Read my previous message mysterious “caveat emptor”.
I laugh at your premise that the DOI or even BAR has or even could have any oversight of a repairer’s charges let alone set pricing.
How about we make it a “law” that repairers work solely for the folks who turn the keys in the ignition? Whoops! It already is the law? Yup! Sure is. Perhaps that is something you forgot?
Please do go on and tell me how the insurer is your customer! Be sure also to tell me how you apply the limitations of DRP contracts to first and third party losses separately.
Whoops! Don’t know the difference between first and third parties!!!? Time to read up on those DRP agreements and maybe take a business law class at the ol junior college.
Now every one reading here who wants to hang their hats on “the contract” please tell me what “public policy” is. For our purposes here’s your hint: it’s the “at least equal in terms of fit quality and performance” part. You see for the public good even a contract has limitations. Some applied by law or code directly.
Next tell me how much of any insurance policy and for that matter any insurance administrative code applies to a third party loss. The answer barring very few exceptions is *none*.
The problem we see here folks is similar to that seen relative to health care issues – where the actual services have become blurred with the financial services for those services.
In short, most have forgotten that health insurance is *not* health care. For our purposes vehicle insurance is *not* vehicle repair.
In fact – What MY AG has said is that what repairers *should* be doing is limited to repairing cars and getting paid. They *should not* be representing vehicle owners in negotiations with insurers (whether first or third party) nor should they be engaged in any agreement which compromises their contract with – and duty to – the vehicle owner. That duty being the full complement of thier expertise relative to the repair. Period.
So let’s separate insurance from repair shall we? Any inference that any DOI has oversight, that the BAR or any such like organization can set pricing – or that repairs and insurance are linked in any way is purely folly.
You are saying that your contract (DRP one would assume) REQUIRES that repairers serving that contract use used parts (so we’re away from the AM now) and that state law also requires it? Hmmm.
This I’d like to see. Which state is this? How do you and the shops you direct “your” work to, apply this to third party losses Gill?
Quality Replacement Parts (QRP) can include a used part, or an aftermarket part. As far as how the bodyshop treats first party or third party claimants, I assume they treat them in such a way that they’ll come back the next time they need service.
I’m in a loopy liberal left coast state.
Are you always so smarmy? Hmmmmm.
Ah irony! I get it! So when I ask for specifics you get vague – then you (the pseudonym guy) ask me if I’m smarmy? LOL that is rich! I’ll make this as plain as possible sharp guy – WHAT STATE ARE YOU IN “GILL”?
“make an effort to use quality replacement parts if they are avaialable”
The quality replacement part available would be the same part… the OEM. OF course unless the customer is requesting something of lesser quality, function and price… and that would be a contractual agreement between the shop and the vehicle owner where the customer would realize the savings.
In my experience insurers do not write aftermarket in our area because of the potential of suits such as AmFam. And in the case of third-party, the diminished value equation makes any thought of Taiwan tin vanish.
Perhaps in the near future your AG will have the opportunity to network with some of our more enlightened AGs! No offense.
I have no idea what good the name calling and other garbage does. This is very interesting subject, but the unprofessional discourse does no service to anybody. It doesn’t matter what side of the issue you are on. You aren’t going to convince anybody of your argument by name calling.
I’ve been in claims for 23 yrs (both company and independent adjuster) and this subject has caused tons of issues for as long as I can remember. I have used OEM, used OEM and a/m parts on my personal vehicles, kids cars and our adjusting company cars. I have had to return some OEM, used and a/m because they were crap. Our appraisers prefer using used OEM parts to a/m because it is easier for the car owner to accept used OEM than a/m. If we pay for an a/m part and it sucks it doesn’t get used. Same goes with OEM and used OEM. Our appraisers are former body shop owners and they will reinspect ANY part that the shop has issues with. Some are legit complaints, some are not. We’re in a small town of about 15K so odds are you will run across the body shop and car owner again. Communication with both the shop and the car owner is the key. Most, but not all, car owners understand why they aren’t owed a brand new OEM fender on their 2002 Taurus and that a/m or used OEM is in order. As independent adjusters we have only had 1 client company refuse to make good on an a/m part when it sucked.
State Farm was found guilty and was fined $1.2 billion dollars. They had a Illinois supreme court judge dismissed the charges after they made a $1 million dollar campaign donation. ONLY IN ILLINOIS IS EVERY THING FOR SALE!!!
Some states, like mine, require that insurers make available quality replacement parts for insurance repairs so that consumers CAN ENJOY A LOWER COST OF INSURANCE SINCE AFTERMARKET PARTS COST LESS!!!!! Why not sue GM for overcharging for parts made from tooling that was bought and paid for years ago?
If a quality replacement part, such as an undamaged but used fender or bumper, can be had for $75, why should American Family pay $350 for a new one? That cost gets passed on to us as consumers in the form of higher insurance rates. We all know that the average client worries more about the cost of premiums than whether or not they have a fender from GM or the wrecking yard.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Read my previous message mysterious “caveat emptor”.
