New England Automotive Report November 2015

N

E

W

E

N

G

L

A

N

D

AUT M TIVE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

Serving the New England Collision and Mechanical Repair Industry

November 2015 U.S.A. $5.95

LIABILITY: WHERE DO YOU STAND? www.grecopublishing.com

2 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

November 2015 • Volume 13, No. 11

DEPARTMENTS BENEFIT SPOTLIGHT 14 | Information You Need with Mitchell International

by Jacquelyn Bauman

CONTENTS

by Jacquelyn Bauman

COVER STORY

44 | LIABILITY: WHERE DO YOU STAND?

LOCAL NEWS 18 | MidState BBQ Offers Fun in Support of Education 22 | ADALB Issues Advisory Ruling on Used Parts

by Joel Gausten 26 | Allstate Subsidiary Caught Using Unregistered Shops in MA 28 | Fighting for the Consumer: AASP/MA Submits Written Testimony on Senate Bill 134

by Jacquleyn Bauman NATIONAL NEWS 26 | VW Faces Recalls, Billions in Fines over Emissions Scandal 32 | Claims Dismissed in Major Multidistrict Suit

by Joel Gausten VENDOR SPOTLIGHT 34 | Continued Success for Balise Wholesale Parts Express

by Jacquelyn Bauman LEGAL PERSPECTIVE 38 | The Commerce DTP Acknowledgment

by James Castleman EQUIPMENT AND TOOLING 48 | An Aluminum Retrospective: Where Are We Now?

by Jacquelyn Bauman AASP/MA MEMBER SHOP SPOTLIGHT 52 | A&P Collision Center

by Jacquelyn Bauman

ALSO THIS ISSUE 7 | TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES: I-CAR CALENDAR OF EVENTS 8 | A MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 10 | AASP/MA CASINO NIGHT SAVE THE DATE

15 | AASP/MA SPONSORS 53 | AASP/MA MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION 58 | INDEX OF ADVERTISERS

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

5

6 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

N

E

W

E

N

G

L

A

N

D

AUT M TIVE November 2015 November 14, 2015

AASP/MA Casino Night Gillette Stadium Putnam Club, 1 Patriot Place, Foxboro, MA (See page 10 for details)

December 8, 2015

ADALB Meeting Division of Insurance, 1000 Washington Street, Boston, MA

STAFF PUBLISHER

ART DIRECTOR

Thomas Greco (thomas@grecopublishing.com)

Lea Velocci (lea@grecopublishing.com)

DIRECTOR OF SALES

MANAGING EDITOR

Alicia Figurelli (alicia@grecopublishing.com)

Jacquelyn Bauman (jacquelyn@grecopublishing.com)

EDITOR

PRODUCTION

Joel Gausten (tgpjoel@verizon.net)

Donna Greco (donna@grecopublishing.com)

PUBLISHED BY: Thomas Greco Publishing, Inc. 244 Chestnut Street, Suite 202, Nutley, NJ 07110 Corporate: (973) 667-6922 / FAX: (973) 235-1963

FOR A FULL LISTING OF UPCOMING AASP/MA EVENTS AND TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES, PLEASE VISIT WWW.AASPMA.ORG

www.grecopublishing.com New England Automotive Report is published monthly by TGP, Inc., 244 Chestnut Street, Suite 202 Nutley, NJ 07110. Distributed free to qualified recipients; $48 to all others. Additional copies of New England Automotive Report are available at $5 per copy. Reproduction of any portions of this publication is specifically prohibited without written permission of the publisher. The opinions and ideas appearing in this magazine are not necessarily representations of TGP Inc. or of AASP/MA. Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Greco Publishing, Inc. Images courtesy of www.istockphoto.com/IStock Photo.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

in Massachusetts November 3, 2015 Corrosion Protection Fuller Auto Body, Auburn, MA November 5, 2015 Overview of Cycle Time Improvements for the Collision Repair Process Fuller Auto Body, Auburn, MA Vehicle Technology & Trends 2016 Modern Auto Body, Brockton, MA November 12, 2015 Plastic & Composite Repair Fuller Auto Body, Auburn, MA November 17, 2015 Vehicle Technology & Trends 2016 Fuller Auto Body, Auburn, MA

For more information, visit i-car.com

AASP/MA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PRESIDENT Molly Brodeur VICE PRESIDENT Adam Ioakim SECRETARY Gary Cloutier TREASURER Kevin Gallerani IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Paul Hendricks

AASP/MA STATEWIDE DIRECTORS COLLISION DIRECTOR Rick Starbard

AASP/MA CHAPTER DIRECTORS NORTHEAST CHAPTER DIRECTORS Alex Falzone Kevin Kyes SOUTHEAST CHAPTER DIRECTORS Michael Penacho Darlene Andrade MIDSTATE CHAPTER DIRECTORS Tom Ricci Ray Belsito, Jr. WESTERN CHAPTER DIRECTOR Peter Langone

AASP/MA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Jillian M. Zywien 12 Post Office Square, 6th Floor • Boston, MA 02109 Phone: (617) 574-0741 Fax: (617) 695-0173 Email: jzywien@aaspma.org

WWW.AASPMA.ORG New England Automotive Report

November 2015

7

A MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

The ADALB’s Big Ruling on Parts Dear Members, At the time of this writing, the ADALB had just hosted their meeting at Pathfinder Regional Vocational Technical High School in Palmer. This was the first ADALB meeting hosted outside of Boston in quite some time. All Board members were in attendance, as was Board Counsel Michael Powers and Secretary to the Board Steven Zavackis.

The September 29 meeting was promptly called to order at 9:30am to a packed room. Following the approval of the minutes from a special meeting on August 18 to approve emergency licenses and a regularly scheduled meeting from August 25, Board member Rick Starbard discussed the Part II exam scheduled for September 30 at Assabet Valley Tech with 70 applicants. He thanked those who helped him secure the vehicles and the site for the test, including AASP/MA’s own Molly Brodeur. I am so pleased that the Board has taken action to move the testing sites around the state.

Arguably the most important item on the agenda was the proposed Advisory Ruling on the use of junkyard or

8 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

used parts in the repairs of suspension systems. At the ADALB’s last meeting, Board member Bill Johnson presented a draft he created for their review. Counsel Michael Powers agreed to take a look at the Advisory Ruling and recommend changes. At this meeting, a new draft was presented. There were several representatives from LKQ Corporation, and two of them spoke during the meeting to offer their concerns on the Ruling. Ultimately, those concerns fell on deaf ears and the document passed with a 4-0 vote of the Board. We believe this is a huge win for the industry. The complete text of the Ruling (as well as additional details about the ADALB’s discussion on the matter) is in the story on page 22. If you are negotiating with an insurer on used parts containing wear items that will impact the operational safety of a vehicle, use this Advisory Ruling to your advantage and contact the association for additional resources. We are here for YOU. Additionally, the ADALB offered and formalized into their minutes the opinion of the Board relative to the use of used parts. The ADALB’s ruling is as follows:

211 CMR 133.04 (3)(c) states “the repair will not impair the operational safety of the motor vehicle.” The ADALB is concerned that the use of used parts that contain wear items, in certain circumstances, may violate 211 CMR 133.04 (3)(c). We want to further note that the insurance company will be responsible and liable for the use of used parts it mandates.

Next, the Board voted unanimously to amend the current license renewal application. The new application will now ask the individual if they have been convicted of a crime or been charged with a crime since the last submitted renewal application. An asterisk (*) will outline exclusions, i.e. certain misdemeanor traffic offenses such as OUIs and those explained in the original application. The exact language can be found on the ADALB’s website.

