Canadian drivers should worry about privacy: report

Telematics worries: Report funded by Privacy Commissioner raise serious concerns about what cars know about drivers

Hamilton Spectator

By Craig Desson

 

MORE, source:

http://www.insidebrockville.com/news-story/5533618-canadian-drivers-should-worry-about-privacy-report/

 

Canadian Insurance Companies Can Legally Practice 'Genetic Discrimination'

July 18, 2014 // 04:05 PM EST

Right now, in Canada, there's a battle going on for its citizens' genes, as health insurance companies are using genome sequencing to assess risk (read: increase rates) for patients who are predisposed to certain diseases. 

The country's privacy commissioner issued a policy statement last week saying that the government would really appreciate if health insurance companies left genetic testing out of whatever actuarial algorithms they're using, but hasn't banned the practice outright. 

While Canada has universal health care that's highly subsidized by (and often free for consumers), there are still plenty of private insurers. And, right now, the country's health insurance industry has instituted a voluntary moratorium on asking people to specifically undergo genetic testing when they apply for coverage. But that doesn't mean it never happens—it just happens in a different way. If a person has already undergone genetic testing in the past, insurance companies will regularly request that data from a prospective client's doctors.

"If genetic testing has been done and the information is available to the applicant for insurance and/or the applicant’s physician, the insurer would request access to that information just as it would for other aspects of the applicant’s health history," the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association stated as its official policy on the issue. 

The practice sets a pretty scary precedent that some have worried about for years—what happens when and if a baby is genetically tested at birth and is determined to be a risky investment for an insurance company? Some countries, including the United States have (sort of) already banned the practice, but there's still no law against it in Canada. 

“Some of these tests—as time goes on, and now—are important indicators with respect to risk,” Frank Zinatelli, a lawyer with the CLHIA, told Canada's Globe and Mail. “So yes, we feel it’s important to be able to have access to those types of information.”

An insurance company flak would say that. There's no denying that knowing whether someone is predisposed to having Alzheimer's or Parkinson's or certain types of cancer is valuable information for an insurance company. It's, perhaps, the most important thing an insurance company can learn about a person, from a business standpoint. 

It's also why the United States, a country that seemingly protects its citizens' privacy much less than Canada does passed a ban on genetic discrimination back in 2008. There are loopholes in that law, sure (it only covers health insurance and employment, not life insurance), but it's better than any sort of "voluntary moratorium," especially when the industry is champing at the bit to expand the practice. Meanwhile, a bill that would actually ban genetic discrimination has been sitting in Canadian parliament since October, with little indication that it's going to move forward.

Source: www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=6257110

 

Over 150 Attendees Already Confirmed to Attend Insurance Telematics Canada Conference 2014

With nearly all of the nations insurance carriers represented in the audience and on stage (C-level officials from RSA Group, Desjardins and The Cooperators are involved in presentations and panel sessions), the 2-day Insurance Telematics Canada conference (May 28-29) will allow telematics service providers such as iMetrik, Octo and IMS; technology consultants such as IBM, Towers Watson and CGI; and insurance regulators such as Financial Services Commission of Ontario and the Alberta Treasury Board and Finance to gain a priceless insight into how insurance carriers seek to utilise the strategic benefits that UBI can deliver. A sample of the delegates can be found here - http://www.telematicsupdate.com/insurance-telematics-canada/attendees.php.


http://www.12newsnow.com/story/25380970/over-150-attendees-already-confirmed-to-attend-insurance-telematics-canada-conference-2014

Source:  http://www.fairassociation.ca/

Motor Mouth: The cost of cheaper insurance is your privacy

Usage-based insurance could be the slippery slope that leads us all into an Orwellian driving future 

How cheaply do we surrender our freedoms?

The nightmare of Big Brother — at least how I’ve always understood it — has always been one that is forced upon its citizenry. To be sure, the methods are always insidious, the doublespeak always cloaked in soothing palliatives and the promise of a Utopian society, not to mention the occasional financial incentive. But, as much as the process of being constantly surveilled is stealthy and surreptitious, it is always forced upon us. We would not, in a million years, volunteer for an Orwellian future, right?

Oh, if only that were true.

