GM OnStar Lawsuits Over Driving Data Tracking Cleared To Move Forward

Judge has allowed core claims that GM and OnStar violated federal wiretapping laws to move forward, rejecting arguments that the lawsuit was improperly filed.

A federal judge has ruled that General Motors (GM), OnStar and some data firms must face a federal wiretapping class action lawsuit, alleging the companies illegally used and stored personal data collected by the GPS tracking system without the vehicle owners’ consent.

OnStar is a subsidiary of GM that provides in-vehicle services such as roadside assistance, navigation, automatic accident response, and can track stolen vehicles. The system has been integrated into GM vehicles since 2016.

Allegations arose in early 2024 that GM and OnStar were collecting data many considered to be private, such as vehicle location data, acceleration and hard braking events. This data was then allegedly sold to insurance companies, who then used the information to justify raising drivers’ premiums.

As GM vehicle owners learned this news, they began to file GM OnStar class action lawsuits, each raising similar allegations that their personal driving data was collected without their knowledge or consent, to be used against them by insurance companies.

GM OnStar Lawsuits

In June 2024, all federal GM OnStar lawsuits were consolidated in the Northern District of Georgia before U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. The cases are now undergoing coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings, while plaintiffs filed a master consolidated class action complaint in December 2024.

Last summer, GM, OnStar, and the data firms LexisNexis Risk Solutions Inc. and Verisk Analytics Inc. filed motions calling for the dismissal of the class action lawsuit. The defendants claimed plaintiffs had filed a “shotgun pleading,” which is an attempt to bring an array of complaints against a defendant in the hopes that something sticks.

Shotgun pleadings are not allowed under federal law and can be dismissed on that basis alone. However, after hearings in early September on the motion, Judge Thrash issued an opinion and order (PDF) on April 22, trimming some of the plaintiffs’ charges, yet rejecting the defendants’ efforts to dismiss the entire litigation.

The judge pared down the 65-count lawsuit significantly but left the core claims of violation of Federal wiretapping laws intact, allowing the litigation to proceed.

“The Amended Complaint does not have conclusory, vague, or immaterial facts, instead properly detailing the factual background for the Plaintiffs’ claims. Each cause of action or claim for relief is separated into separate counts and specifically lists which defendant is liable for each count.”

– U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr.

The decision means that fact discovery for the cases will likely continue throughout most of the year, which will be followed by a trial or GM OnStar lawsuit settlement agreement.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.