Before adjourning to their usual executive session at 10:28am, the Board set their next meeting for Tuesday, December 8 at 9:30am back in Boston. I would like to thank our Western Chapter members for their encouraging attendance. The robust turnout may encourage the Board to continue to move their meetings around the state.

All ADALB meeting videos are posted on the Members Only section of AASP/MA’s website and can be viewed at any time. If you are not currently a member, I would urge you to participate and join today to support the only association in the Commonwealth “building the success of the auto repair industry.” We need the support of the entire collision repair field to continue to encourage and promote change on your behalf. Join today and receive the rest of the year FREE. Your dues will be credited to 2016. Start the new year off right with a membership to AASP/MA. Sincerely,

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

Jillian Zywien, Executive Director

AASP/MA Executive Director Jillian Zywien has been a senior account executive at Lynch Associates for over six years. She can be reached at (617) 574-0741 or via email at jzywien@aaspma.org.

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

9

Sponsorship Categories STILL AVAILABLE! Dinner and Dessert Sponsor - $1,000 Package Includes: · · · ·

Two event tickets with stadium tour Prominent dinner station signage Prominent dessert station signage Electronic book ad will be displayed on several TVs throughout the event

End Zone Signage Sponsor (Jumbotron) - $750 Package Includes: · End Zone signage (Jumbotron) complete with company logo/slogan ($2,000 value) · Your company logo listed on the website with a link back to your site

Gaming Table Sponsor - $750 Package Includes · Company logo prominently displayed on gaming table · One event ticket with stadium tour · Electronic book ad will be displayed on several TVs throughout the event

Raffle Prize Sponsor (One still available) - $750 Package Includes: · Electronic book ad will be displayed on several TVs throughout the event · One event ticket with stadium tour · Prominent signage at raffle table with prizes

10 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

11

12 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

13

BENEFIT SPOTLIGHT

INFORMATION YOU NEED WITH MITCHELL INTERNATIONAL One of the advantages of being an affiliate of a national organization is that the benefits that can only be provided by a wide-reaching institution are available to those at the local level. Thanks to AASP/MA’s affiliation with AASP National, there are a number of discount programs provided to Massachusetts shops that normally wouldn’t be available on a regional basis.

Mitchell International has been a part of and a friend to the industry for almost 70 years through its numerous programs designed to provide repairers with important information and services to facilitate their daily business. One of its most popular products is Mitchell RepairCenter Tech Advisor.

“TechAdvisor provides access to OE repair procedures,” says Ed Rachwal, president of Uxbridge, MA-based Mitchell International distributor Designer Office Systems, Inc. “It includes frame diagrams [and] body repair procedures like quarter sectioning and door trim panel replacement, as well as OE TSBs and diagnostic trouble codes, airbag [information], color wiring diagrams and even mechanical procedures like steering and suspension.”

TechAdvisor is also modular, so shops have the ability to purchase only the components they need.

“Essentially, TechAdvisor allows shops to research the OE procedures necessary to repair vehicles on the road today properly,” says Rachwal. “With vehicles becoming more complex — and newer technologies like adaptive cruise control, autonomous braking, park assist, adaptive headlights, lane keep assist and more becoming standard on more vehicles — there are numerous procedures necessary to recalibrate those systems, as well as precautions to take on

these vehicles. This helps the shop with the important technical information and provides the documentation necessary to get reimbursed by insurers for the additional procedures and non-reusable parts.”

For members of AASP/MA who would like to take advantage of this invaluable asset, there is a 15-percent discount on all packages. The TechAdvisor Repair Standards Module, which includes body repair procedures, starts at just $60 per month.

Another discounted Mitchell product for AASP/MA members is UltraMate Estimating with Toyota Recommended Repair Procedures. Mitchell has teamed up with Toyota to help industry pros create accurate estimates in just a few easy steps. For example, when you select “Replace Quarter Panel” on a 2013 Toyota Highlander, the system automatically puts in 28 lines of procedures and non-reusable parts in addition to the quarter panel. Plus, the Toyota crib bulletins and repair procedures are available right in the estimating system.

“I have had shops asking me for this type of technology for over 25 years,” says Rachwal. “The estimate just about writes itself. We have had shops that are required to use another estimating vendor get this system just for their Toyotas alone.”

Many members may have seen this product demonstrated by Rick Leos from Toyota at regional meetings in the past. AASP/MA members can get a reduced rate for new subscribers through January 31, 2016. Subscriptions start as little as $235 per month with the discount. For those who are unsure of the commitment, there are free, 30-day trials available.

MASSACHUSETTS

For more information about Mitchell RepairCenter TechAdvisor, please contact Designer Office Systems, Inc. at (508) 278-7839, email designersystems@comcast.net or visit dshelp.com.

BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

AASP/MA WORKS TO MAKE YOUR DAILY BUSINESS IN THE AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE INDUSTRY AS EASY AS POSSIBLE. Through relationships with a variety of companies, the association provides member benefit services such as uniform services, SEO and website management, legal consulting services and so much more. Now we want to hear from YOU. Is there a service or company you think would make a great addition to AASP/MA’s list of benefit providers? Let us know!

Contact Executive Director Jillian Zywien at (617) 574-0741 or email her at jzywien@aaspma.org.

14 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

AASP/MA ASKS YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS!

AASP/MA NEWSLETTER SPONSOR

WOLPERT INSURANCE Contact AASP/MA at (617) 574-0741 / jzywien@aaspma.org for information on becoming an AASP/MA sponsor!

New England Automotive Report

November 2015 15

16 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

17

LOCAL NEWS

On September 11, hundreds from the AASP/MA community gathered for the MidState Chapter’s annual BBQ at SAC Park in Shrewsbury. With beautiful fall weather and a spirit of fun filling the air, the Friday night event raised more than $5,000 for the AASP/MA Tool Grant in partnership with the Collision Repair Education Foundation.

In addition to amazing food courtesy of Firefly’s, the evening included a special performance by magician Matt Roberts and great tunes by DJ/emcee Fuzzy Wuzzy.

18 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

Offers Fun in Support of Education

AASP/MA and the MidState Chapter thank the following sponsors/donors for their generous contributions to the festivities: Grand Prize Sponsors: Bernardi Auto Group, cPrax Marketing, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Marlboro Nissan, Wellesley Volkswagen, Don Kennett, Linder’s, Inc.; Live Auction Prize Sponsor: Wagner Motors; General Raffle Sponsors: Bald Hill, ABSAP, Balise; Dinner and Dessert Sponsors: Best Chevrolet, R.H. Long Automotive; Children’s Meal & Door Prize Sponsor: Imperial Parts; Children’s Goodie Bag Sponsor: BASF; and Entertainment Sponsors: Kelly Auto Group, Spray Booth Services & Equipment.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

19

20 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

21

LOCAL NEWS by Joel Gausten

ADALB ISSUES ADvISORY RULINg ON USED PARTS The Auto Damage Appraiser Licensing Board (ADALB) is on the move – and on a roll.

For their September 29 meeting, the ADALB chose to conduct business at a new location, the Tea Room at the Pathfinder Vocational Technical High School in Palmer. This move to the western part of the state was an attempt by the Board to host meetings in different parts of the Commonwealth in addition to their regular location at the Division of Insurance in Boston. The Pathfinder meeting drew a sizable crowd of area body shop personnel and other industry professionals eager to follow the Board’s activities.

Considering the importance of the subject matter tackled by the Board, it came as little surprise that the industry turnout was so strong. The majority of the hour-long meeting focused on the possible adoption of an Advisory Ruling drafted by Board member Bill Johnson that addressed the utilization of used parts in the repair of suspension systems on damaged motor vehicles.

