General Motors has agreed to pay $12.75 million to settle allegations that it violated California’s privacy law by collecting and selling drivers’ location and driving data without proper notice or consent.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the settlement, saying GM illegally gathered data from California drivers between 2020 and 2024 and sold it to data brokers Verisk Analytics and LexisNexis Risk Solutions. The data was allegedly collected through GM’s OnStar subsidiary and its Smart Driver system, which was linked to driver-scoring products used for insurance-related services.
The investigation began in 2024 after media reports revealed that automakers, including GM, had shared driver behavior data with insurers. California officials said GM did not properly inform consumers about the data collection, failed to get clear consent, kept the data longer than needed, and later repurposed it for sale. Authorities said GM made around $20 million nationwide from the data.
Attorney General Bonta said GM sold California drivers’ data without their knowledge or consent, even after making statements that reassured customers it would not do so. He said the information included precise location data that could reveal people’s daily routines and movements.
The $12.75 million civil penalty is the largest of its kind in California’s history and marks the state’s first enforcement action focused on data minimization rules under the California Consumer Privacy Act.
As part of the settlement, GM must stop selling driving data to consumer reporting agencies and data brokers for five years. The company must also delete retained driving data within 180 days unless users clearly agree to keep the information. GM is also required to ask LexisNexis and Verisk to delete data they previously received and improve its privacy compliance program with regular reports to regulators.
If this article helped you, please consider supporting our work. Every small contribution keeps Abijita.com independent and running.
California officials said drivers in the state were unlikely to have faced higher insurance premiums because of GM’s data sales, since state law does not allow insurers to use driving data to set rates.
