Disarming Onstar

[old-chevy-dude]

On 2007+ models, OnStar, GPS, & XM share the same antenna. On pre 07 models, they had 2 antennas on the top.

 

 

The GPS antenna (for the OEM GPS Unit) is NOT part of the OnStar antenna, it is a separate antenna mounted under the dash toward the windshield. Now the OnStar GPS antenna might be part of that, in all honesty I do not know, but I know for fact the OEM Nav unit GPS antenna is in the dash.

[Black02Silverado]

since Onstar still 'collects vehicle information' even after you cancel it, does that mean they will still notify help if my vehicle is ever in a serious accident?

 

Nope is the answer I got for OnStar. But I supposed you could hit the blue button after the accident and resign up with your Visa card... might be a little hard to do depending on your injuries and dialing 911 would be faster anyhow.

 

 

I agree with JrDirt - Make it + 4. XM has to be one of the sleaziest hard sell companies to deal with, must work for some folks or they would not do it... but for me it was such a nightmare I had to cancel / close a visa card to get them to stop charging me for years all the way out to 2013 and 14 on a truck I no longer owned!

 

If your worried about big brother a Droid base smart phone tracks more info on you then OnStar ever will.. OnStar just knows what your truck is doing... oh and its all in the ODB computer in the truck anyhow, anyone can grab that data if needed including your mechanic, police and insurance companies.

 

 

 

Bingo!

[noway]

Chucky Schumer called the tracking "one of the most brazen invasions of privacy in recent memory."

 

AL Franken and Chris Coons say that the company's actions "appear to violate basic principles of privacy and fairness."

 

They also said “We believe that OnStar’s actions underscore the urgent need for prompt congressional action to enact privacy laws that protect private, sensitive information like location,”

 

Never thought I wold agree with these three stooges!

[old-chevy-dude]

Chucky Schumer called the tracking "one of the most brazen invasions of privacy in recent memory."

 

AL Franken and Chris Coons say that the company's actions "appear to violate basic principles of privacy and fairness."

 

They also said “We believe that OnStar’s actions underscore the urgent need for prompt congressional action to enact privacy laws that protect private, sensitive information like location,”

 

Never thought I wold agree with these three stooges!

 

 

sounds to me more like they own GM products with OnStar and don't want the wife to know where/when they are with their mistresses.

[dataspng]

Chucky Schumer called the tracking "one of the most brazen invasions of privacy in recent memory."

 

AL Franken and Chris Coons say that the company's actions "appear to violate basic principles of privacy and fairness."

 

They also said "We believe that OnStar's actions underscore the urgent need for prompt congressional action to enact privacy laws that protect private, sensitive information like location,"

 

Never thought I wold agree with these three stooges!

 

 

And yet they dont have a problem with cell phone companies and smartphones and all the tracking they do?... Interesting... I agree with old-chevy-dude they must dislike GM/Onstar or have stock in other auto manufactures.

[Superperv23]

Well everyone can stop panicking as onstar have reverted back to the old terms and conditions just over an hour ago. I had a lengthy conversation with onstar about the issue just now and I would like to make a few points.

 

First off as I stated many replies ago, that noone listened too, if you want to totally disable onstar you arrange it through your dealer. Had you have done this under the new terms and condition it would have been free as they had to offer it free to give you the option of not excepting the terms. Now however if you want to be totally disabled you will have to either do it yourself or go to the dealer and pay standard shop rates.

 

Now as it stands if you do not want to be tracked you just call up and cancel the service if you pay for it. This leaves the modules intact in the vehicle so that at some point in time it could be restored by simply calling them. None of the services will work and they will not be notified if you are involved in a crash. So just to be clear if you do not pay the fee they have no idea what you are doing, you can leave the module connected.

 

Finally the paranoia of a few will almost certainly cost the lives of others as onstar having a connection to a vehicle without an active plan means that in the event of a crash they would have been notified and would have acted on it. I find it extremely hard to swallow that millions of people could have had crash response in exchange for onstar selling some data of people who do not care that they sell it. However because a few people are so paranoid that someone might give them a ticket because they deserved one, confirmed them at fault in an accident when they were at fault, or maybe even called a subscriber and said their husbands vehicle was always parked out side of a strip club and told her maybe her marriage was not going to work out that now someone somewhere could be involved in a single vehicle accident on a deserted road and no one will know until it is too late. So if you bitched about onstar tracking you and that happens to someone you know realize that next time you should think before you act and ask questions rather than make statements.

