The theft of high-value commercial vehicles is no longer a random crime. Professionally organised networks analyse modern security solutions in detail, understand their limitations and adapt their strategies accordingly. However, many fleet managers continue to rely on security assumptions and measures from a time when the threat landscape was different. Christoph Ludewig, Vice President EMEA at Geotab, highlights four common misconceptions.
Misconception number 1: “A tracker means the vehicle can be located”
Today, professional criminals fully expect trackers to be in use and routinely employ signal jammers, which are now inexpensive and widely available. Furthermore, the time between a tracker being detected and deactivated and the actual theft is often considerably shorter than many fleet managers realise. Even a high-quality tracking device, no matter how carefully installed, remains a potential weak point if it is used as the sole security measure: if this single device is detected and switched off, tracking is no longer possible.
For businesses, the consequences extend far beyond simply a stolen vehicle: lost contracts, insurance claims and angry customers left without vehicles. It is therefore crucial to rely not just on a single tracker, but on a security concept without a central weak point. The chances of successful tracking and recovery increase significantly when multiple technologies and redundant systems are combined. Tracking is then not just a device, but part of a holistic security strategy.
Misconception number 2: “The tracking system fitted as standard is sufficient”
Another misconception concerns factory-fitted telematics: these are primarily designed for vehicle operation, not for fleet security. All the signals and data recorded work excellently for their intended purpose — however, they are not sufficient as protection against organised theft. This is because even factory-fitted trackers can, for example, be easily disabled using a signal jammer.
With some models, there is an additional specific security issue: in many vehicles, drivers can activate a privacy mode that completely interrupts data transmission. Whilst this makes sense and is legitimate from a data protection perspective, from a security standpoint it can represent a significant vulnerability that professional criminals can specifically exploit. A second, independently installed tracking unit, operating on different signal channels, can provide the necessary redundancy and a multi-layered security concept that is significantly more resilient.
Misconception number 3: “Theft cannot be predicted. All you can do is react.”
Most fleet managers still regard vehicle tracking as a reactive process: a vehicle is stolen, an alarm is triggered, and the search begins. Yet it is precisely at this moment that the race against time is already underway. Modern telematics systems can do much more than simply locate a vehicle after a theft: Geofencing rules, night-time movement detection and border-crossing alerts provide early indications of unusual activity. With the help of AI-driven analysis methods, the frequency of alerts can also be automatically adjusted in areas and time slots with an increased risk of theft, revealing unusual movement patterns long before a driver reports that something is missing.
The difference between a successful recovery and a total loss is often measured in minutes. These crucial minutes are not gained through a faster search, but through the earlier detection of suspicious events.
Misconception number 4: “The same approach works in every European market”
What works in one country does not necessarily work in another. The circumstances surrounding vehicle theft vary considerably across Europe, as do the methods employed by the criminal groups behind it. Criminals operate along specific routes and move stolen vehicles across borders within a very short time — for example, to countries where tracking and recovery become legally complex. Police response times, reporting procedures and cooperation between authorities vary from market to market.
Many fleet managers also operate vehicles across several countries and therefore face a complex situation. This is because security strategies tailored to individual countries quickly reach their limits in such scenarios. It is therefore extremely important to design one’s own security approach to accommodate this complexity from the outset, taking into account country-specific requirements, regional differences and international transport routes.
Conclusion
What all four misconceptions have in common is the underlying assumption that vehicle protection is a product-based decision rather than a system-based one. Promising approaches, however, are based on the opposite premise: professionally organised networks will, sooner or later, test every level of security — which is why redundancy is not an option, but a prerequisite. Multi-layered tracking via independent signal paths, AI-supported detection of movement anomalies, and coordination via established security control centres form the core of modern security strategies for fleet managers.
Geotab
Geotab is a leading global provider of connected fleet solutions, video telematics and AI-powered analytics. More than 100,000 customers rely on its expertise – ranging from small fleets and Fortune 500 companies to public sector organisations such as the US federal government. Geotab connects around 6 million vehicles and assets and processes 100 billion data points every day. Thanks to certifications such as ISO/IEC 27001:2022, SOC2, FIPS 140–3 and FedRAMP, Geotab’s open platform and partner ecosystem combine security, compliance and operational processes within a single centralised system.