It turns out that, in the last few years, some six million motorists — mostly in the United Kingdom and the United States — have volunteered to have a black box installed in their automobile that monitors their behaviour behind the wheel, with all of the data from every kilometre of their driving fed right back to their insurance companies.

The lure is that, should you drive according to the insurer’s guidelines, you could actually have your monthly insurance premium reduced. Each insurer differs as to what they actually measure and what specific limits they pose, but the premise is always the same: drive in a “normal” manner — i.e. as if you were a little old lady from Pasadena driving a Suzuki Sprint with one spark plug missing — and you will see savings.

Motor Mouth: Surrendering our driving freedom $50 at a time

How significant are these savings? Well, it depends on whom you talk to. Desjardins’ new Ajusto black-boxed insurance program being offered in Ontario and Quebec promises as much as 25% savings if you respect their limits of not accelerating harder than 13 kilometres per hour per second or braking more than 15 km/h/sec. In Quebec — where the RCCAQ (Le Regroupement des cabinets de courtage d’assurances du Québec) is estimating that up to 30% of drivers may opt for such telematics-based insurance by 2017 — the median savings is said to be about 12%. For a little more perspective on that, remember that Quebec automobile insurance is partially subsidized, the average consumer paying about $650 annually for their supplementary property damage insurance. Do the math and the costs savings to the average Ajusto customer in Quebec is about seven bucks a month. Even for someone in Ontario currently paying $2,000 a year, that net savings would translate into but $20 a month, not enough to buy you a 12-pack unless The Beer Store is having a fire sale.

The Ajusto wireless device from Desjardins Insurance is installed into a vehicle’s diagnostic port and measures distance travelled annually, frequency of hard braking and acceleration, as well as time of day the vehicle is driven to determine savings on insurance rates.
Handout, The Canadian Press

A few other companies in Quebec offer greater savings. Industrial Alliance’s Mobiliz, for instance, targets drivers between the ages of 16 and 24, generally acknowledged as those most at risk for traffic accidents. According to the company, the average young adult saves about 25%. Of course, only the most law-abiding of teenagers signs up for the program, especially since Mobiliz is the only black box insurer that will actually raise your rates — by up to 100% if you’ve been particularly naughty — if you speed too dramatically or too often (for instance, every instance of “extreme speed” will result in a premium of $10 being added to your monthly bill). So that the insured can immediately see the result of their driving behaviour, Mobiliz’s premiums are adjusted monthly meaning their premiums could fluctuate dramatically.

Nonetheless, the lure of lower insurance rates is finding traction. According to Towers Watson, a consulting firm in the U.S., about 200,000 Americans a month are signing up to have said black boxes installed in their cars. The organization also says that “nearly 90% express openness to buy a UBI (usage based insurance) policy in the U.S. if there is no risk of premium increasing.” Canadian Business, on the other hand, reports that a Deloitte survey here in the Great White Frozen North revealed that 61% of Canadians would not be interested in such surveillance devices in their cars.

Motor Mouth: Missing jet a sobering reminder of tech’s faults

In this 2006 file photo, Adam Gordon, of Saint Paul, Minnesota, displays the wireless device that his auto insurance provider uses to monitor his driving speed, distance, braking and accelerating, and what time he’s driving. In exchange, Gordon gets a 15% savings on his auto insurance premiums.
Archive photo, Craig Borck/St. Paul Pioneer Press/

That would seem to put us in a more independent mindset than our Yankee friends, usually the last bastion of personal freedoms and privacy. Nonetheless, I would still want to know why a seemingly incredible 39% of Canadians think volunteering for such a program is a good idea? Indeed, forget about the plight of the scofflaw motorist for a moment; why would anyone volunteer to supply evidence of malfeasance of any kind that might be used against them? This is akin to volunteering for a tax audit. Or videotaping your business hotel room for your spouse so that they might witness first-hand the nonsense you get up to when they’re not around. Surely, even those of you smugly sitting in your Toyota Priuses, comfortable in the knowledge that you’ll never speed, understand that opening up every part of your personal life to constant scrutiny — data loggers in your trousers and breathalyzers for everyone! — is never a good idea.

