AB 1833, the Consumer Driving Data Protection Act of 2026, would create a new statutory framework for the use of telematics in private passenger automobile insurance and would amend Proposition 103 to allow consumers to voluntarily use telematics data to establish their driving record for rating purposes. The bill states that telematics may be used only for automobile insurance rating, and not for underwriting, claims, marketing, or other purposes. It defines telematics data broadly to include driving-related information such as speed, braking, acceleration, time of operation, and distance traveled, while excluding nondriving-related personal information.
The bill would impose extensive consumer consent, disclosure, privacy, and data-security requirements on insurers and third-party telematics providers. Participation would be strictly voluntary, with consumers allowed to revoke consent at any time, and insurers would be prohibited from requiring telematics participation as a condition of coverage, penalizing consumers who decline, or making it harder to opt out than opt in. The bill also requires detailed disclosures about what data is collected, how it affects premiums, who can access it, retention periods, and whether audio or video recordings may occur. Insurers would have to provide consumers access to their telematics data and an explanation of how it affected rating decisions.
AB 1833 would also change insurer filing and oversight requirements. A rate application using telematics would have to include program descriptions, data elements, scoring models, validation studies, actuarial support, consumer forms, provider contracts, and privacy/security documentation. The Insurance Commissioner could require audits, demand compliance records, suspend or prohibit telematics programs that produce excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory rates, and impose civil penalties, corrective orders, or license discipline for violations. The bill further treats telematics data as a driving safety record for Proposition 103 purposes and declares that the measure furthers Proposition 103’s purposes.
The bill’s impact on state law is significant because it would add a new Insurance Code article governing telematics and usage-based insurance, while also making a technical change to the Vehicle Code definition of connected vehicle location access. In practical terms, it would create a regulated pathway for insurers to offer telematics-based insurance products in California, but only under strict consumer-protection rules and with continued oversight by the Department of Insurance. It would also affect insurers, third-party telematics vendors, and consumers who choose to participate in usage-based insurance programs.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is supportive of innovation but strongly protective of consumer privacy and choice. The findings emphasize modernization, transparency, fairness, and the potential benefits of lower-mileage driving, while repeatedly stressing that participation must remain voluntary and that consumers should control their data. There is little direct committee or vote history available because the bill’s first hearing was set and then canceled at the author’s request, so there is no recorded floor or committee vote to indicate broader legislative support or opposition. The main points of contention apparent from the bill itself are likely to be whether telematics should be treated as a permissible rating factor under Proposition 103, how much data insurers may collect and retain, and whether the bill’s restrictions are workable for insurers and telematics vendors.
AB 1833 would add Article 10.5 to the Insurance Code to regulate telematics and usage-based automobile insurance, creating new duties for insurers and third-party telematics providers regarding consent, disclosures, data use limits, retention, security, consumer access, and dispute resolution. It would also amend Proposition 103-related rating rules by allowing telematics to be used voluntarily as a driving record for private passenger auto insurance, while preserving the existing rating-factor hierarchy and giving the Insurance Commissioner enforcement and rulemaking authority. Separately, it makes a technical, nonsubstantive change to the Vehicle Code definition of connected vehicle location access.
The bill is framed in a generally favorable way toward telematics-based insurance, but only if it is tightly controlled to protect consumers. Its findings emphasize modernization, innovation, lower-mileage incentives, and consumer control over driving data, while also expressing concern about hidden rating factors and misuse of sensitive information. No committee vote or substantive hearing record is available because the first hearing was canceled at the author’s request, so there is no recorded legislative vote sentiment beyond the bill’s own consumer-protection-oriented framing.
The main likely points of contention are the scope of permissible telematics use, the extent of consumer privacy protections, and the regulatory burden on insurers. Consumer advocates would likely focus on the bill’s strong opt-in, opt-out, disclosure, and anti-retaliation provisions, while insurers and telematics vendors may object to limits on data use, retention, sharing, and the requirement to disclose scoring models and validation studies. Another likely issue is the bill’s interaction with Proposition 103, since it would effectively authorize telematics as a rating tool under the driving-safety-record factor, which could raise concerns about whether the measure expands insurer discretion too far or, conversely, whether it is too restrictive to be operationally useful.