B

brianconwy

Well-Known Member
The murderer had thought that he had covered his tracks by having two accomplices take his wife's Disco that he used at the time and burning it. JLR still had the data that had been transmitted by sim card saved and this told the police where the car had been at the time of the murder and even what times the boot had been opened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-51466273
 
Yeah, read the article earlier, interesting stuff. Must be very frustrating for his family to not know why he was murdered.
 
Was talking to a guy recently who does crash investigations for insurers. Was telling me people greatly underestimate the amount of data avaible to the insurer once they get access to the data. He was asked to llok at a new Porsche that had rolled, driver clmaied brake failure and passenger was claiming whiplash and signficant damages. He got the speed, braking force, g-forces and record of seat belts (not worn), that was the end of that. He said drivers sometimes now try to withold access to the car hoping to cover up the data but don't realise its already been transmitted. Fip side to this is that I was talking to a guy doing cyber security for a very secure UK site. They had control of mobiles and the whole site "air-gapped" for data but they still had a wifi link and off site transmission. Turned out to be a new BMW hire car in the car park, the driver didn't know and nothing on the car showed it had wifi cell-net acess open at all times.
 
I am all for using this data to stop insurance scams. Trouble is that insurance companies just seem to pay out anyway. Shortly aftermy daughter first passed her driving test she went into the car in front at walking pace. Not even the slightest mark on her car. The other lady got paid out nearly seven grand, for whiplash no doubt. A few months after, my daughter and her friends were travelling in a taxi which was hit by a car jumping the lights. They got paid over two grand each in case of any future injury. She didn't claim she was injured even though the taxi was a total write off.
 
Over 30 years ago in California I was in collision with a cyclist at a 4-way stop that they just barreled on through when I had followed the proper "Bow & Curtsey" give way process (witnessed).
The rider (a woman in her 20's) all in black and on an unlicensed and unlit bike had plenty of injuries (I thought I was gonna get lynched when all the people tumbled out of their houses to see what all the commotion was about).
Police got the witness statement that she didn't stop at the 4-way and told me to be on my way and they prosecuted her for traffic violations. But my insurer paid her an undisclosed sum (to prevent all future claims).
 
Be interesing to see what happens if a Tesla is used in a robbery or hit and run. I think they have all round cameras that transmit back to Tesla.
 
brianconwy said:
I am all for using this data to stop insurance scams. Trouble is that insurance companies just seem to pay out anyway. Shortly aftermy daughter first passed her driving test she went into the car in front at walking pace. Not even the slightest mark on her car. The other lady got paid out nearly seven grand, for whiplash no doubt. A few months after, my daughter and her friends were travelling in a taxi which was hit by a car jumping the lights. They got paid over two grand each in case of any future injury. She didn't claim she was injured even though the taxi was a total write off.
Click to expand...

Similar my first year,
Blind exit out of work because a truck had blocked it, edged out, thought it was clear and went out, ending up pulling out on someone .. they had to brake, I f'd up but no issue I thought as no impact.
They claimed, my insurance said don't worry about it .. and then paid out o_O
Didn't use them again.
 
DanClarke said:
Over 30 years ago in California I was in collision with a cyclist at a 4-way stop that they just barreled on through when I had followed the proper "Bow & Curtsey" give way process (witnessed).
The rider (a woman in her 20's) all in black and on an unlicensed and unlit bike had plenty of injuries (I thought I was gonna get lynched when all the people tumbled out of their houses to see what all the commotion was about).
Police got the witness statement that she didn't stop at the 4-way and told me to be on my way and they prosecuted her for traffic violations. But my insurer paid her an undisclosed sum (to prevent all future claims).
Click to expand...

There's a busy mini roundabout near my office, the other day I had to emergency stop together with the car on the other side of the roundabout because a stealth cyclist barrelling along at well over 30 shot across the roundabout without slowing. Did make me wonder if he was on a bike because he kept failing his driving test.
 
My cousin with his mrs and two kids in the car were at a petrol station and got 'tapped' by the woman behind. She wasn't hurt, none of the people in his car were hurt. The only damage was some minor paint damage to his rear bumper. It was plastic but deformed a bit cracking the paint. She didn't want to go through the insurance so he told her to give him £100 for a respray to his bumper. His BMW was pretty much mint. She paid up, no problem, but he felt to cover himself that he should notify his insurance anyway. They pestered him trying to get him to use a hire car. They telephoned him five or six times pushing him to claim for whiplash injuries. In the end, he was so fed up with being pestered and angry that despite him reassuring them that NOBODY was hurt in either car that he told them to 'go and make love to themselves' and that if they telephoned him again he on this matter, that he AND his father would take their business elswhere. They are both mechanics by trade with their own garage and have their own cars, their partner's car's and the business all with that company.
 
yfo866 said:
My cousin with his mrs and two kids in the car were at a petrol station and got 'tapped' by the woman behind. She wasn't hurt, none of the people in his car were hurt. The only damage was some minor paint damage to his rear bumper. It was plastic but deformed a bit cracking the paint. She didn't want to go through the insurance so he told her to give him £100 for a respray to his bumper. His BMW was pretty much mint. She paid up, no problem, but he felt to cover himself that he should notify his insurance anyway. They pestered him trying to get him to use a hire car. They telephoned him five or six times pushing him to claim for whiplash injuries. In the end, he was so fed up with being pestered and angry that despite him reassuring them that NOBODY was hurt in either car that he told them to 'go and make love to themselves' and that if they telephoned him again he on this matter, that he AND his father would take their business elswhere. They are both mechanics by trade with their own garage and have their own cars, their partner's car's and the business all with that company.
Click to expand...