So far, the push for the installation of these black boxes have been rather modest campaigns by private insurance companies, all — at least in Ontario — assuring that the information won’t be used for nefarious purposes (i.e. raising your rates). Imagine, however, if the political class gets involved. The Wynne government is already desperately looking for ways to fulfill their promise to lower Ontario’s insurance rates. And, what if politicians in B.C., Manitoba and Saskatchewan — provinces where the entire insurance programs are government run — get behind this constant monitoring of motorists? How long do you think it will be before such schemes become mandatory and a cash cow for beleaguered governments?

All this for as little as seven bucks a month. If we do end up in some brackish Orwellian dystopia, we will have no one else to blame but ourselves.

Could our driving data fall into to the wrong hands?

So far, the discussions regarding the privacy of the information culled from owners’ black boxes has focused on who owns the data. To their credit, virtually everyone in the insurance industry seems to agree that the information must remain the property of the owner (Quebec’s RCCAQ has asked for guidelines to be established that all information collected remains the property of the insured and such policies are already in place in Ontario). That said, the big insurance companies aren’t the ones actually collecting the data; that generally rests with third party data collection firms. And, depending on which company is doing the information gathering, your particulars could be housed in Canada, the United States, or even Italy. With the porosity of data security now being top-of-the-fold headline material these days, do we really need more Heartbleed leaks to understand that data mining is the playground of the modern scoundrel?

Source:  http://driving.ca/auto-news/news/motor-mouth-bowing-down-to-big-brother-for-cheap-insurance By David Booth Originally published: April 25, 2014

A Joint Venture with SAP: Taking control of car insurance premiums

For hard-pressed consumers, catching a break on car insurance premiums might become easier thanks to pay-how-you-drive technology developed by Quebec-based Baseline Telematics.

“Drivers can’t control their age, gender or where they live, but they can control their driving habits,” says Paul-André Savoie, president and chief executive officer of Baseline Telematics. “The program is hugely popular with young drivers, who typically pay high premiums. They now have control over how much insurance they pay and an incentive to drive safely.”

A small wireless data collection device in the vehicle gathers information about speed, acceleration, braking and distance travelled. These four factors are used to determine insurance risk. Each month a premium is calculated based on the results during that period. Over the next 30 days drivers can address weaknesses, such as speeding or hard braking, and lower their premium for the following month.

A collaborative approach brought teams together from Baseline Telematics, Industrial Alliance, and SAP Canada to develop the technology.

Industrial Alliance was looking for a way not only to change the way insurance is sold, but to change driving habits and ultimately save lives, says Savoie. The result was the Mobiliz program that has been available in Quebec since April, 2011.

“We partnered with SAP because they have the big data capabilities that we need to collect, manage and analyze an almost unlimited amount of information in real-time,” explains Savoie.

For SAP, the technology completes a suite of services provided to its 1,000 insurance company clients around the globe. “It’s a disruptive technology that brings choice and behavioral change allowing drivers to help themselves,” says Richard Daukant, national vice-president of strategic engagement with SAP Canada. “For insurance carriers, it’s become an ‘ignore it at your own risk’ opportunity.”

In Canada, there are currently over 25,000 subscribers to the pay-as-you-drive telematics program spanning Alberta, Saskatchewan and Quebec. Discussions with insurance regulators in Ontario are underway; it is expected the program will be launched in the province during 2014. There are also pilot projects with a dozen insurance carriers around the world, including Australia, France, Germany and Chile, adds Savoie. A program for motorcycles is under development for riders in Saskatchewan.

The program is bringing a seismic shift for actuaries and how they calculate risk, says Daukant. “Instead of using data from years past to calculate risk they can use information from the past 30 days.”

It’s also changing customer communications. “Insurers are now connecting with customers four times a month via email to let them know how they been driving and if they have incurred any infractions,” he says. “Open rates on communications are at 87% — people actually want to hear from their insurance company and that’s a pretty dramatic shift.”

This is a transformational technology, says Savoie, “I believe pay-as-you-drive programs have the capability of insuring one of every two cars in the next five to 10 years. And when you look at the $20-billion in car insurance sold annually in Canada alone, the market potential is astronomical.”

