Auto glass repair firm loses $208,000 lawsuit against The Co-operators over billing amount

An Ontario court recently dismissed a breach-of-contract lawsuit against The Co-operators General Insurance Company, filed by Resq Auto Glass Inc., over repairs to windshields of vehicles insured by The Co-operators.

Court records indicate that between February 2012 to July 2014, repairs were done to windshields of 1,844 vehicles and that The Co-operators authorized repairs at $50 per repair. In 109 cases, Resq Auto Glass billed The Co-operators $50 for the repair and in the other cases, The Co-operators was billed $100. The Co-operators paid $50 per repair and Resq went to court seeking an extra $50 each, on the repairs for which it billed $100. The total damages Resq Auto Glass sought was $208,359.57.

“The plaintiff contends that it ought to be paid at the rate of $100 because that is the ‘market’ rate for windshield repairs in the industry,” wrote Madam Justice Wailan Low, of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, in her ruling Feb. 11. Justice Low dismissed Resq Auto Glass’s motion for summary judgment and granted The Co-operators’ motion for summary dismissal.

“In contrast to companies operating auto glass replacement and repair businesses out of brick and mortar locations which get business from car owners who approach them, the plaintiff does not operate out of a fixed location,” Justice Low wrote. “The plaintiff’s business with automobile owners is initiated through independent contractors who find cars with one or more windshield chips, identify the owners, ascertain the owners’ insurers, and place calls to the insurers to facilitate authorization by the insurers to the plaintiff to do the repair.”

The Co-operators sent documents to Resq authorizing the repairs for $50, with a notice reading: “The Co-operators will not pay more then (sic) the amounts that are stated on this quotations. If modifications are needed please call us for authorization.”

The Co-operators “stipulated in the Authorization what it was prepared to pay and made it clear by noting in bold that it would not pay more than the stated amount in the absence of further authorization,” Justice Low wrote. She rejected as “irrelevant” Resq’s claim that $100 was the “market rate” for windshield repairs.

“The Insurer has an obligation to the plaintiff to pay pursuant to its various contracts,” Justice Low wrote. “This it has done.”

In each case, the vehicle’s owners signed work order estimates, which included a section assigning their rights against their insurer. However, Justice Low found there was no assignment of the insurance policies and that Resq Auto Glass was not an Insured.

“The policy is not assignable and the language in the plaintiff’s Work Order Estimate could not, in my view, on any reasonable construction, constitute an assignment of the car owner’s insurance policy,” Justice Low wrote.