I laugh at your premise that the DOI or even BAR has or even could have any oversight of a repairer’s charges let alone set pricing.
How about we make it a “law” that repairers work solely for the folks who turn the keys in the ignition? Whoops! It already is the law? Yup! Sure is. Perhaps that is something you forgot?
Please do go on and tell me how the insurer is your customer! Be sure also to tell me how you apply the limitations of DRP contracts to first and third party losses separately.
Whoops! Don’t know the difference between first and third parties!!!? Time to read up on those DRP agreements and maybe take a business law class at the ol junior college.
Now every one reading here who wants to hang their hats on “the contract” please tell me what “public policy” is. For our purposes here’s your hint: it’s the “at least equal in terms of fit quality and performance” part. You see for the public good even a contract has limitations. Some applied by law or code directly.
Next tell me how much of any insurance policy and for that matter any insurance administrative code applies to a third party loss. The answer barring very few exceptions is *none*.
The problem we see here folks is similar to that seen relative to health care issues – where the actual services have become blurred with the financial services for those services.
In short, most have forgotten that health insurance is *not* health care. For our purposes vehicle insurance is *not* vehicle repair.
In fact – What MY AG has said is that what repairers *should* be doing is limited to repairing cars and getting paid. They *should not* be representing vehicle owners in negotiations with insurers (whether first or third party) nor should they be engaged in any agreement which compromises their contract with – and duty to – the vehicle owner. That duty being the full complement of thier expertise relative to the repair. Period.
So let’s separate insurance from repair shall we? Any inference that any DOI has oversight, that the BAR or any such like organization can set pricing – or that repairs and insurance are linked in any way is purely folly.
You are saying that your contract (DRP one would assume) REQUIRES that repairers serving that contract use used parts (so we’re away from the AM now) and that state law also requires it? Hmmm.
This I’d like to see. Which state is this? How do you and the shops you direct “your” work to, apply this to third party losses Gill?
Quality Replacement Parts (QRP) can include a used part, or an aftermarket part. As far as how the bodyshop treats first party or third party claimants, I assume they treat them in such a way that they’ll come back the next time they need service.
I’m in a loopy liberal left coast state.
Are you always so smarmy? Hmmmmm.
Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids. LET THE CONSUMER DECIDE. (PERIOD)
Ah irony! I get it! So when I ask for specifics you get vague – then you (the pseudonym guy) ask me if I’m smarmy? LOL that is rich! I’ll make this as plain as possible sharp guy – WHAT STATE ARE YOU IN “GILL”?
“make an effort to use quality replacement parts if they are avaialable”
The quality replacement part available would be the same part… the OEM. OF course unless the customer is requesting something of lesser quality, function and price… and that would be a contractual agreement between the shop and the vehicle owner where the customer would realize the savings.
In my experience insurers do not write aftermarket in our area because of the potential of suits such as AmFam. And in the case of third-party, the diminished value equation makes any thought of Taiwan tin vanish.
Perhaps in the near future your AG will have the opportunity to network with some of our more enlightened AGs! No offense.
I have no idea what good the name calling and other garbage does. This is very interesting subject, but the unprofessional discourse does no service to anybody. It doesn’t matter what side of the issue you are on. You aren’t going to convince anybody of your argument by name calling.
I’ve been in claims for 23 yrs (both company and independent adjuster) and this subject has caused tons of issues for as long as I can remember. I have used OEM, used OEM and a/m parts on my personal vehicles, kids cars and our adjusting company cars. I have had to return some OEM, used and a/m because they were crap. Our appraisers prefer using used OEM parts to a/m because it is easier for the car owner to accept used OEM than a/m. If we pay for an a/m part and it sucks it doesn’t get used. Same goes with OEM and used OEM. Our appraisers are former body shop owners and they will reinspect ANY part that the shop has issues with. Some are legit complaints, some are not. We’re in a small town of about 15K so odds are you will run across the body shop and car owner again. Communication with both the shop and the car owner is the key. Most, but not all, car owners understand why they aren’t owed a brand new OEM fender on their 2002 Taurus and that a/m or used OEM is in order. As independent adjusters we have only had 1 client company refuse to make good on an a/m part when it sucked.
didn’t state farm have to pay big on this scenario a few years back?
State Farm was found guilty and was fined $1.2 billion dollars. They had a Illinois supreme court judge dismissed the charges after they made a $1 million dollar campaign donation. ONLY IN ILLINOIS IS EVERY THING FOR SALE!!!
Some states, like mine, require that insurers make available quality replacement parts for insurance repairs so that consumers CAN ENJOY A LOWER COST OF INSURANCE SINCE AFTERMARKET PARTS COST LESS!!!!! Why not sue GM for overcharging for parts made from tooling that was bought and paid for years ago?
If a quality replacement part, such as an undamaged but used fender or bumper, can be had for $75, why should American Family pay $350 for a new one? That cost gets passed on to us as consumers in the form of higher insurance rates. We all know that the average client worries more about the cost of premiums than whether or not they have a fender from GM or the wrecking yard.