_{source: Special to Financial Post | January 7, 2014 6:00 AM ET
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/01/07/a-joint-venture-with-sap-taking-control-of-car-insurance-premiums/}

Time to speak up about car insurance

Here we go again. Ontario’s insurance legislation requires the Superintendent of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario to conduct periodic reviews of auto insurance. The Superintendent’s report is expected to be presented to the Minister of Finance this fall. The last review of auto insurance resulted in massive reductions to no-fault accident benefits in 2010. Submissions to the Superintendent can be made up to Mar. 31. The usual stakeholders will make their wishes known but now is the time for ordinary people to stand up and make their voices heard. If you have been in a car accident and don’t like how you’ve been treated by your insurance company, or if you feel you have been the subject of an injustice, now is the time to speak up. If people don’t do that, their voices will be overshadowed by the usual industry stakeholders. The biggest issue facing accident victims relates to the medical and rehabilitation benefits available for what are deemed minor injuries. Prior to 2010, non-catastrophic accident victims were entitled to medical/rehabilitation benefits of up to $100,000. While this may have been generous in many cases, this isn’t money that went into the pockets of accident victims; it was money that went to pay for medical/rehab care. The 2010 reforms reduced the $100,000 to $50,000. But they also created a new category of injuries called minor injuries and allotted a maximum of $3,500 in med/rehab benefits for them. Worse, the $3,500 includes the cost of assessments, examinations and reports, an amount that can be eaten up quickly with an assessment, an examination or a report followed by physiotherapy two or three times a week. Car insurance adjusters have been given the power to categorize an injury as minor or non-minor. They can disagree with the injured person’s doctor and override the diagnosis and prognosis of medical professionals, without having obtained a supporting medical opinion to justify the denial. Sometimes they seek a second opinion but often these come from insurer-friendly experts. Disagreements over minor injury designation can be disputed but that pushes victims into a lengthy mediation/arbitration process. In the meantime, victims go without treatment and must suffer and rely on painkillers. Aside from revamping minor injury guidelines we need to overhaul the use, or perhaps I should say misuse, of independent medical examinations (IMEs) by the insurance industry. Insurers retain outside experts to assess and categorize injuries and determine which treatments and benefits ought to be paid. Arbitrators and judges base their decisions on experts’ reports and evidence. Accident victims cannot receive justice and justice cannot be seen to be done unless we change the rules for these IMEs. As the FAIR Association of Victims for Accident Insurance Reform states, “Ontario’s IME process is fraught with bias and lack of oversight; consumers have no faith when attending an IME in Ontario that they will be given an acceptable quality report prepared by a competent and unbiased assessor.” Too many insurer-appointed experts earn substantial sums and substantial portions of their income from insurance companies. Even if these experts try to be impartial they may suffer from subconscious bias and can’t be seen to be impartial. We need reforms that compel experts to be acceptable to the insured as well as the insurer. Insurance companies have been playing the fraud card to justify reductions in accident benefits, but the numbers don’t justify the reductions. In 2012, Ontario’s car insurers collected $3.78 billion in accident benefits premiums but paid out only $1.67 billion in claims and adjustment expenses. That’s from the General Insurance Statistical Agency, the non-profit organization that tracks information on behalf of provincial insurance regulators. So, despite fraud, accident benefits coverage is highly profitable for Ontario insurance companies. If you want to provide your views to the Superintendent you can send them by email to Jennifer MacMillan, Senior Policy Consultant, to 3YearReview@fsco.gov.on.ca. source: By Alan Shanoff   ,Toronto Sun First posted: Saturday, January 11, 2014 07:00 PM EST

Stalked by those we've paid to protect us

For those of us who have been under surveillance for years - we are stalked by those we've paid to protect us. It would be worse if an accident victim has a telematic device in their car...surveillance you'd pay for that your insurer could use against you.

http://www.victimsofviolence.on.ca/rev2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=363&Itemid=53

WHAT IS STALKING?

There are varying perceptions of what constitutes stalking. Some believe that any harassing behaviour constitutes stalking, others believe that the behaviour must be threatening for it to be defined as stalking. Some believe that stalking is based solely on infatuation, others believe it has nothing to do with sexual attraction but rather power and control. Some definitions of stalking include:

“Generally it consists of repeated conduct that is carried out over a period of time and which causes you to reasonably fear for your safety or the safety of someone known to you” (RCMP, 2007).