For every honorable person there's dozens that would take the money, such is the culture of everyone being a victim (whether they like it or not)
 
Few years back my car got written off with flood damage. This lead to months of pesistent injury clamis calls day and night that had all the correct personal details I wrote to the insurence company and then brought a formal complaint for a data breach, they denied it at first but the investigation found they were selling customers data.
 
rob1miles said:
Few years back my car got written off with flood damage. This lead to months of pesistent injury clamis calls day and night that had all the correct personal details I wrote to the insurence company and then brought a formal complaint for a data breach, they denied it at first but the investigation found they were selling customers data.
Click to expand...
Since i started using insurance comparison sites about eight years ago i started getting companies that i hadn't even looked at for quotes phoning my mobile up to a couple of months after my renewal date wanting to quote me. I suspected some company was sharing my details so soon started giving an old mobile number on the forms and it stopped. Now i give a genuine email address but one specifically for spam and once i take out a policy i give them an address i regularly check. They only get my phone number if i make a claim which given that i have nine years NCB isn't often. If any company insists on being given a home phone number, i find out what their number is and give them that.
I can deal with spam emails but being called at home or on my mobile with unsolicited and unwanted calls really winds me up!
 
I like the idea of giving them their own number! At the time we had 2 elderly relatives (sadly now one) but every time the phone rings at an odd time you assume it another fall or worse and run to the phone. I got really wound up by it which is why I pursued it through formal complaints and data breaches. That stopped the calls, but so far as I know no one got prosecuted.
 
yfo866 said:
If any company insists on being given a home phone number,
Click to expand...

I feel your pain - this is one of the reasons we got rid of our landline - and also block withheld / private numbers on our mobiles ! So much better.
 
While the prosecution of the crossbow murderer was a welcome thing, I am surprised that any company can collect data on individuals without their express concent, is this not a breach of the data protection act?
If you are being tracked like this let's say you go off for a couple of nights in a hotel, anyone hacking into that data may know your house is vulnerable.
And I dont feel reassured by any claim that the data is safe.
 
I suppose they adhere to the data protection act legislation. They would probably claim that they are monitoring the car for safety reasons rather than the driver. Spooky though.
 
raywin said:
While the prosecution of the crossbow murderer was a welcome thing, I am surprised that any company can collect data on individuals without their express concent, is this not a breach of the data protection act?
If you are being tracked like this let's say you go off for a couple of nights in a hotel, anyone hacking into that data may know your house is vulnerable.
And I dont feel reassured by any claim that the data is safe.
Click to expand...
No, i think a company can collect anything they can get away with, they only breach the data protection act if they share it with a third party.
Look at Google.........
 
Data protection is for people protection only. They're monitoring what the car is doing. Not the person. The drivers details are not known. Remote live monitoring is a step up of the previous version of cars logging data which is automatically eggstracted during garage visits to main dealers. Info is used to find out about a cars use. No different to cars when they first had electronics monitoring things and they counted harsh eggscelleration events. Thrashing it often meant they wouldn't repair damaged caused by thrashing it if the count was high. They also use the data to help future development like count the number of times doors are locked and opened. From that they know how robust the design them.

I'm guessing they use the telemetric live data anonymously unless theres a request to look at a specific car like a request from the police. Or a failed engine claim makes the want to see if its been ragged at brands hatch.
 
Hippo said:
Data protection is for people protection only. They're monitoring what the car is doing. Not the person. The drivers details are not known. Remote live monitoring is a step up of the previous version of cars logging data which is automatically eggstracted during garage visits to main dealers. Info is used to find out about a cars use. No different to cars when they first had electronics monitoring things and they counted harsh eggscelleration events. Thrashing it often meant they wouldn't repair damaged caused by thrashing it if the count was high. They also use the data to help future development like count the number of times doors are locked and opened. From that they know how robust the design them.

I'm guessing they use the telemetric live data anonymously unless theres a request to look at a specific car like a request from the police. Or a failed engine claim makes the want to see if its been ragged at brands hatch.
Click to expand...
It's hard to see that they are monitoring the car as the car is only capable of sitting immobile in one place without human interaction, all the events they measure are instigated by a human actions. Also they gave the information to the police as a record of what the person did, it was my understanding that you cant store data on a computer without consent, as I recall some organisations even went back to card files to allow them to keep data which they didn't want to ask permission to keep.
Dont get me wrong I am delighted that they caught that scum bag, but as I mentioned we often learn the hard way that wonderful new technology can have more sinister uses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Disco 3 (LR3) I return to the fold with a Window Fault
Replies
6
Views
587
johnlad
johnlad
B
TD5 R380 gearbox selector bush
Replies
1
Views
518
Landmark2
Landmark2
R
Discovery 4 TDV6 - shuddering engine, no acceleration/won’t rev
Replies
7
Views
1K
tyregeezer
tyregeezer
Flat 6
New electronic dizzy - no spark
Replies
4
Views
663
Flat 6
Flat 6
SR4x4
Discovery 3 2005 (55) Land Rover Discovery 3 Tdv6 Auto (7 Seat) £6000
Replies
0
Views
2K
SR4x4
SR4x4