[old-chevy-dude]

Well everyone can stop panicking as onstar have reverted back to the old terms and conditions just over an hour ago. I had a lengthy conversation with onstar about the issue just now and I would like to make a few points.

 

First off as I stated many replies ago, that noone listened too, if you want to totally disable onstar you arrange it through your dealer. Had you have done this under the new terms and condition it would have been free as they had to offer it free to give you the option of not excepting the terms. Now however if you want to be totally disabled you will have to either do it yourself or go to the dealer and pay standard shop rates.

 

Now as it stands if you do not want to be tracked you just call up and cancel the service if you pay for it. This leaves the modules intact in the vehicle so that at some point in time it could be restored by simply calling them. None of the services will work and they will not be notified if you are involved in a crash. So just to be clear if you do not pay the fee they have no idea what you are doing, you can leave the module connected.

 

Finally the paranoia of a few will almost certainly cost the lives of others as onstar having a connection to a vehicle without an active plan means that in the event of a crash they would have been notified and would have acted on it. I find it extremely hard to swallow that millions of people could have had crash response in exchange for onstar selling some data of people who do not care that they sell it. However because a few people are so paranoid that someone might give them a ticket because they deserved one, confirmed them at fault in an accident when they were at fault, or maybe even called a subscriber and said their husbands vehicle was always parked out side of a strip club and told her maybe her marriage was not going to work out that now someone somewhere could be involved in a single vehicle accident on a deserted road and no one will know until it is too late. So if you bitched about onstar tracking you and that happens to someone you know realize that next time you should think before you act and ask questions rather than make statements.

 

 

 

I really wish this forum had some type of "like" button or forum reputation system so I can applaud your post..

[mhenshaw]

Well everyone can stop panicking as onstar have reverted back to the old terms and conditions just over an hour ago. I had a lengthy conversation with onstar about the issue just now and I would like to make a few points.

 

First off as I stated many replies ago, that noone listened too, if you want to totally disable onstar you arrange it through your dealer. Had you have done this under the new terms and condition it would have been free as they had to offer it free to give you the option of not excepting the terms. Now however if you want to be totally disabled you will have to either do it yourself or go to the dealer and pay standard shop rates.

 

Now as it stands if you do not want to be tracked you just call up and cancel the service if you pay for it. This leaves the modules intact in the vehicle so that at some point in time it could be restored by simply calling them. None of the services will work and they will not be notified if you are involved in a crash. So just to be clear if you do not pay the fee they have no idea what you are doing, you can leave the module connected.

 

Finally the paranoia of a few will almost certainly cost the lives of others as onstar having a connection to a vehicle without an active plan means that in the event of a crash they would have been notified and would have acted on it. I find it extremely hard to swallow that millions of people could have had crash response in exchange for onstar selling some data of people who do not care that they sell it. However because a few people are so paranoid that someone might give them a ticket because they deserved one, confirmed them at fault in an accident when they were at fault, or maybe even called a subscriber and said their husbands vehicle was always parked out side of a strip club and told her maybe her marriage was not going to work out that now someone somewhere could be involved in a single vehicle accident on a deserted road and no one will know until it is too late. So if you bitched about onstar tracking you and that happens to someone you know realize that next time you should think before you act and ask questions rather than make statements.

 

I really don't understand why you think people are crazy for not wanting OnStar to have this ability. We all know that you will be tracked in this day and age by cameras, cell phones, internet searches, credit card usage and many other things. But the thing you are missing is those technology's create an ability for people like law enforcement or criminals to track you IF THEY WANT TOO. OnStar on the other hand is a company that sole purpose is to monitor vehicles.

 

 

Do you remember when companies first started putting tattlers in semi-trucks? Do you remember how well that went over?

 

Should OnStar really be allowed to become this huge big brother to all GM owners and then profit off the information they sell? How would you feel if your insurance went up because they can tell you drive 20,000 miles a year when the national average is 12,000? Or that you drive down congested city roads more than someone that lives in the country?

 

I for one don’t think my insurance should go up because they acquired new data on my truck. In fact if your insurance did go up you would just be paying for the data that was bought from OnStar. In the end a consumer will always pay because a company only focuses on the profit.

[tanked_darren]

Well everyone can stop panicking as onstar have reverted back to the old terms and conditions just over an hour ago. I had a lengthy conversation with onstar about the issue just now and I would like to make a few points.

 

First off as I stated many replies ago, that noone listened too, if you want to totally disable onstar you arrange it through your dealer. Had you have done this under the new terms and condition it would have been free as they had to offer it free to give you the option of not excepting the terms. Now however if you want to be totally disabled you will have to either do it yourself or go to the dealer and pay standard shop rates.

