Why not in Massachusetts?

Maybe because Progressive’s claims to “not increase your insurance nor the insurance of people who don’t choose to use it” are likely a crock?

<

p>Think about this for a minute. How exactly will Progressive see enough lower costs from this program to give the “good” drivers a discount while not increasing insurance for others? It can’t. So it will be increasing insurance for those people who refuse to wear this invasive ankle bracelet and for those it deems “bad drivers” based on its secret methodology – a label that has no recourse or appeal process, by the way, and is likely to stick with you for life (and maybe they will even share this with credit agencies…).

<

p>Insurance is about reasonable shared risk. Without any state oversight, we are letting unelected faceless bureaucrats decide who is “worthy” and who is “not worthy”. Insurance companies don’t care about the larger picture — like that their policies can result in societal changes like urban flight (compare the rates between a city and a suburb – they are substantial). They just care about their little corner of it.

It would stand to reason that Progressive or other insurers that utilize similar technology would want to try to keep good drivers, thereby ensuring revenue and good will from those drivers who receive a discount. My rate presently through Progressive is almost $800 less than the rate that I was just quoted through Liberty Mutual. Don’t you think that people getting such a great rate won’t spread the word? Heck, I’m telling everyone I know. 🙂

<

p>Respectfully Submitted,
Sincerely,
Wayne J. Wilson, Jr.
Roslindale