By Chris Isidore, NCS
(NCS) — The day earlier than Philip Siefke went looking for a brand new car insurance coverage, he occurred to hit his brakes arduous whereas driving. Not 24 hours later, when he priced a coverage with Progressive, he was shocked to discover the insurer already knew about that mundane expertise.
“I’m like, how the eff did they have my information?” Siefke stated. “I was pissed.”
He referred to as Progressive and demanded to understand how the insurer had such detailed details about his driving habits. The data got here from Toyota, a rep defined to the incredulous Siefke.
“She said, ‘Probably you signed up for a research project, and it’s coming from your telemetry that’s in your car,’” Siefke stated. When he protested that he’d finished no such factor, “she said, ‘Oh yeah, you did. Just about everybody does.’”
About 90% of latest vehicles on the highway accumulate data on the driving conduct of whoever is behind the wheel, in accordance to Telemetry, an automotive strategic advisory agency. Many automakers promote that data to third events like insurance firms.
Car patrons do have to agree to enable the gathering and sale of their information—however that settlement is usually buried deep within the wonderful print of the paperwork individuals signal once they purchase the car, a part of the sheaf of papers about costs, mortgage phrases and warranties.
“Technically, they had permission,” stated Sam Abuelssamid, auto analyst with Telemetry. “It’s something that people should be aware of, but are not.”
Most individuals don’t know they’re agreeing to the sale of their information, stated John Yanchunis, an legal professional at Morgan and Morgan whom Siefke employed to sue Toyota, Progressive and a 3rd party-data supplier in April 2025.
“If you go to buy a car, you have a single focus, right? The price,” Yanchunis stated.
“They don’t give people that choice to see what’s going to happen with this data at the time of the acquisition of the product. They bury it. And why do people bury things? Because they don’t want consumers to know what they’re doing.”
The assortment and sale of driving information is widespread throughout the automotive business, the Federal Trade Commission famous in a 2024 warning to shoppers. The auto firms, nevertheless, say this information is collected with the intent to use the data to defend drivers.
Cars now ‘powerful data-gobbling machines’
Industry commerce teams just like the Alliance for Automotive Innovation defend the gathering of driving information. It says automakers use these applications to present data that help vehicles’ correct functioning and enhance security. For instance, by alerting the automaker if the car has a difficulty that wants servicing.
“No, your car isn’t spying… it’s keeping you safe,” the Alliance titled its 2023 statement “Yes, your vehicle is generating and transmitting certain safety data. That’s by design.”
Consumer advocacy teams and the FTC, nevertheless, flag privateness considerations.
“Car brands quietly entered the data business by turning their vehicles into powerful data-gobbling machines,” stated a report from the Mozilla Foundation, a expertise privateness curiosity group, which characterised the auto business as “the worst product category we have ever reviewed for privacy.”
In its 2024 shopper warning, the FTC wrote that “cars can collect a lot of data about people. This data could be sensitive…and its collection, use, and disclosure can threaten consumers’ privacy and financial welfare.”
Although the FTC stated it has been monitoring this concern for years, the company has introduced just one case towards a company. In an order resolved simply final month, the FTC prohibited General Motors and its OnStar service from promoting this sort of information for 5 years “without adequately notifying consumers and obtaining their affirmative consent.”
There was no monetary penalty for GM, which stated it had discontinued the observe of promoting the data it collects to third events a 12 months earlier than the FTC order. The company famous that this system “was created to promote safer driving behavior, (but) we ended that program due to customer feedback.”
For Siefke’s lawyer, Yanchunis, it’s not a query of security; it’s about each privateness and knowledgeable consent.
“People should have the right to decide what they want to share with third parties, and they should not have those privacy rights taken from them without choice,” he stated.
Siefke feels he didn’t get that alternative, and that he ended up paying for it.
Last January, regardless of his reservations, Siefke moved ahead with a Progressive coverage that value lower than $300 a month. With driving document that included no tickets in nearly a decade and no accidents because the Nineties, he thought he’d keep fee.
But when it got here time to renew his coverage six months later, his fee had jumped to greater than $400 a month with no rationalization.
Meanwhile, the case he filed towards Toyota, Progressive, and the third-party information company continues to be pending. It was moved from the courts to arbitration—Siefke had additionally unknowingly agreed to arbitrate any disputes when he purchased the car.
Toyota wouldn’t touch upon ongoing litigation however stated it solely sells driving data to third events “except when the customer provides consent and directs Toyota Motors North America to do so.” Progressive didn’t reply to a request for remark.
Meanwhile, Yanchunis expects the widespread information assortment to proceed. He recalled what Thirties legal Willie Sutton stated when somebody requested why he robbed banks: “That’s where the money is.”
“In the 21st century, we’re where the money is. Information, data, that’s the money,” Yanchunis stated. “Companies harvest it, aggregate it, make money off it. And look, I understand that. But again, it comes back to choice: People ought to have the right to choose what’s being taken from them.”
The-NCS-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.