A Florida man is suing Toyota for $5 million after his car tracked him without his knowledge and shared the information.

When most people think about what their car knows about them, they can picture the basics: mileage, fuel usage, maybe even whether the check engine light is on. Few imagine that their vehicle might be quietly gathering a detailed portrait of their every drive — where they go, how they brake, how often they drive at night — and then sharing that information with outside companies.

Tampa Bay’s WTSP-TV reports that a Polk County man has filed a lawsuit against Toyota. The story quickly caught the attention of drivers nationwide.

Eagle Lake resident Philip Siefke filed a complaint in federal court claiming his Toyota vehicle did more than help him get from point A to point A. According to her lawsuit, Toyota’s connected vehicles were recording an astonishingly rich amount of data about her driving and then making that information available to third parties — all in the open and without her knowledge.

The revelations shocked Sifke when they came to light last year and have many other drivers wondering if their cars could be shared.

The smoking gun

Siefke’s discovery came in early 2025 when he was applying for car insurance with Progressive. During the online process, he opted out of the insurance company’s own usage-based data program, which would prevent any transfer of driving information.

Instead, a pop-up message informed him that Progressive already had detailed driving data going back months. That data was tied to his vehicle, not the insurer’s program. Confused, he called Progressive, and the insurer told him the information came from Toyota.

Shock turned to disbelief when Sifke contacted Toyota. A customer service representative told him that purchasing the vehicle automatically enrolled him in the trial of Toyota’s data sharing program. Sifke said he never knew the test existed, that the data would be shared outside of Toyota, or that opting out later would not stop the flow of information.

Connected car data pipeline

The case paints a picture of modern automakers pushing deeply into the business of connected data. Vehicles manufactured in recent years often include telematics systems that can collect GPS location, speed patterns, braking and cornering behavior, seat belt usage, and even vehicle health information.

Toyota reportedly provided that data to Connected Analytics Services, which in turn provided it to insurers such as Progressive. Drivers only find out when they’re surprised by insurance apps already showing months of driving history they thought no one but themselves knew.

Sifke asked the court to certify his complaint as a class action, arguing that thousands of Toyota owners across the country may have been similarly tracked and were not informed clearly, in advance, about how their information would be collected and shared.

But late last year, a federal judge ruled that the lawsuit could not proceed as a class action, due to arbitration clauses buried in Toyota’s terms of service and connected service contracts. Instead, Siefke must pursue his claims individually through arbitration. His attorneys with the firm Morgan & Morgan are moving forward and looking for ways to still pursue relief on behalf of the other drivers.

The complaint alleges violations of several federal laws, including the Wiretap Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as claims for invasion of privacy, breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Damages sought in the lawsuit exceed $5 million, although with arbitration the only way forward, individual outcomes are uncertain.

A wake-up call for drivers everywhere

Drivers across the country are taking notice. On social media car forums, owners of Toyota and other modern vehicles share their own concerns about telemetry data and what automakers are allowed to collect and share. Some say they discovered they were being sent data even after they believed they had opted out. Others warn readers to scour privacy settings in vehicle apps if they want any control.

The case raises uncomfortable questions about the personal movements and behaviors we casually surrender when buying a “smart” car. It also highlights how agreements buried in fine print can drive legal consequences, moving disputes out of public courts and into private arbitration. Not only is compensation for a driver in the teeth, but consumers should expect to know what modern vehicles are doing with the digital footprints they create.

Sources: WTSP-TV, Lutzker and Lutzker