 

Now as it stands if you do not want to be tracked you just call up and cancel the service if you pay for it. This leaves the modules intact in the vehicle so that at some point in time it could be restored by simply calling them. None of the services will work and they will not be notified if you are involved in a crash. So just to be clear if you do not pay the fee they have no idea what you are doing, you can leave the module connected.

 

Finally the paranoia of a few will almost certainly cost the lives of others as onstar having a connection to a vehicle without an active plan means that in the event of a crash they would have been notified and would have acted on it. I find it extremely hard to swallow that millions of people could have had crash response in exchange for onstar selling some data of people who do not care that they sell it. However because a few people are so paranoid that someone might give them a ticket because they deserved one, confirmed them at fault in an accident when they were at fault, or maybe even called a subscriber and said their husbands vehicle was always parked out side of a strip club and told her maybe her marriage was not going to work out that now someone somewhere could be involved in a single vehicle accident on a deserted road and no one will know until it is too late. So if you bitched about onstar tracking you and that happens to someone you know realize that next time you should think before you act and ask questions rather than make statements.

I don't live in a police state, my vehicle recording what I do should be my choice. I break the law all the time and so do most people driving. I'm glad onstar changed the terms and conditions. It was the right thing to do.

[dataspng]

If you want to totally disable onstar you arrange it through your dealer. Had you have done this under the new terms and condition it would have been free as they had to offer it free to give you the option of not excepting the terms.

 

Now as it stands if you do not want to be tracked you just call up and cancel the service if you pay for it.

First I agree... the collision reporting would be nice option for everyone, you paid for the module when you bought the truck why not use it.

 

But I disagree in the "Opt Out" approach so many companies take (not just GM), why not do Opt In? Why stick the customer with the reasonability to get to the dealer, schedule appointment, and spend working hours which cost us time and money to get it disconnected. If they have the technology to ignore the data / signal like they are doing now for non-paying folks... why not just put a button on the OnStar website that says "Free Collision Detection - Sign up Here!" with full disclosure of what is tracked and sold. I think they would get a warmer reception and I doubt any political figures would get involved (not newsworthy enough).

 

 

BTW - I checked with my insurance company for discount if I kept OnStar - No Discount for Auto, theft or medical? I thought that was interesting.

[Superperv23]

Should OnStar really be allowed to become this huge big brother to all GM owners and then profit off the information they sell? How would you feel if your insurance went up because they can tell you drive 20,000 miles a year when the national average is 12,000? Or that you drive down congested city roads more than someone that lives in the country?

 

I for one don’t think my insurance should go up because they acquired new data on my truck. In fact if your insurance did go up you would just be paying for the data that was bought from OnStar. In the end a consumer will always pay because a company only focuses on the profit.

 

How would I feel? Fine...

 

If I am paying for something I use then it has to be done. Your logic makes zero sense, this is nothing but people bitching because they want to be dishonest or bend the rules. Think of it this way you go to work and you work 2500 hours a year and then the company average is 1600 a year so they say oh well we will just pay you for the average hours worked, would you think that was fair? Insurance companies already have a general idea of where you live and drive anyway by your address. For instance if you live in a part of new york that is usually on fire and leave your vehicle on the street you will pay a lot more than if you live in some small town in maine with a garage kept vehicle.

 

This is all irrelevant any way since they were not going to sell specific data from specific vehicles to anyone who asked. They were only going to provide specific data with a court order for it and guess what thats the same way it is now and always has been. What they were going to sell was databases that give an indication of driving habits without knowing who actually drove them. This would have been sold to companies such as oil companies so they could engineer tests that reflect real world use to optimize their product or restaurant chains to determine traffic in a given area to decide on locations, and other things. Also it would be valuable research information to help determine road safety and usage.

 

Most people, including you, have no idea what they were doing and dont realize they were never going to get a ticket or higher insurance premium from it. There is seemingly no reasoning either so I shall just let you continue to think whatever you want.

[old-chevy-dude]

Should OnStar really be allowed to become this huge big brother to all GM owners and then profit off the information they sell? How would you feel if your insurance went up because they can tell you drive 20,000 miles a year when the national average is 12,000? Or that you drive down congested city roads more than someone that lives in the country?

 

I for one don’t think my insurance should go up because they acquired new data on my truck. In fact if your insurance did go up you would just be paying for the data that was bought from OnStar. In the end a consumer will always pay because a company only focuses on the profit.

