Auto Repair Perspective: Work For, Not Against

The world of repair shops and front-line collision damage appraisers is very different to that of the corporate insurance industry. A closer understanding of the challenges faced by both sides is clearly needed. In fact, with both bodyshops and insurers facing extremely tight operating margins in the highly competitive auto repair market, it can only make sense that both the body shop owner and insurer should work together rather than against each other.

Insurers who pay for repair and refinish of collision damaged vehicles expect a seamless claims process. Insurers talk about a quality claims experience for their clients, with the expectation that the client will be so pleased with the claims and repair process that he/she will be eager to reinsure with their company.

Collision shop owner/managers repair vehicles for their customers — the car owner. The insurer however, pays the bills. The shop owner wants a happy customer too. After all, a happy customer means a life-long client who often helps form decisions for others on what shop to use. Over 70% of a repair shop’s business is derived from referrals. Good recommendations of a shop to a potential customer from brokers, suppliers, friends and relatives is the largest source of income, so they too want a seamless repair with no hassles or delays.

So, if everyone wants the same end result, namely a happy client and a seamless repair process, then why do shops call me and vent their frustrations on how they are unable to achieve that end due to purported “roadblocks” put in their way by insurers? And, why do insurers call me and complain that repair shop are not co-operating?

Despite upbeat speeches at conferences and wonderfully warm public ads to win new clients, both collision repair shops and insurers often alienate customers in the claims handling aspect of vehicle repairs. The following is a list of the top ten complaints received by my office. I have also provided my thoughts on what can be done to solve these issues:

Am I getting OEM parts right? With the continuing negative publicity of aftermarket part lawsuits, an increasing number of customers are asking for original manufacturers’ parts. In addition to which, shop owners do not like aftermarket products as they often fit poorly and take an average 33% longer to install, resulting in vehicle return delays. On the other hand, insurers like aftermarket parts because they are cheaper. But, remember, this means longer delivery cycles resulting in a dissatisfied customer and higher rental car costs.

What do you mean it will take seven days for an appraiser to show up? Customers are often referred to bodyshops by relatives, dealerships and brokers. However, when dealing with an insurance company representative, they are told that if they go to the shop of their choice rather than the insurer-preferred shop, then they will have to wait for an appraiser to evaluate the damage before the repairs can be made. This is not a good way to build customer loyalty nor bring about time efficiency.

You want the rental car back in seven days too? Insurers have every reason to want to restrict car rental costs. However, badgering the client will not help achieve that end. Please recognize that the repair shop does not have staff waiting to pounce on the repair and start the moment the damaged car arrives. Neither are those parts that are needed (or even worse, back-ordered) going to be there when the car rolls in. Rather, improved communications between repair shop, customer and the insurer would help. A new twist is to link the rental into the shops promised repair date. Some shops will recognize the extra costs an insurer bears and will cover them if a delivery delay is the shop’s fault.

We will not guarantee the work at that shop. It is the repair shop that guarantees the work, not the insurer. Many shops find these comments by insurers, intent on sending clients to their own contracted shops, as demeaning and untrue. It is, however, fair to advise your customer of specifics of the warranty at the shop that they wish to use.

The insurer wants to remove my car to one of their own shops. Well, there goes the cycle time, cost control and customer satisfaction rating. By the time the insurer pays for the extra tow, the double estimate fees, the double “tear down costs” and possible additional parts fees — the repair costs have escalated tremendously. Insurers would be smarter to leave the car where it is.

The shop told me my car would be ready in two weeks. Shops must do a better job of keeping their commitments to delivery time, and, if there are changes, then let the broker/insurer and customer know in advance. Repair shops would win “extra brownie points” with insurers and customers if they guaranteed their commitment to delivery time. Some shops may even offer to cover rental costs if they are at fault in not keeping to delivery times.

The insurer is sending someone to the shop to replace the windshield. The non-trades certified mobile glass installer (who may have been a laid-off steelworker last week) arrives at a repair shop to use the power, heat, space, and move cars around and at the end, perhaps safely install a windshield after the car is almost completed and delicately painted. The shop does not get to bill anyone, the customer or the insurer, for the work as the glass company directs its bills the insurer. Who is liable when the customer is ejected from the car along with the improperly installed windshield in the next accident? You bet, the shop owner. After the ABC newsmagazine show 20/20 ran a segment that quoted an installer saying that half of the windshields installed in the U.S. were done improperly, the calls to shops escalated on this issue. Make sure that the glass installer is either trade-certified or has taken an approved training course. Insurers and repair shops can lose significant amounts of money if these recommendations are not followed — look at the litigation tort awards running into several millions of dollars occurring south of the border.

The insurer wants to put a used airbag in my car. Insurers should not use them. All major car manufacturers recommend against used airbags. News stories persist of used airbag suppliers being linked to using stolen goods. This is a liability that neither the repair shop or the insurer needs. One insurer advised me that they will offer their insurance company’s lifetime warranty on installed used airbags as long as a qualified technician installed it — the problem is that the company in question could not find a technician to accept the liability.

Why is the insurer telling me to void my new car warranty. How many clients are thrilled to be told by their insurer that their new car warranty is to be terminated for an insurer’s warranty? The expression on their faces is shock. Insurers should re-think their attempts to void OEM warranties. This is particularly true with leased cars where the insurer demands aftermarket parts be installed with an insurer’s warranty. Once the car goes off-lease, is the insurer going to pay the $1500 penalty that one client was assessed by his dealer because non-OEM parts were used?

My paint cost me $400 to buy, but the insurer will only pay $350. The cost of paint to shops has gone up over 70% in the last ten years. Putting an arbitrary “cap” on the insured cost is unrealistic. A double-wheeled, 4×4 crew cab takes a lot more paint than a Neon, yet insurers cap the same price. Have the appraisers at your insurance company take some basic auto refinishing training. The end result will be a more skilled employee, and ultimately a more satisfied customer. Is that not what we all want?