As previously reported in New England Automotive Report (“Used Parts Concerns Spur ADALB Debate,” NEAR October 2015), the Ruling aimed to address whether requiring the use of such parts would impair the operational safety of an automobile in violation of state regulations.

At the ADALB’s previous meeting, Board member Joseph Coyne, Jr. suggested that the Advisory Ruling include an insertion stating that the use of salvage suspension and steering parts will impair the operational safety of the automobile. At the September 29 gathering, Johnson opined that Coyne’s suggestion was “too strongly worded” 22 November 2015

and that it was not the Board’s place to impart an outright ban on the use of used suspension parts. Calling Johnson’s draft Ruling “a step in the right direction,” Board member Rick Starbard nonetheless called for greater restrictions on the use of these parts during suspension repairs. To illustrate his concerns, he shared a recent experience his shop had with a suspension component he received from the same company (LKQ Corporation) that appeared before the Board at their August 25 meeting to defend the quality of their products. According to Starbard, he received a part from LKQ only a week after that presentation for a job for a self-pay customer who insisted on its use to save money.

“The suspension assembly came in rusty, like it had been in saltwater for the last year,” he said. “My service tech couldn’t even break it apart to separate the ball joints from it.

“We have one company that says that they sandblast, Magnaflux, test, paint and make these parts look like new,” he added. “We bought, a week later, a component from that facility that was anything but.”

While he acknowledged Starbard’s position, Johnson stood his ground on what the Board could and couldn’t do to address the issue.

“To me, the Board’s job is to follow the CMRs,” he said. “To say that we’re going to prohibit used auto parts, I think, is far-reaching. I think it’s up to each shop and each consumer to negotiate as is mandated in the CMRs...If a shop uses a part that is inferior, that’s their liability [and] the insurance company’s liability, and the consumer needs to be aware. Our job is to make

New England Automotive Report

sure that everybody knows negotiations should occur, as is mandated by the CMRs. I don’t think we should be trying to say, ‘You can’t use this part or that part,’ because every car’s different, every suspension’s different and every situation’s different. You can’t legislate common sense...All we can do is tell people what the rules are, and they need to follow them.”

Paul Folino, regional industry relations manager for LKQ, appeared before the Board to detail his company’s work to protect the shops that utilize its products. He stressed that LKQ provides a “promise of protection” in addition to its warranty on the used parts it sells, offering “complete indemnification” to any repairer who properly installs one of these parts for a job written by a licensed appraiser. Additionally, Folino challenged Starbard’s recent experience with one of LKQ’s parts.

“I don’t think rust constitutes a safety issue,” he insisted. “The part you took off the vehicle, chances are, was rusty.”

Interestingly, Folino noted that it was not automatically LKQ’s job to thoroughly test the products it sells to the collision repair industry.

“Not every one of our customers requires testing,” he says “There are plenty of people who use recycled suspension [items] day in and day out without testing. We test upon request; it’s an added service that we add. To say that you got a part that was [for] a self-paid [job] that wasn’t tested...If you specifically didn’t ask, you didn’t get it tested. Not everybody requires testing of the parts.”

In addition to suggesting that not all used parts suppliers guarantee their

products to the same extent as LKQ, Massachusetts shop owner Peter Langone (Langonet Auto Body & Frame, Agawan) presented photographs to the Board of a frame that an insurer purchased from a “junkyard” for use in a vehicle at his shop. He stated that he refused to perform the repair with this item due to concerns over its quality.

“The times to repair this stuff right now, just with doors and stuff from junkyards, [are] absolutely ridiculous,” he said. “Cars sit for days and days.

Parts come from LKQ, [and] they’re not any good. You wait for the insurance company to come back out on it, and it’s three days, three days, three days...It’s absolutely getting ridiculous to fix a car and try to make money on it.”

Ultimately, the Board voted unanimously to pass a slightly revised version of Johnson’s Advisory Ruling that incorporated minor changes suggested

by ADALB Legal Counsel Michael D. Powers. The text of Advisory Ruling 2015-1 (also available online at tinyurl.com/nbtvzru) appears at right:

The Auto Damage Appraiser Licensing Board has passed a motion agreeing that an appraisal conducted by a licensed appraiser needs to follow 212 CMR 2.04 (e), which states in part: “The appraiser shall determine which parts are to be used in the repair process in accordance with 211 CMR 133.00. The appraiser shall itemize the cost of all parts, labor, materials and necessary procedures required to restore the vehicle to pre-accident condition and shall total such items.” 212 CMR 2.04 (e) also states: “The appraisers representing the insurance company and the registered repair shop selected by the insured to do the repair shall attempt to agree on the estimated cost for such repairs” As such, all costs associated with the appraisal shall be negotiated.

One of the items referenced in 212 CMR 2.04 (e) is parts; the ADALB also recognizes the use of used parts is allowed as referenced in 211 CMR 133.04 (2). The ADALB wants to stress that 211 CMR 133.00 and 212 CMR 2.00 need to be read in [their] entirety. 211 CMR 133.04 (3)(c) states“the repair will not impair the operational safety of the motor vehicle.” The ADALB is concerned that the use of used

parts that contain wear items, in certain circumstances, may violate 211 CMR 133.04 (3)(c). We want to further note that the insurance company will be responsible and liable for the use of used parts it mandates. Please note 211 CMR 133.04 (2) states: “If the repairer uses the source and specified part(s) indicated on the appraisal and these parts are later determined by both parties to be unfit for use in the repair, the insurance company shall be responsible for the costs of restoring the parts to usable condition.”

Further, 212 CMR 2.04 (e) mandates all itemized components and all such costs associated with the appraisal shall be negotiated. As such, the use of used parts needs to be negotiated by the appraisers. The ADALB strongly advises that used parts that would impact the operational safety of the motor vehicle should not be used and complete negotiations should occur as mandated. This Advisory Ruling shall be effective upon posting on the Auto Damage Appraiser Licensing Board public website.

Failure to comply with this ruling could result in fines and penalties as provided for by law.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

23

24 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

25

NATIONAL NEWS

LOCAL NEWS

Allstate Subsidiary Caught Using Unregistered Shops in MA The push against unregistered collision repair shops in the Commonwealth has landed one auto insurance carrier in hot water with the Attorney General.

On September 24, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced that Encompass Insurance Company, a subsidiary of Allstate, had agreed to pay for the correction of faulty repair work performed on motor vehicles brought to unregistered body shops. The AG’s Office revealed that Encompass failed to verify the body shops’ certifications and paid unregistered facilities for repairs made to its policyholders’ vehicles on numerous occasions.

According to an official statement issued by the Attorney General, “insurers are prohibited from paying body shops directly for repairs made pursuant to their collision and comprehensive coverages unless that shop represents that it is registered with the state and complies with Massachusetts laws. The law protects consumers who may not be able to determine whether a repair shop they brought their vehicle to is properly registered and insured.

All body shops conducting business in Massachusetts must be registered with the state and comply with certain training and safety standards. If not, they may be shut down or be subject to penalties by the Division of Standards.”

The AG’s Office began its investigation following a complaint from a consumer who unsuspectingly brought her damaged vehicle to an unregistered shop that failed to perform the correct repairs. Although Encompass directly paid the unregistered shop $4,500 for work that the AG says “left the customer with a still-unsafe vehicle,” the insurer did not provide its policyholder with any additional funds to have the vehicle subsequently repaired in a correct manner at a registered facility.

In light of the AG’s findings, Encompass has agreed to: pay $25,000 to the state; train its staff regularly on this issue and maintain a regularly updated list of registered shops; and send notices to consumers who may be affected and have the right to get their vehicle inspected.

