Great Lakes Edition Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Wisconsin
32
YEARS
www.autobodynews.com
Detroit Body Shop Raided in Suspected Theft and Fraud Ring, Numerous Cars Impounded A multi-jurisdictional task force conducted raids in Wayne and Oakland counties on the morning of Feb. 28 on suspicion of a theft and fraud ring involving automobiles. The investigation reportedly stemmed from a stolen automobile
that lead investigators to raid the Somerset Collision Shop on John R. near Eightmile, according to reports in the Detroit News. “The raids were conducted with auto theft teams from Highland Park and Hazel Park in conjunction with the Action Auto Theft squad and a number of other assisting agencies,” said the Hamtramck Police Department in a press release. “The raids were successful with multiple arrests and the recovery of stolen property. Somerset Collision in Detroit was the primar focus of the See Detroit Shop Raided, Page 8
Minnesota Bill Proposes More Comprehensive Restrictions on Insurer Vendor Requirements their representatives from requiring that a vehicle be presented “… at a particular motor vehicle repair shop designated by the insurer” in addition to the existing ban against drive-in claim centers. According to Judell Anderson, executive director of AASP-MN, whose organization supports the bill, this amend seeks to expand the existing prohibition on requiring vehicle owners present their cars at a drive-in because insurers have adapted to the existing prohibition by requiring vehicle owners to take their vehicles to a specific repair facility for inspection. See Minnesota HF 2690, Page 8
Change Service Requested
P.O. BOX 1516, CARLSBAD, CA 92018
A proposed bill in Minnesota, House File 2690 (HF 2690), seeks to amend Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 72B.092, subdivision 1 to include more stringent prohibitions against insurance company requirements placed upon repair facilities. Introduced by Representatives Joe Atkins, Greg Davids, Joe Hoppe, Debra Hilstrom, Jim Davnie and Melissa Hortman on Monday, March 3, HF 2690 changes two subsections of the existing law, including provisions the repair industry supported and were added into the law in 2007. The first amends adds a prohibition against insurance companies and
VOL. 3 ISSUE 7 APRIL 2014
Michigan’s HB 5339 Seeks to Address Steering, Non-OEM Parts, and Parts Procurement Michigan House Bill 5339, introduced on February 19, seeks to amend the Michigan Insurance Code of 1956 to restrict insurance companies from numerous actions that irk collision repair facility operators. The broadly worded bill has not yet been scheduled for hearings. The bill, as sponsored by Representatives Dale W. Zorn ,Greg MacMaster, Anthony G. Forlini, Peter Pettalia, Michael D. McCready, would ban insurance companies from compelling the use of specific collision repair or claim centers, restrict non-OEM parts usage, and prohibit an insurer from specifying specific vendors for parts or other materials. Specifically the bill would prohibit insurance personnel from the following:
● Compel or coerce the insured or claimant to choose a particular repair facility, claim center, or other similar facility regardless of whether the repair facility, claim center, or other similar facility is under the insurer's direct control. This subdivision would not prohibit an insurer from requesting the insured or claimant to take the a particular repair facility, claim center, or other similar facility after informing the insured or claimant that the insured or claimant is not under an obligation to do so. ● Must not fail to inform the insured or claimant that the insured or claimant has the freedom to use a repair facility of the insured's or claimant's choosing, or fail to inform See Michigan HB 5339, Page 9
Maryland Parts Bill Receives Unfavorable Vote in Cmte In a vote in the MD House Economic Matters committee on March 14, Maryland House Bill 574 (HB574), sponsored by Delegate John A. Olszewski, Jr., received an unfavorable report out of the committee. Introduced in January, HB574 and its companion, Senate Bill 487, sponsored by Senator John C. Astle, sought to prohibit insurance company personnel from specifying a specific vendor for parts or materials or part procurement process, and would have required OEM crash parts for a period of three years after the date of manufacture of a vehicle. In a 16 to 7 vote on March 14, the MD House Economic Matters committee voted for an unfavorable report on HB574. In Maryland, committees report to the legislature on the bills that are assigned to them as favorable, with or without amendment, unfavorable, or without recommendation. Having been voted out of committee, the bill now returns to the floor of its
chamber of origin accompanied by a report of committee action for consideration. No action has yet been taken on SB487. The bills provided common ground for insurers and non-OEM parts suppliers in opposition. Several insurance and aftermarket parts groups testified in opposition to the bill. Repair facility operators that support the legislation believe it protects consumers and preserves a repair facilities ability to manage its operations. The Washington Metropolitan Auto Body Association, WMABA, supports the proposed legislation believing it necessary to protect the rights of repair facilities to operate their business independently and protect consumers. The Automotive Body Parts Association (ABPA) publicly denounced the legislation prohibiting insurers from requiring the use of alternative collision parts on vehicles less than See Maryland Parts Bill, Page 16
Presorted Standard US Postage PAID San Bernardino, CA Permit #2244