 

How would I feel? Fine...

 

If I am paying for something I use then it has to be done. Your logic makes zero sense, this is nothing but people bitching because they want to be dishonest or bend the rules. Think of it this way you go to work and you work 2500 hours a year and then the company average is 1600 a year so they say oh well we will just pay you for the average hours worked, would you think that was fair? Insurance companies already have a general idea of where you live and drive anyway by your address. For instance if you live in a part of new york that is usually on fire and leave your vehicle on the street you will pay a lot more than if you live in some small town in maine with a garage kept vehicle.

 

This is all irrelevant any way since they were not going to sell specific data from specific vehicles to anyone who asked. They were only going to provide specific data with a court order for it and guess what thats the same way it is now and always has been. What they were going to sell was databases that give an indication of driving habits without knowing who actually drove them. This would have been sold to companies such as oil companies so they could engineer tests that reflect real world use to optimize their product or restaurant chains to determine traffic in a given area to decide on locations, and other things. Also it would be valuable research information to help determine road safety and usage.

 

Most people, including you, have no idea what they were doing and dont realize they were never going to get a ticket or higher insurance premium from it. There is seemingly no reasoning either so I shall just let you continue to think whatever you want.

 

 

 

aside from the fact that they are doing it anyway, without telling you, and have been doing it for 15 years.

[scottmoyer]

I agree with everybody that is standing their ground against this. I don't know how old many of those in favor of this are, but the government and businesses that lobby government started taking privacy away years ago. As time goes on, it gets worse and worse and the new generation of young adults have grown up with it and think nothing of it. Why are you all so willing to give up your freedoms? These things always start small and then grow into a mess. It happens all the time. Here's another example...Banks! For many years, we had cash only. Then checks were introduced. Checking accounts cost a monthly fee, but you didn't have to carry cash anymore. The bank then offers free checking if you use direct deposit and they make it beneficial for your company to use direct deposit instead of printing checks. Then cash cards were to replace the checks. They were free to use anywhere. As people started using them more and more, they started charging for ATM use. People accepted this and said that it was the cost of doing business. Now, people are using the cards and don't use cash or checks. Since everybody uses the cards for everything, the latest news is that banks want to start charging a fee for every transaction. The gradual change has become accepted, but do you think people in the early 80s would have been willing to go from cash to paying a fee for every transaction? Would we have the cards in use today? It's called indoctrination and desensitizing the public.

 

Look at how seat belt laws have come about. Back in the 60's they were added to cars and weren't required to use. During the 80's, they were recommended, but not required. During the 90's, you can get a ticket for not wearing the seat belt only if you were pulled over for something else. By the late 90's/early 2000's, you can get pulled over for not wearing it! Click it or Ticket!! You don't think this is a violation of my rights? If I die in a crash because I was thrown from my car in a crash, isn't that my right? If the benefit is solely for my protection, shouldn't I have the right to say I don't want to wear it and suffer the consequences on my own. Why does the government need to get involved in my personal protection? I could go on, but I won't.

[MikeNH]

Look at how seat belt laws have come about. Back in the 60's they were added to cars and weren't required to use. During the 80's, they were recommended, but not required. During the 90's, you can get a ticket for not wearing the seat belt only if you were pulled over for something else. By the late 90's/early 2000's, you can get pulled over for not wearing it! Click it or Ticket!! You don't think this is a violation of my rights? If I die in a crash because I was thrown from my car in a crash, isn't that my right? If the benefit is solely for my protection, shouldn't I have the right to say I don't want to wear it and suffer the consequences on my own. Why does the government need to get involved in my personal protection? I could go on, but I won't.

 

 

 

Because unfortunately more often than most will realize you don't just die when you go through the windshield, you end up crippled or a vegetable where you stop being a contributing member of society and just end up costing those of us who are more through increased insurance costs.

 

It is NOT your right to drive.

 

It is NOT your right to drive on a road you don't own/pay for.

 

It is NOT your right to go flying through the windshield of your vehicle, smear yourself across a road you don't own so emergency service workers you don't pay for have to come and scrape your ass up.

[dlewis1111]

Let me throw this out:

 

I have Onstar in my truck and it is not enabled. I get into a serious wreck and push the Onstar button. They refuse to send assistance and I die. Does my wife have a lawsuit? Isn't it everyone's responsibility to take due diligence in their daily activities? Did Onstar show due diligence by refusing to call an ambulance for me, or did they show a blatant disregard based solely upon money?