The AG’s Office credits Assistant Attorney General Monica Brookman, the deputy division chief of the Insurance and Financial Services Division, for handling the case with assistance from Division staff members Michael Beaulieu and Rebecca Dutra.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

26 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

VW Faces Recalls, Billions in Fines over Emissions Scandal

As 2015 winds down, Volkswagen finds itself embroiled in one of the biggest scandals in automotive history.

In September, the US Environmental Protection Agency revealed that the automaker falsified pollution tests on 500,000 diesel-engine vehicles in the US. As noted in numerous mainstream sources including a September 29 online report by CNN, VW installed software (“defeat devices”) to make these automobiles appear cleaner than they were when being tested. As a result, vehicles had the potential of releasing as much as 40 times the allowed level of nitrogen oxides when driven. At press time, it was estimated that at least 11 million VW cars have been affected worldwide. The identified US models include the VW Jetta, Beetle and Golf (2009-2015); the Audi A3 (2009-2015); and the Passat (2014-2015). As this issue went to press, Volkswagen was expected to be hit with fines totaling in excess of $18 billion, while the company has suspended sales amidst a call to recall 500,000 cars in America.

The emissions debacle comes at a time of already-strained relations between the manufacturer and its 600-plus American dealers. In a September 30 report by the New York Times, Volkswagen National Dealer Advisory Council Chairman Alan Brown voiced his discontent over the automaker’s actions.

“The recent events unfolding globally regarding the diesel scandal have hit the dealers in the US extremely hard,” he said. “We have been suffering from an outdated product cycle, overpriced product and a deteriorating relationship between the dealer body and Volkswagen for a number of years.”

On September 23, Volkswagen CEO Martin Winterkorn resigned from the company amidst a fraud investigation by German prosecutors. He was replaced by Matthias Müller, who has served as CEO of Volkswagen subsidiary Porsche since 2010.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

27

LOCAL NEWS by Jacquelyn Bauman

FIgHTINg FOR THE CONSUMER: AASP/MA Submits Written Testimony on Senate Bill 134 On September 22, AASP/MA submitted important written testimony to the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure in support of Senate Bill 134, an Act Relative to Warranties.

“This legislation will protect consumers, generally, and the value of motor vehicles, specifically,” wrote AASP/MA Executive Director Jillian Zywien in the text submitted to the Committee, co-chaired by Representative Jennifer E. Benson (D - Lunenburg) and Senator Barbara L’Italien (D - Andover).

Senate Bill 134 would prevent a dealer or repair shop from taking any action in a repair that would void a vehicle’s existing warranty. Although some may be led to believe that this would be covered under the MagnusonMoss Warranty Act, that particular piece of legislation only prevents companies from voiding a warranty or denying coverage for the use of an aftermarket part.

However, if the use of such a part causes damage to another part of the vehicle that is under warranty, coverage may be denied by the manufacturer or dealer. Many vehicle owners are unaware of this fact.

Zywien believes that this will eliminate a number of complications for the consumer.

“The legislation addresses the Catch-22 consumers currently face where standard automobile insurance policies conflict with, and potentially void, standard 28 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

motor vehicle warranties,” she writes in the testimony.

“Repairs made with parts from the original equipment manufacturer [OEM] tend to reduce the cycle time a vehicle spends at an auto body repair shop because those parts are designed and tested for use on the particular vehicle subject to repair…[A]ftermarket parts often require multiple install attempts.

“If a registered repair shop installs an aftermarket part, as required by the insurer, that may impact another of the vehicle’s parts or systems, the manufacturer has the right to reject payment for the repairs,” she adds in the testimony. “This then causes the consumer to incur out-of-pocket expenses not otherwise covered by the insurer or the motor vehicle’s warranty.”

When the issue is boiled down, Zywien believes the most important thing is prioritizing the customer’s safety.

“For AASP/MA, this is an issue about protecting consumers,” she says to New England Automotive Report.

“A motor vehicle is one of the most expensive items a consumer will ever purchase. As such, we have worked to educate legislators about the need to protect them from any action that will reduce the safety or value of their motor vehicles. Our hope is that this legislation will be another safeguard for protecting the interests of the general public.”

This is just one example of the ways AASP/MA is working to fight for the automotive repair industry through legislation. For more information on these initiatives, contact an AASP/MA Board member or call the association directly at (617) 574-0741.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

30 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

31

NATIONAL NEWS by Joel Gausten

Claims Dismissed

MAjOR

in Multidistrict Suit The collision industry’s ongoing efforts to challenge auto insurers through Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) have suffered a potentially fatal blow.

Despite being filed by 20 Florida body shops against 39 auto insurance carriers, the second amended complaint in A&E Auto Body, Inc., et al. v. 21st Century Centennial Insurance Company, et al. - the first-filed action in an MDL case involving two dozen suits - was put to rest on September 23 by US District Judge Gregory A. Presnell. In his order, Judge Presnell dismissed the amended complaint’s four claims — price-fixing in violation of the Sherman Act, boycott in violation of the Sherman Act, quantum meruit and tortious interference with business relations — “with prejudice,” meaning that the plaintiffs would not be given another opportunity to re-file.

“This is the plaintiffs’ third arduous attempt to state a claim,” Judge Presnell wrote. “The problems identified in response to their initial complaint – shotgun pleading, vagueness and implausibility – have persisted in their subsequent efforts. Based upon a review of the pleadings in this and the other 20-odd cases [in the MDL] – almost all of

which share the same shortcomings – the Court finds that giving the plaintiffs another opportunity to state a claim would be an exercise in futility. Despite becoming much wordier, the plaintiffs’ pleadings have not come remotely close to satisfying the minimum pleading requirements as to any of the claims asserted. Accordingly, all four claims will be dismissed with prejudice.”

Additionally, Judge Presnell noted that the plaintiffs had continually struggled to properly explain their claims against insurers for wrongdoings: At the outset, it should be noted that the plaintiffs have failed to indicate which assertions in the second amended complaint are intended to support which of their claims. None of the four counts explicitly incorporate any of the factual assertions set forth in the pleading. Instead, the plaintiffs’ 70 pages of “Facts” are simply followed by 17 pages of “Causes of Action,” leaving it up to the reader to divine which allegations the plaintiffs believe to be relevant to any particular claim.

Originally filed in February 2014, the A&E case was initially dismissed on June 11, 2014 on the grounds that it was (according to court documents) “a prohibited ‘shotgun’ pleading, that it failed to properly set forth the basis for [the] Court’s jurisdiction, that it failed to identify which parties had ongoing contracts with one another and that all of the allegations of wrongdoing were attributed, collectively, to every defendant, even where such collective attribution made no sense.”

An amended complaint (containing two Sherman Act claims and five state law claims) was filed on June 28, 2014.

In January of this year, one of the state law claims was dismissed with prejudice, while the remaining claims (state and federal) were dismissed without prejudice. The plaintiffs filed the second amended complaint in February 2015.

It was unclear at press time whether other cases involved in the MDL (most of which are being represented by the Eaves Law Firm in Jackson, MS) would suffer the same fate as the A&E suit.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

32 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

33

VENDOR SPOTLIGHT

Continued Success for

Profitable and successful members of AASP/MA are likely more than familiar with Balise Wholesale Parts Express. The company’s name is often branded across signs at association events, in brochures at these gatherings and in New England Automotive Report. As a frequent sponsor and major supporter of a number of popular association events including Casino Night, Balise Wholesale Parts Express’ name is engrained in everyday shop discussions throughout the Commonwealth.

Providing OEM parts from nine automakers and 13 brands, Balise Wholesale Parts Express supplies the industry with products from over 22 locations. They boast a wide delivery radius that includes Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island, which explains why they have experienced consistent positive growth throughout the years. In times of economic downturns that have seen other parts operations struggle, Balise Wholesale Parts Express has only experienced an upward trend in their sales – and they expect 2016 to be their best year yet.

There are a number of reasons for Balise Wholesale Parts Express’ success, including their knowledgeable sales team determined to provide exceptional customer service.

Within their call center, there are multiple experts for each of the automakers they offer. This means that any questions will be directed to the individual who knows the most about the product they are supplying and can best direct the customer to a resolution.

Additionally, Balise Wholesale Parts Express works on an easy to use system by allowing customers to place an electronic order through three parts systems (CollisionLink, Auto PartsBridge and OPSTRAX), phone in to the call center, send a fax or even email their request. No matter how the order is placed, Balise Wholesale Parts Express requires the VIN of the vehicle receiving the parts to identify and correctly supply the products ordered by the customer.

They will always try to price match in order to supply more OEM parts and make sure that the customer will work with high-quality materials.

Balise Wholesale Parts Express’ success can also be attributed to their efficient logistics. A major difference between Balise Wholesale Parts Express and other parts operations is a later order cutoff time. Customers can order a part late in the day and more often than not will receive it the next day. Balise Wholesale Parts Express ships orders twice a day and keeps wholesale parts salesmen on the road in order to guarantee a superior customer experience.

Lastly, their investment in their ever-expanding inventory helps set Balise Wholesale Parts Express apart in the wholesale field. As part of an OEM dealer group, they believe they have the latest and greatest in terms of product changes, repeatedly staying ahead of the curve in a constantly evolving industry. Balise Wholesale Parts Express is working to be stronger, bigger and better every day.

Balise Wholesale Parts Express is open Monday through Friday from 7:30am to 5pm.

To contact, call (413) 233-2185 (Western Mass and Connecticut), (508) 957-6399 (Eastern Mass and Cape Cod) or (401) 780-3099 (Rhode Island).

E-mail wparts@balise auto.com, fax (800) 254-3544 or visit them online at baliseauto.com.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

Clockwise from top: The Balise Wholesale Parts Express team from Western Massachusetts, Cape Cod and Rhode Island.

34 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

35

36 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

37

LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

THE COMMERCE DTP ACkNOWLEDgMENT A collision repair shop owner recently emailed me a document to review that I had not seen before. It is a form from MAPFRE/Commerce, entitled “Acknowledgment of Direction to Pay.” Upon examining the form, it appeared to me that it had some good aspects, but also that it contained one part that seemed bizarre – and which could violate Massachusetts law.

by James A. Castleman, Esq.

ThE DTP ConCEPT Motor vehicle insurance policies are contracts between insurers and their insureds – usually vehicle owners or lessees. There may be additional insured parties listed on the policy as well, such as a finance company holding a security interest in the vehicle or a lessor who actually owns the vehicle. If there is a covered loss to the vehicle, then the insurer is obligated to make payments for the loss to the parties named on the policy – and only to those parties.

Collision repair shops are not parties to their customers’ insurance policies. In fact, the standard Massachusetts policy specifically says that it is not to benefit anyone in the repair business. A repair shop is not a named insured, and there is no inherent or contractual right for it to be paid for its services directly from the customer’s insurer.

On the other hand, there are benefits to all parties involved if an insurer makes claim payments directly to the insured’s repair facility. Collision repair shops have an interest in getting paid as soon as possible for the work that they do. They do not want to wait around for the customer to get paid on a claim and then endorse the payment check over to them, or deposit the check into his or her account before writing a personal check to them. Plus, a repair shop may have concerns that a customer who gets a claim payment check will use the funds for other purposes while the 38 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

facility is left storing the car on its premises, waiting and hoping for eventual payment.

Because repair shops can enforce their garagekeeper’s lien and keep a repaired vehicle until they get paid, there are advantages to the vehicle owners and their insurance companies if an insurer can pay a shop directly for repairs.

Customers get their cars back quicker, and insurers can minimize their substitute transportation coverage costs.

Every day sooner that a repair shop gets paid for its work is a day less that the insurer has to pay for a rental car.

While there has never been anything preventing an insured from assigning his or her right to a claim payment to the repair shop, there has traditionally been a concern about the enforceability and standardization of such an assignment. In response to these concerns, the right of an insured to direct his or her insurer to make a claim payment to the repair shop has been specifically addressed in Massachusetts insurance statutes and regulations. The Massachusetts statute regarding collision coverage says, “The insurer shall pay either to the insured or to a repair shop if the insured so indicates in writing to his insurance company for direct and accidental loss of or damage to the insured motor vehicle…” (Emphasis added.) The regulations governing so-called Direct Payment Plans provide, with regard to payments for supplemental damage agreed to by

insurers, that “[t]he claimant may direct the insurer to make any supplemental payment to the repair shop, provided the repair shop is registered under M.G.L. c. 100A.” As a result, a system has developed over the years for customers to be able to sign a “Direction to Pay” (sometimes referred to as a “DTP”) instructing their insurer to make claim payments for repair work directly to their repairer. While it is not perfect, the system usually works well for all involved parties. While the statute only applies to collision losses and the regulation only applies to supplemental payments on collision and comprehensive losses, insurers almost universally recognize DTPs for initial and supplemental payments on collision, comprehensive and even third-party losses.

ThE PoSITIvES of ThE CoMMERCE foRM There are some great parts to the MAPFRE/Commerce Acknowledgment of Direction to Pay form. In fact, it addresses and solves some of the most common and difficult problems with the DTP system.

The form initially acknowledges that Commerce has received a DTP from the shop. This in and of itself helps that facility, since it provides an actual record of receipt of the DTP by Commerce. The form goes on to confirm that there is insurance coverage for the loss. This is a major plus, since the shop has no other way of knowing that the insurer is going to pay the claim. If the shop is going to release a customer’s vehicle before it gets paid in full, then it should be able to feel some degree of security that payment will actually be received. The form goes even further, specifically assuring the shop that Commerce is going to make payment directly to it – although subject to the applicable deductible and confirmation that appraised repairs are related to the covered loss.

The form then addresses other issues that may be of concern to the shop. It specifies the applicable deductible and/or whether it is going to be waived so that the shop knows whether or not to charge the customer directly. The form also discloses whether the insured has rental car coverage, which can allow the repair shop to schedule the job.

It can also protect the facility if it or an affiliate is supplying a rental car. Finally, the form discloses how much has already been paid on the claim and to whom prior payments have been made, i.e. to the customer or to the shop. Again, this allows the shop to know how much to directly charge the customer for repairs.

ThE nEGATIvES of ThE CoMMERCE foRM While Commerce should be lauded for some aspects of its Acknowledgment of Direction to Pay form, it is my opinion that it should also be taken to task for the bad parts.

In particular, I am concerned by two sentences in the form, which say, “The Commerce Insurance Company accepts this Direction to Pay as an indication that your repair facility will complete all repairs to this vehicle in accordance with the appraisal. Refunds for any repairs not completed should be made to The Commerce Insurance Company, not to the owner of the vehicle.”

The problem with this portion of the form is that the repair shop has no contractual obligation to Commerce (and no statutory or regulatory obligation) to make repairs to a vehicle in accordance with the insurer’s appraisal. Remember that the shop is not an insured under its customer’s auto insurance policy. On the other hand, the shop does have a strict contractual obligation to its customer and is governed by applicable Massachusetts law in regard to that relationship.

