Slashdot Mirror
Rental Car Companies Watching By Satellite, Again
tlcruiser writes: "The Arizona Daily Star reports that Budget Rent-A-Car companies in Arizona have used satellite tracking systems to track customers' use without notifying customers. They have used the tracking system to issue fines to their customers. Several customers are suing Budget for the invasion of privacy." When ACME Rent-a-Car did this in Connecticut, it was found improper by that state's Department of Consumer Protection. This time, the monitoring is not only of speed, but also of whether renters are staying within contractually allowed driving territories.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As usual seems many people did not read the article. The lawsuit is NOT about tracking the individuals in their vehicles (though the article does play that aspect up). The lawsuit is about wording in the contract. Specifically that the renters thought it was $1/mile in the "out of bounds" area and Budget charged them $1/mile on their whole trip. Having not actually seen the contract, I cannot comment on whose right, but this leads to the point.
Companies make rules, if you don't like the rules, then don't buy from them. If you are willing to accept the rules, then you must also be willing to accept the methods used to enforce those rules. Otherwise the rule is pointless.
Now, many people may get upset becuase they previously took advantage of the fact that the company couldn't enforce the rule accurately. But those people have no right to complain. They got lucky and their luck has run out.
I also find it odd that people think that they are allow privacy in a rented vehicle. It's their vehicle, they can do what they want. It is not your vehicle. In the same way that if I was to loan my car to a friend, it is still my vehicle, and if I want to monitor what my friend does with the car, I can. And yes, I would expect my friend to pay for any damages he inflicts on the vehicle as well. Again, if you don't like it, don't rent it.
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm no expert, but it seems that one of two things will happen:
1. As companies like ACME and budget start to use GPS to track their car's location/speed, there will be a small but inconsequential protest from consumers. Following the initial flurry of objections, other companies will see this as a potential source of revenue and will do it as well. Soon the practice of tracking customer whereabouts will become standard and given no alternative in the market, customers will just have to accept that whenever they rent a car, the company (and others, such as law enforcement or whomever) will know where the car is at all times.
2. As companies like ACME and budget start to use GPS to track their car's location, there will be an overwhelming outpouring of disgust and fury from the consumer, resulting in organized boycotts against the offending companies. Other companies, seeing that the public is outraged by the privacy invasion, will not track their customers for fear of losing business. The practice of tracking customer's whereabouts will not gain traction, and people will be free to drive cross-country to cheat on their spouses without fear of anyone finding out.
The question: Which scenario do you think is more likely, given what you know about modern-day America? Keep in mind that as we speak, an American citizen is being held under arrest indefinately by the government without charges being filed. Everyone knows it, but there is no rioting in the street.
I say if you wanna "get away from it all" in the near future, better walk.
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Only the very wealthy and self-insured will be able to drive cars without GPS logging and remotely storing your position, velocity, and the time. Rates will be adjusted for forays into "unsafe" neighborhoods, parking outside of bars, etc.
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
A simple solution for any privacy problems like this is implementing a system of two rates. You don't feel like having a rental car company looking over your shoulder, fine, pay a premium! Don't mind them looking over your shoulder, great, get a discount!
I suppose that due to our rather cheap nature everyone would opt for the latter choice thus making the system of two rates obsolete at introduction but at least you'd have a choice.
My oldest buddy from college is a manager at Enterprise. Now this is the guy who was always the designated driver, rarely got drunk, honest abe, abd never said a harsh word about anyone. Token goody two shoes of my less than desirable crowd.
There is not week that goes by where he does not call me with some rental horror story. Usually ending up with him and the police looking for a rental that someone refuses to bring back. Or there is a wreck in another state with one of his cars that was rented for local use.
And the lists goes on. The company owns the car and does need some form of protection. I know if I owned anagency I would want tracking.
Again the model where you can pay less with the tracking device or pay more without is a good idea.
The reason the companies are doing this is the lack of responsibility of the renters to respect the car and the contract. And remember very few agencies rent to people under 25.
Puro
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
The simple fact is that in our dealings with coroprations, we are frequently required to agree to large, complex, one-sided agreements. People sign (or otherwise agree to) these contracts because they really have no choice. Negotiating on the details of the agreement is simply not an option, and taking your business elsewhere may not be a realistic solution. Rarely are such contracts read - how many contracts have you agreed to without reading? I would imagine the number is in the thousands.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That being said, if you sign a contract, and agree to limit your use to specific terms and conditions, expect it to be enforced.
:D. "Yes Ma'am, you appear to have broken a few laws by exceeding the speed limit by five hundred and... oh. Hang on a sec..."
I would still be *SO* tempted to rent a car, pull the satellite tracking 'bits' out, UPS them around the country for a few days, and pop them back in.
Then deal with the 'fine' for doing air transport plane speeds across 8 states
a grrl & her server
For instance, does Budget immediately and permanently destroy all information about your activities if they are not outside of your contract? Do they have measures to protect the security of your information from crackers? What information exactly do they collect? All information could be attained by law enforcement agencies, almost arbitrarily since PATRIOT. Destroying information won't help if the police get there first and make the people quietly keep the information.
They need to have a clear notification that all your movement in the car is tracked. And it shouldn't just be in the contract -- it's not about the contract at all. They need a big sticker on the dashboard, saying "We track all your movement". That they can use that information to fine you is part of the contract.
Of course, clearly presented with this information, Budget's revenue would probably drop precipitously as people would be seriously spooked by having their movements tracked. But that's as it should be. It's not a free market if parties are uninformed about the products being exchanged.
Did you even bother reading the article? If you had, you'd see that the bulk of it explains why the rental agency's activites could be seen as more than just protecting their property.
For example, consider the following quote from the article, "Some customers said they didn't realize the $1-per-mile charge would be applied to their entire trip." In other words, if I were to drive an unlimited mileage in-state rental for 5,000 in-state miles and 2 out-of-state miles, I get hit with a $5,002 penalty.
It gets even worse, as "In some cases, according to court documents, the customers discussed their travel routes with Budget rental agents, and permitted areas were noted on rental contracts."
In short, this sounds like the rental agency is using the penalties as a gotcha-style revenue scheme rather than a legitimate means of protecting their own property. The fact that you ignored that entire aspect of the article makes me suspect that you're either delibrately trolling or at least weren't diligent enough to read up on the issue that you're commenting on.
This is done right now at the low end of the market. There are thousands of people driving around in cars that will stop running if they miss a payment.
See the site of Payment Protection Systems, whose motto is "Changing Behavior Through Technology". Their "OnTime" system is primitive; it's just a timer, which resets when given a new key code provided by the payment processor. If not reset, the car won't start. There are warning beeps, a day countdown, and an emergency override you can use once.
The next step up is Payment Sentry, with the slogan "It's Like Having a Collector in the Car!". Payment Sentry uses the Skytel paging system to send remote commands to the car, like "sound audible make-payment warning", "disable starter" or "sound alarm horn". It's one-way, though; there's no back channel.
Finally, there's Tracker International, a full-service vehicle tracking operation. Their GeoTraxx uses GPS and cellular data networks to transmit location. "Using GPS, vehicles can be pinpointed to within 36 feet. Location is fast, too. ... Often, same day location and repo takes place!" They even have a live demo, although it's not working at the moment.