Southwest Edition Texas Oklahoma Louisiana New Mexico
31
YEARS
www.autobodynews.com ww ww.autobodynews.com
I-CAR Responds to Associations’ Questions on Repair Standards, Clarifies Stance on OEM Procedures Gaps I-CAR responded to questions posed by repairer associations regarding the training organization’s position on repair standards, as they relate to OEM repair procedures, and I-CAR’s ultimate decision not to take an active role in the identification of gaps in OEM repair procedures and forming a council to foster closing those gaps, something the association’s had requested of ICAR in 2011. In an April 12 letter to I-CAR, the three repairer organizations had questioned I-CAR’s reasons for not accepting this expanded role in the development of repair standards, and
questioned statements made by I-CAR that “seem to suggest a belief within ICAR that not all industry segments support using OEM repair procedures as a standard of repair.” I-CAR responded in the form of a letter addressed to representatives of the Alliance of Automotive Service Providers (AASP), the Society of Collision Repair Specialists (SCRS), and the Assured Performance Network. In the latest official response, ICAR reiterated its position that it “firmly believes that OEM collision repair procedures are the industry stanSee I-CAR Clarifies, Page 8
VOL. 31 ISSUE 5 MAY 2013
Repairer-Only Meeting Focuses on Shops’ Response to Key Industry Issues at April CIC Phoenix Meeting by John Yoswick
Insurer-mandated parts procurement systems, and I-CAR’s decision not to follow through with its plans to work with automakers to identify and close the gaps in existing collision repair procedures, dominated discussion at a repairer-only meeting held in Phoenix in April. Aaron Schulenburg, executive director of the Society of Collision Repair Specialists, led the “Repairer Roundtable” meeting, but said it was less tied to any one organization than to an over-arching goal of providing
PAINT AND REFINISH TECHNOLOGIES Second of 2 Issues
GM Wants Dealers to Stock More Service Parts, Parts Managers and Dealers Debate Costs and Discounts
pact of the Service Lane Parts program. GM estimates that the majority of dealerships will spend $6,000 to $10,000 to buy the additional inventory, but worried dealers also believe it may result in buying parts that won’t move as quickly as GM believes, wasting valuable shelf space as well as money. See GM Dealers’ Parts, Page 16
Change Service Requested
P.O. BOX 1516, CARLSBAD, CA 92018
General Motors is revamping its service parts program and giving incentives to dealerships to increase their inventory for more same-day repairs and to buy more of those parts directly from the factory, Automotive News recently reported. However dealers and their parts managers have expressed serious concerns about the inventory cost and im-
repairers a place to discuss and establish objectives without the influence of other industry segments. “I think our industry has become well-informed,” Schulenburg said. “There is a great network of information going in and out of the associations, and from the trade I-CAR Board member press. But just Dusty Womble being informed did not support board decision isn’t enough. We See Repairer Roundtable, Page 9
• Custom Painter Stories, p. 10, 28, 32, 44 • Training and News, p. 6, 18, 24
Suit Filed Against Safelite and Toyota After DoubleFatality Rollover, Safelite Says Not Repairer of Record A Houston, Texas-based personal injury attorney has filed suit against Safelite and Toyota on behalf a Montana woman who he says lost both her husband and young daughter in a rollover crash, in which the windshield allegedly separated from the vehicle. The attorney, Rob Ammons, contends Safelite had replaced the windshield on the vehicle involved, while Safelite argues its claims division processed the claim on behalf of another glass shop. “While traveling on a North Dakota highway one December afternoon, the family’s 2005 Toyota Tundra contacted an icy patch and went out of control. The pickup crossed the highway’s median and rolled over,” Rob Ammons said in a news release. “Safelite, who had installed a windshield on the Tundra, was also named as a defendant,” the document
continues. “According to the lawsuit, the windshield separated from the pickup in this crash and exacerbated the movement of the roof’s pillars. As a result, the driver and rear seat passenger were partially ejected from the pickup, despite the fact that they were wearing their seatbelts.” Ammons listed Safelite as a defendant because he contends the company installed the windshield on the pickup, according to the release. Safelite’s senior corporate counsel has another take: “Safelite typically does not comment on pending litigation. However, in this tragic case, after a preliminary investigation we determined that Safelite AutoGlass did not perform the windshield replacement,” says Brian DiMasi, Safelite’s senior corporate counsel. “Rather, Safelite Solutions, the claims management business, See Safelite and Toyota Suit, Page 18
Presorted Standard US Postage PAID San Bernardino, CA Permit #2244