Under the contract for repair (and under consumer protection regulations issued by the Massachusetts Attorney General), the repair shop is obligated to make repairs to its customer’s vehicle in accordance with whatever the customer has authorized, and only in accordance with that authorization. Regardless of what the insurer’s appraiser has written on his or her appraisal (and no matter what repairs may have been authorized or specified by the insurer), the shop is bound by its own appraisal and customer authorization – not by Commerce’s appraisal or authorization. If the shop does not abide by the customer’s instructions, then the shop has committed a per se violation of the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act and made itself potentially liable for treble damages and attorney’s fees if the customer sues it for not doing what it was supposed to do.

Further, an insurer is obligated under its contract (and under applicable statutes and regulations) to pay the insured for the full amount of a covered vehicle damage loss in all instances (subject, of course, to the applicable deductible). The customer has absolutely no obligation whatsoever to make any of the repairs appraised by the insurer, or to have repairs made in the manner appraised by the insurer. An insured cannot certify to the insurer that repairs were made if they were not. An insurer has the right to New England Automotive Report

November 2015

39

LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

reduce the insured’s actual cash value of the vehicle by the amount of repairs that it paid for but which were not made, yet the insurer still has to pay the full amount due for what repairs would be needed to return the car to pre-loss condition – even if the customer then chooses to use the claim payment at the blackjack tables at Foxwoods.

If an insurer has made a claim payment for a certain amount directly to a repair shop under a DTP, the insurer has made a determination, through its licensed appraiser, that the full amount of those funds is needed to pay for the reasonable cost of repairs that will return the car to

40 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

pre-loss condition. Whether or not those repairs are made (or whether the repair shop may choose to charge less for repairs than the insurer has paid), the insurer is still obligated to make the payment that it has authorized. If full repairs are not made (or if there are excess funds for any other reason), those funds belong to the insured – the shop’s customer – not to the insurer.

There is no obligation to refund the excess funds to the insurer, and it would appear to violate both the shop’s contract with its customer and Massachusetts consumer and insurance laws for the shop to do so.

In other words, it appears to me that the objectionable language in the Commerce Acknowledgment form violates Massachusetts law (as well as Commerce’s insurance contract with its policyholder), and that the cited language may well be unenforceable and against public policy.

opinion, cannot be changed by a referral shop contract. If you are a Commerce referral repair shop, it may be advisable to consult with your own attorney as to how to address this issue.

Attorney James Castleman is a managing member of Paster, Rice & Castleman, LLC in Quincy, MA. He can be reached at (617) 472-3424 or at jcastleman@

prclawoffice.com.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

A fInAL WoRD To CoMMERCE REfERRAL ShoPS In many instances, general requirements applicable to the auto damage insurance claim payment system can be legally changed by an insurer’s contract with its referral repair shops. That is why an insurer may be able to limit its liability to its referral shops for things like the Labor Rate it may be required to pay, the maximum storage time for which it will pay for totaled vehicles or perhaps how it determines paint and materials reimbursements. The objectionable language in the Commerce DTP Acknowledgment form is not one of those things. The form’s language addresses the shop’s contractual and legal obligations to its customer – something that, in my New England Automotive Report

November 2015

41

42 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

43

COVER STORY

LIABILITY: WHERE DO YOU STAND?

by Jacquelyn Bauman

44 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

On July 5, 2014, Donald Ibey of Barre, VT was driving his 1992 Chevrolet Corsica when, according to police reports, “he heard a pop.”

The sedan went out of control down a steep hill and crashed, killing Ibey’s wife, Elizabeth.

Just two months earlier, Vermont mechanic Steven Jalbert had passed the vehicle, posting an inspection sticker on it after it drove into his family’s Barre-based business, A.J.’s Sunoco. A post-crash inspection of the vehicle uncovered extensive rust on the rocker panels that, according to DMV Lieutenant Tim Charland in a court affidavit, would “most likely” have been present when the car was brought in to be inspected, as the Corsica had only traveled 383 miles since its visit with Jalbert.

As a result, Jalbert was brought up on charges of involuntary manslaughter and reckless endangerment. He is currently awaiting trial.

The case shook shop owner Mike Parker of Parker’s Classic Auto Works in Rutland, VT, who is well known in the AASP/MA community for his legal proceedings fighting insurance companies on short-pays.

(The most recent NEAR article detailing one of Parker’s cases can be found in the April 2015 issue [“VT Shop Wins $53K Assignment of Proceeds Suit”].)

“It surprised me to hear that this case was criminal as opposed to civil,” Parker says. “But now that this has happened, it has opened up a whole new avenue. There’s a potential precedent to be set now throughout the US. There’s a lot of things you can do to get fined or sued for, but when a death results, it puts the case in a whole different area.”

Parker is concerned not only for the impact this case may have on inspectors, but on collision repairers as well.

“When you put this same issue into the collision industry, it’s comparable to putting on a reconditioned wheel or using used suspension, except we would be held even more responsible because we are the installer,” he says.

Parker tells New England Automotive Report that he is experiencing a similar issue in his own shop regarding a struggle to get an insurance company to pay for an OEM upper tie bar. According to him, his shop never installs aftermarket structural parts; if a customer’s insurance company refuses to write for OE, he or she must pay the difference. In this case, the customer fought the insurer to pay the $8 difference for an OEM upper tie bar versus its aftermarket version. The company put the burden of proof on Parker, insisting that he must show that the aftermarket piece was not of like kind and quality in order for them to pay for the OEM part.

“This is a safety issue; this is a structural part. I want to ask the insurance companies how they can sleep at night,” he expresses. “If a body shop is foolish enough to put these parts on a car, they’re going to be liable for them. You are the installer. You are the collision expert.

It’s up to you. This case here is potentially setting a precedent and will hurt some collision shop that doesn’t know the difference. Shops put used suspensions on a car and they think it’s never going to happen to them. It only has to happen one time.”

The reverberations of the Jalbert case are also being felt here in the Commonwealth. Massachusettsbased lawyer James Castleman (Paster, Rice and Castleman) weighed in on the situation and the effects it could possibly have on the Massachusetts automotive industry.

“It certainly is an unusual situation to charge someone criminally

for this,” he explains. “To show involuntary manslaughter, you have to prove – beyond a reasonable doubt – a reckless disregard for the consequences. This is a very difficult thing; if he had been sued for monetary damages, it would be a much easier case to make. The standard to prove reckless disregard is much higher.”

While a guilty verdict in a civil case for monetary damages may be covered by liability insurance in some circumstances, a criminal prosecution such as this obviously bears a much heavier penalty. If convicted, Jalbert faces up to 16 years behind bars.

“People doing inspections need to be aware of what their liability could be,” Castleman says.

There are also some unforeseen complications for Massachusetts appraisers and repairers that add an extra level of liability.

“In Massachusetts, it’s the law for an appraiser who encounters a vehicle that does not pass inspection to remove the inspection sticker from the windshield,” Castleman notes. “If an appraiser does not do so, he or she is flouting the law. If that vehicle gets in a subsequent accident with the sticker still intact, then the appraiser may well be liable.”

Castleman notes that another state law — the requirement for shops to warranty the parts they install on a customer’s vehicle — makes the liability situation even stickier.

“The first thing to understand is that the insurer never mandates that a particular part be used by a shop; they only tell you what it is they’re going to pay for,” he says. “Clearly, if a repairer makes a repair with parts he or she believes to be inferior, there’s the significant potential for the shop to be sued. As I mentioned

before, in the criminal case in Vermont, reckless disregard must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to charge someone with involuntary manslaughter. If a repair is made with inferior parts that the [technician] recognizes are subpar and an accident results from the failure of one of these parts, there is the potential for criminal action if it can be shown that the technician acted with reckless disregard for the consequences of using those parts.”

While the possibility for these severe ramifications exists, Castleman does not believe that an abnormal amount of worry is warranted from repairers in Massachusetts.

“Despite all of this, I think the much greater liability is being sued monetarily,” he offers.

One of the local industry’s most vocal shop owners, AASP/MA Secretary Gary Cloutier had much to say about this case and its shadow on the Massachusetts repair community.

“Even though the case dealt with an inspection station, no matter what, in the grand scheme of things, you should never let a vehicle go out of your shop if it’s not in good condition,” he opines. “As a repairer, I am not willing to put my customers’ lives, my business, my livelihood or my license on the line because an insurance company wouldn’t pay an extra $50 for a part. I’m the customer’s best advocate; it’s my job to look for things that are wrong. I treat the car like it’s my mother’s car, every time.”

Despite how thorough Cloutier is in investigating the damage on a vehicle, he always makes sure to take extra precautions in the case of a legal proceeding. He provides the example of a recent customer whose vehicle was written for a hood latch assembly. As the hood latch assembly was not in bad shape,

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

45

COVER STORY Cloutier refunded the customer the money, had the customer sign and date a form, gave the customer a copy of that form and kept one for himself. This level of meticulous documentation is a precaution that he insists must be taken.

“If his hood opens up, I can show that he didn’t want it fixed,” he explains. “I try to cover my butt in all situations so that no one can say that I’ve committed fraud. You have to take a proactive approach to this because everyone is so sue happy these days.”

In regard to who is liable for repairs, Parker urges shops to remember their position in the contract between the insurer and the consumer.

“The only way an insurer has a right to dictate how a repair is made is if they choose to repair the car themselves,” Parker explains. “However, this would make the insurer liable for the repairs, so instead they settle in money with the vehicle owner. In 1964, there was a case in Alabama against State Farm [State Farm Mutual Automobile v. Dodd] where State Farm was found liable for wrongful death after the suspension snapped in a vehicle that they had elected to repair. That’s when everything changed. In order to avoid liability, they allow the continued on pg. 58

46 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

Prompt &  Dependable Delivery

Experienced and Professional Parts Team

Ask about our Competitive Prices

Fax Line: 508.699.4761 Parts Hours: Mon-Sat: 7:30-5:00

Fax Line: 508.673.6338 Parts Hours: Mon-Sat: 7:30-5:00

Fax Line: 508.316.8397 Parts Hours: Mon-Sat: 7:30-5:00

www.firsthyundai.com

www.firstfordma.com

Parts Line:

508.699.4700 270 East Washington St. North Attleboro, MA 02760

Parts Line:

774.888.6666

292 William S. Canning Blvd.

Fall River, MA 02721

Parts Line:

508.316.8410 280 East Washington St. North Attleboro, MA 02760

www.firstchryslerma.com

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

47

EQUIPMENT AND TOOLING

by Jacquelyn Bauman

An Aluminum Retrospective: Where Are We Now? It’s here. how prepared are we?

It’s been almost a year since aluminum hit the market like never before in the form of one of the nation’s most popular automobiles, the 2015 Ford F-150. As a result, many are looking at the impact this has had on the industry. With all of the hype and information swirling around for the past 12 months, it is interesting to take a step back and look at the resulting trends that have affected the field.

Aluminum is on the road, and perhaps it has already been in a shop in your area. So what has been the response?

Unfortunately, according to a number of industry experts, the results are disappointing.

According to Assured Performance’s Advanced Repair Capable Certified Shop Locator (available at certifiedbody shop.info/insured), out of 15 Assured Performance recognized aluminum-capable repair shops in Massachusetts, only three are Ford Aluminum Certified.

Even though I-CAR’s 2015 Ford F-150 class (FOR06) was the most popular course in 2014, I-CAR President and CEO John Van Alstyne revealed at the April Collision Industry Conference in Atlanta that only 34 percent of today’s industry partakes in available training.

Although there are numerous forms of training on the market (including programs offered by various original equipment manufacturers), Mark Allen, collision programs and workshop equipment specialist at Audi of America, warns that being certified to do repairs on one OEM’s aluminum-intensive vehicles doesn’t mean that one is qualified for all aluminum repairs.

“The introduction of the 2015 Ford F-150 has raised interest in the Audi aluminum certification program because we have a reputation for having done the training for a long time,” he says. “I applaud efforts like those, but one brand doesn’t necessarily apply to another brand.”

This confusion over where to turn for training is a problem on which Allen blames the overdose of information flooding the market.

48 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

“Equipment manufacturers are saying this, OEMs are saying that and repairers are saying something completely different,” he observes. “The industry is getting a lot of mixed messages. There are a lot of people trying to do the right thing by getting the information out there, but it’s not united, which is where I think we need to do better. People don’t realize that there are so many different types of aluminum, as many as there are steel [and] as many as there are carbon fiber. You can’t throw an agnostic blanket of knowledge out there. It’s not right. There are specific things OEMs do with their cars and with their design qualities based on the materials they’re using. You have to follow those specific repair procedures. The problem is, the industry is in the dark about where to find the information and how to follow it.”

While many in the industry are disappointed with the overall national reaction to aluminum, the response closer to home is starting to pick up. One of Massachusetts’ most popular equipment providers, Kevin Lombard of Lombard Equipment, Inc., believes that the introduction of aluminum represents a new era for the collision repairer.

“There’s been a big change in the overall attitude of my customers,” he explains. “A lot of shops are excited about the new changes. I went to three seminars this weekend about aluminum, and each one of them had over 100 people there.

This has pushed shops to look at their business, get tested, get certified and step up to do better work.”

For shops that are interested in becoming aluminum certified but who are unsure how to start, Allen suggests beginning with a bit of reflection.

“As with most self-improvement, the answers on where to begin have to come from within,” he says. “Shops need to look at their core; they need to examine what cars they repair and the level of training they currently have. Based on the recently released I-CAR figures, the first move for a lot of shops should be to get involved in training. I suggest taking an ASE test as an evaluation; it might be humbling, but it will point out the areas of necessary growth. Failure isn’t negative – it’s where you can improve. Once you get the training, then you look into equipment and tooling. At that point, you’ll be more guided and more likely to make the right choices.”

“When it comes to the first investments, if a shop wants to be conservative, they should start with basic things like an aluminum dent pulling system,” says Lombard. “If a panel comes in with a dent, they can start by just working with the pulling system. If they want to move forward, my next suggestion is usually a pulse aluminum welder. The move to aluminum doesn’t have to happen all at once, and this is a very palatable way to start. This isn’t just a passing phase.”

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

49

50 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

51

AASP/MA MEMBER SHOP SPOTLIGHT

by Jacquelyn Bauman

A&P COLLISION CENTER Not many people buy their first car at 12 years old. But for Medford-based shop owner Alan LaRose (A&P Collision Center, Medford, MA), it’s the reason he is where he is today.

Tinkering around on that 1964 Pontiac LeMans started out as a hobby for LaRose, but it quickly became a passion. He turned his love of cars into a career when he started as a service advisor at a Volvo dealership, eventually working his way up to service manager.

“I had thought about opening up my own shop for a while,” LaRose says of his decision to leave working for someone else behind. “When I found a good location, I decided to give it a try.”

In 2010, A&P Collision Center opened its doors for the first time. The shop services drivers within a 30-mile radius and prides itself on following a customer service-focused business model, a philosophy that helped it grow from a 3,800-square-foot shop to 7,600 square feet this past September.

“My favorite thing about the work that I do is trying to help people out after they’ve had an accident,” LaRose explains. “When they’re upset and looking at their damaged car, I tell them we’ll return it better than what it looked like before the accident. We calm them down and make them feel better. When they see the car at the end, they always appreciate it.

“I think it’s more than likely our customer service that sets us apart from other shops,” he continues. “I bend over backwards for my customers. The happier they are, the more recommendations you get.”

He credits this dedication to customer service to Andy Ioakim of Hogan & Van Auto Body (with whom he worked for a few years before starting his own business) and past employer Kris Ogonowsky of Maaco Collision Repair in Somerville.

Although LaRose has found success through his customer-minded approach, he is finding business growth difficult due to the inability to get new

life into the industry. After looking for a new employee to add to his six-person team for over a year, he has started to become frustrated.

“Finding personnel is the biggest challenge,” he admits. “People don’t want to get into this industry if you can make the same money sitting behind a desk and you don’t have to get dirty.”

It is for this reason and more that LaRose recently joined AASP/MA. Having worked for a number of member shops in the past (as well as maintaining a close relationship with the Ioakims), he is well aware of the benefits of being a member.

“It helps a lot,” he states. “I see all of the different things going on with laws and insurance companies. [Current AASP/MA Vice President] Adam Ioakim has come here and explained things that the association is doing to help the industry. We need to get everyone on the same page to fix the cars correctly and get new people into this business.”

LaRose believes these conditions will improve within the next few years if the industry continues to work towards positive goals.

“If we get the Labor Rate changed and work on enforcing some of the laws that insurance companies should be obeying but are disregarding, I hope we can get things in this industry straightened out,” he expresses.

As for his day-to-day business, LaRose adheres to a simple philosophy for success.

“Be proud of your work and stand behind it,” he says. “Do what you’re supposed to do to repair the car properly and keep your customer satisfied.”

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

A&P Collision Center is proud of their new 7,600-square-foot facility.

52 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

2016 MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

As a member of the Alliance of Automotive Service Providers of Massachusetts (AASP/MA), I will abide by the association’s bylaws and code of ethics. I understand that membership in AASP of Massachusetts is non-transferable, and I must remain current with my dues in order to be a member in good standing. I understand that if I discontinue my membership that I must immediately cease using any association promotions, logos or materials. Additionally, I understand that as part of my AASP of Massachusetts membership, I will receive New England Automotive Report, the official publication of AASP of Massachusetts, faxes, emails and other mailings.

*** PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT LEGIBLY *** BUSINESS INFORMATION: Mr.

Mrs.

What benefits motivated you to join AASP of Massachusetts?

Ms.

__________________________________________________________

Business Representative Name: ______________________________

__________________________________________________________

Business Name ____________________________________________

__________________________________________________________

Street Address ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Street

City

State

Zip

Mailing Address ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Street

Phone Number ( E-mail Address

City

)____________________________________ Fax Number (

State

Zip

) __________________________________________

________________________________________ Web Site Address ____________________________________________

Enrolled By (Name and Address) ________________________________________________________________________________________ MEMBERSHIP TYPE REPAIRER MEMBER (check one) Collision Repair Shop Mechanical Repair Shop Both, Collision & Mechanical Repair Shops Other Repair Shop

PERSONAL INFORMATION: Name ____________________________________________________ Nickname ________________________________________________ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES (The AASP membership year is from January 1 to December 31, 2016)

$40/month SUPPLIER/ASSOCIATE MEMBER (check one) Auto Paint/Crash Parts/Auto Parts/Wholesaler Equipment/Tool Supplier Manufacturer/Sales Agent Services (Computers, Software, Vehicle Rental, Other)

$115/quarter

$425/year - BEST vALUE!

Monthly & Quarterly Dues are Automatic Credit Card Transactions ONLY*

NEW! Political Action Committee (PAC) Donation ...............$_____ Check or Cash

Credit Card:

Visa

MasterCard

Amex

Card Number: __________________________________________ LIST OTHER SPECIALTIES ______________________________________ __________________________________________________________

CID Number: ____________

(3#s on back for Visa, 4 on front for AMEX)

Expiration Date: ________________________________________ Name on Card: __________________________________________

Just like good tools and equipment, membership in AASP of Massachusetts is a valuable investment. AASP of Massachusetts works for you through such outstanding programs as: (1) management and technical training; (2) discount uniform rental; and (3) a wide variety of other business services.

Put AASP of Massachusetts to work for you today.

COMPLETE THE MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION AND RETURN IT WITH PAYMENT TO AASP OF MASSACHUSETTS.

Billing Address of Credit Card: ____________________________ ________________________________________________________ Signature: ______________________________________________ Date: __________________________________________________ *Additional authorization form needed. Please contact AASP/MA Office.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Check Number ______________________________Check Date ________________________Check Amount ______________________________ Date joined ______________________________Member Number ______________________Next Bill Date ______________________________

12 Post Office Square, 6th Floor • Boston, MA 02109 Phone: (617) 574-0741 | Fax: (617) 695-0173|jzywien@aaspma.org As required by the U.S. Tax Code, AASP of Massachusetts, Inc. informs its members that 75% of the dues paid to the association are tax deductible. The remaining 25% is allocated to legislative activities and is not tax deductible.

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

53

54 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

55

56 November 2015

New England Automotive Report

New England Automotive Report

November 2015

57

COVER STORY

continued from pg. 46

customer to go to the shop of his or her choice. It’s important for shops to be aware of this.”

Regardless of the ultimate impact this case in Vermont will have on the Massachusetts repair industry, it is good business practice to always be prepared for potential liability in your line of work. Guard yourself with liability insurance, be conscientious

N

about documentation and speak with legal counsel as soon as possible in the event of litigation. Additionally, being a member of AASP/MA provides opportunities to learn about this and many other topics regarding how to protect yourself and your business, and also offers the network necessary to answer any questions you may have.

MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING THE SUCCESS OF THE AUTO REPAIR INDUSTRY

E

W

E

N

G

L

A

N

D

AUT M TIVE AD INDEX AP Media ........................................................40 Audi Group ....................................................20 Audi Shrewsbury ..........................................55 Axalta Coating Systems ..................................4 Bald Hill Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram..............8 Balise Wholesale Parts Express ....................35 Baystate Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge ..................49 Bernardi Group ........................................30-31 Best Chevrolet/Best CDJR..........................IFC BMW Group ..............................................24-25 BMW/Mini of Warwick ................................17 Clay Subaru ....................................................49 Colonial Auto Group ....................................29 Empire Auto Parts..........................................40 Enterprise ..........................................................9 First Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep-Ram ..................47 First Ford ........................................................47 First Hyundai..................................................47 Ford Group ....................................................43 Future Cure ....................................................41 G&M New England LLC ..............................46 Honda Group..................................................27 Hyundai Group ..............................................57 Imperial Ford ..................................................43 Infiniti of Norwood........................................21 Ira Group....................................................12-13 Kelly Automotive Group............................IBC Kia Group........................................................36 Linder’s, Inc. ..................................................58 Long Automotive Group ..........................OBC Mazda Group..................................................11 Mercedes-Benz of Shrewsbury ....................55 Mopar Group..................................................37 Nissan Group..................................................42 PPG ....................................................................3 Robertsons GMC Truck ................................46 Sarat Ford Lincoln..........................................23 Sentry Group ....................................................6 Subaru Group............................................50-51 Tasca Group ....................................................33 Toyota Group..................................................54 Village Auto Group........................................16 VW Group ......................................................56 Wagner BMW of Shrewsbury ......................55 Wagner Kia of Shrewsbury ..........................55 Wellesley Toyota/Scion ................................47

58 November 2015

New England Automotive Report