“The Bureau of Justice Statistics defined stalking as a course of conduct, directed at a specific person on at least two separate occasions, that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009).

Source:  http://www.fairassociation.ca/

Telematics gives brokers opportunities to offer advice but may need a 'disable creep stalk' function

Telematics is going to change the way auto insurance is offered, and the technology gives brokers plenty of opportunities to offer advice to consumers, according to speakers at Thursday's P&C Crystal Ball conference who are using pilot versions of the technology to monitor reports on their own driving habits.

"Telematics is going to change everything," said Alister Campbell, chief executive officer of The Guarantee Company of North America. "Taken to its logical extreme, the usage based insurance model is no longer insurance."
He made his remarks during a question period at P&C Crystal Ball, which was organized by CW Consulting (formerly known as Cookson Walker) and held at the International Plaza Hotel in Toronto.
"Insurance is the pooling of a group of people with shared characteristics and then you use the previous performance of those people with shared characteristics to guess how they might do something in the future that involves some form of risk, like a car crash," Campbell noted.
But the "full extreme version" of usage-based insurance, Campbell added, is "basically a utility. It's how you drove, how far you drove and what kind of events happened while you were driving, week by week and month by month."
The role of the broker, Campbell said is "not clear" to him, but the CEO of a major broker association did offer some clarity.
"Telematics is going to change our world in 2014," said Randy Carroll, chief executive officer of the Insurance Brokers Association of Ontario (IBAO). "You have to ... help the consumer understand that product and in order for them to understand that product, you have to understand ... how it works. It actually affords you the opportunity to go back to the basics of underwriting, from a different perspective, and become an educator for the consumer versus having the conversations that you have had over the past two years, talking about black box underwriting, having no idea how the policies have been underwritten, or rates have been determined."
Carroll added brokers can advise consumers as to how they can improve their risk.
"You can also have a great conversation, advising them as to whether they should move to that type of product offering or whether they should stay within the traditional model," he said, noting IBAO executives have been beta-testing telematics.
"I would massacre myself if I moved over to a telematics," he said. "Out of whole test group, I am the person with most frequency and severity of braking."
Campbell is also involved in a telematics pilot, involving 30 members of The Guarantee's senior management team and board.
"A lot of my dangerous rating on the pilot we are doing is because I am not driving 100 (kilometres per hour) on (Ontario Highway) 401," said Campbell. "I'm going to want a usage-based pricing model but I want one that recognizes my characteristic of 30 years with no accidents. Even though I drive a little bit above the speed limit I think there will be lots of people like that and there will be lots of companies who will be very hard-nosed in their modeling and less sensitive to those differences."
Cambell added different carriers will have different rating models when using telematics to assess risk.
"I can assure you the actuaries do not have consensus on that," he said. "In that environment, there's a lot of room for advice on which box to use, which company's model might fit with a certain type of driver."
Campbell shared some other of lessons he has learned in the telematics trial.
"I was able, to track, in a weekly report, my wife doing 57 over the posted limit .. coming off (Ontario Highway) 409 on to the entrance into (Toronto) Pearson  (International Airport)," he said. "The speed limit goes from 100 to 90 to 80 to 60 to 50 in about 10 feet and there is always a cop there. You can spot those kinds of things. They are interesting but a bit creepy."
Campbell also discovered a function that lets users determine the last reported location for their vehicle and he brought the house down with his anecdote.
 "I clicked on it and there she was, parked, on Fairlawn Avenue, just off Avenue Road," he said when checking his wife's location.
"Two days before Christmas, probably shopping, but maybe that's where her boyfriend lives," he quipped. 
But in all seriousness, Campbell suggested insurers offering telematics will need to take this into consideration.
"You realize you will probably have to have a 'Disable household creep stalk' function," he said. "Has anybody thought about that one yet? Because I think the winning companies will."

Source:  By: Greg Meckbach, Associate Editor 2014-01-24 http://www.canadianunderwriter.ca/news/telematics-gives-brokers-opportunities-to-offer-advice-but-may-need-a-disable-creep-stalk-function/1002876453/s7vw03Wsv64srM2vx/?ref=enews_CU&utm_source=CU&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CU-EN01272014