his laser beams on them und warped off at greatest speed as always at the end of the show .. "making it so with logic und life - but not as we know it -with Klingons on the starboard side!" Ach! for a laser beam like Captain Kirk's in my car to vapourise the scammers
und the "baddies" who just do not use C O A S T 
WildCat said:
(und the recycling ethic may rebound on itself too when people are fined for chucking the wrong rubbish in the wrong bin on the wrong day.. ) ...ist wrong that people can be "tagged" like this.
) ...ist wrong that people can be "tagged" like this. Remember George Orwell's 1984 ?
He was 22 years early, but he knew that we would be watched under a 'microscope'.
Just waiting for the crapometer to be fixed to every toilet now
Edited by shuvitupya on Friday 6th October 20:04
shuvitupya said:
WildCat said:
(und the recycling ethic may rebound on itself too when people are fined for chucking the wrong rubbish in the wrong bin on the wrong day.. ) ...ist wrong that people can be "tagged" like this.
) ...ist wrong that people can be "tagged" like this. Remember George Orwell's 1984 ?
He was 22 years early, but he knew that we would be watched under a 'microscope'.
Just waiting for the crapometer to be fixed to every toilet now
Edited by shuvitupya on Friday 6th October 20:04
I wonder .. if they fine for having the "runs".
Personally - I would fine prats und lentilists und Noo Labia und all other politically correct idiots for having "verbal diarrhoea"
I think I will end up in Room 101 for being a right rebel though
No matter.. am feline.. nothing fazes me. They'd lose GPS relies on the satellite having direct line of sight access to the car, anyone tried to use gps in major city streets will know that it can be problematic with limited access to the satellite
but thought labour was wanting to do road tolls thru in car black boxes, hands up all who voted for labour ?
nice idea, but guess that will be in addition to road and fuel tax as per usual. The NU idea is good for people who rarely use the cars or young people given a choice of £4000 to insure some car they use for college and little else..
but thought labour was wanting to do road tolls thru in car black boxes, hands up all who voted for labour ?
nice idea, but guess that will be in addition to road and fuel tax as per usual. The NU idea is good for people who rarely use the cars or young people given a choice of £4000 to insure some car they use for college and little else..
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff