In recent days, the case of a number of home-based insurance companies has attracted industry attention. Unlike in the past, the “two statements” of the repair plant in the incident gave rise to considerable controversy。
A brief account of the dispute follows:
In mid-march this year, after an accident involving the owner of a car, the repair plant designated by the insurance company was not adopted, but was chosen for a repair plant, and the vehicle was first repaired in the absence of a flat amount determined by the division. As the owner insisted on using the original plant, the repair plant issued two statements: a spare parts bill of $6595 and a maintenance work schedule of $6370, totalling $12965. For the first time, however, the insurance company was set at a loss of only $4,000. The owner complained and complained, after which the division made concessions to raise the offer to $6900, but the owner still did not approve it. The deadlock between the two sides resulted in the owner not receiving compensation for three months. As a result, the owner of the car entrusted the head of the local maintenance association to assist in the defence of rights, resulting in an incident in which the repair plant was located。
It appears to be a common settlement dispute, referring directly to such issues as the failure of insurance companies to carry out repairs, the non-support of repair plants to use the original plant, and the direct supply of spare parts. However, the central dispute in this case points to the repair workshop maintenance settlement。
Is “a breakdown of maintenance projects, 6,000 hours of work” reasonable
Read the accessories statement first。
Six of the spare parts purchased in the list were original items, apparently a “treatment” for 4s, but could not be excluded from the owner's position。
After all, when the owner paid the premium, paul did not inform him whether the original or the secondary plant was used for the maintenance. As the repair plant is responsible for the quality of the spare parts, it makes sense to procure the original plant of a more manageable quality。
Moreover, there is a suspicion that paul's fittings are both referee and athlete。
It is also the subject of controversy to look at the time statements — is it reasonable that 34 maintenance projects are included in the list and the cost of 6,000 hours
The challenge was sharp: “the cost of 6,000 multi-work hours was excessive, which was higher than the cost of 4s, and it was no wonder that paul owed compensation.”
One trader, for example, examined the front bars in the maintenance list: a “open bars” operation was broken down into front bars, front bars, middle nets, bars up and down on front bars, left and right lights, front bars, and seven projects with a total cost of $820。
“absolutely, the time-cost of the scavengers is one. The price of $150 for the replacement of a front-line 4s store would have been fully covered; if the cost of the vehicle was less than 150,000, it would have been $100. There is also the problem of scraping and calculating the hours worked.”
In addition, it has been pointed out that it is not paradoxical that the front left door is listed in the spare parts settlement, while item 10 of the working hours settlement is to replace the front left and item 13 is to unload the front left door
A trade veteran pointed out, even more starkly, that the accident billing level at the repair plant was not professional, that the project for the dismantling and repair of the wheel had been listed, and that the cost of 800 dollars had been incurred without adding a “four-wheel positioning” and a “pre-repair frame”。
While there was some resonance, it also reflected the issue of settlements。
And, of course, the sound of the repair plant. In their view, the mechanics and techniques of the repair plant were worth money and should be reflected in the hourly costs, which should be aligned with the offer for the 4s store。
“on the basis of this statement, a four-percent discount on working hours would be a reasonable price.” one of the maintenance plant directors said。
02 why not recommend that the repair plant defend itself
In this initial dispute, the owner eventually chose to entrust the head of the local maintenance association and operator of a car repair plant to defend his rights, but no clear progress has been made。
The industry analyses indicate that the most effective way to resolve such disputes is for the owner himself (or the insured person) to bring an action or claim directly against the insurance company (the insurance division). The central reason is that the premiums are paid by the owner, who is the core client of the division and the key “lifegate”。
Maintenance units (repair plants) as stakeholders can actively assist car owners in defending their rights, such as providing maintenance vouchers, explaining technical details, etc。
However, there is a general and strong recommendation that the repair plant sign a full power of attorney or a proxy agreement with the owner to place itself at the front desk and become the subject of direct confrontation with the division。
There are some risks to this practice:
First, the basic principle of the court's treatment of compensation payments is that they are paid to the owner or the insured, whose legal effects are not always recognized by the court, by a power of attorney signed by the owner to transfer the claim entirely to the repair plant。
Second, with regard to maintenance costs per se, the hourly charge is not readily priced by repair plants, and industry reference standards are usually available. If the division objects to the maintenance programme, it has the right to apply for re-accreditation and to be assessed impartially by a randomly appointed expert body appointed by the court。
The ac vehicle column author stated that once such an agreement had been signed, the owner might have chosen to drive the vehicle directly, at which point the repair plant was caught in the passive position of pursuing maintenance payments from paul alone, making it much more difficult。
More importantly, this should have focused on the tension between the owner and the paul, unnecessarily shifting to the repair plant and the paul, and could have weakened the ability of the owner to assert his rights as a consumer。
As a result, the mlc called upon the repair plant to assist the owner in making a clear claim to the paul division in the event of a refusal or reduction of compensation, for example, to ensure the quality of maintenance, use of spare parts from the original plant, etc. In turn, it is the responsibility of the division to consult with the repair plant that is being repaired on specific maintenance details, including the selection of spare parts, approval of working hours and scope of maintenance。
In the event that actual costs exceed the amount fixed by the division during the maintenance process, this should be a matter for consultation between the division and the repair plant, where the interests of the owner are best safeguarded。
“in the name of the owner of the car, it is highly probable that the case will succeed”. Industry said。
03. The root cause of the settlement dispute remains the right to speak
All actions are fought for survival。
In the past year, 36 repair trade associations made a joint statement complaining about the disruptions in the repair and compensation chain of the accident vehicle, making public the difficulties of running the repair plant in the accident vehicle repair operation。
Today, many repair plants have come to defend themselves against insurance companies, and behind this intense move is the brutal reality that the margin of profit from the accident vehicle repair operation has been stretched to the limit。
At this time, 4s has shown unprecedented attention to the accident vehicle business, which will undoubtedly further exacerbate the fragmentation of the repair plant in the field of accident vehicle operations. The repair plant within the non-insurance company's core service network is facing unprecedented challenges in accessing critical points such as accident vehicle resources, loss and loss。
It has been pointed out by industry that in the case of a repair plant, such a special working-hour settlement was impossible。
Today, in the event of an accident, the costs of parking, information and the return of the traffic attendants are high, and even out-of-pockets and taxi drivers are involved in the information trade. Every piece of this “cake” is so big that people are bound to lose it and even to lose it。
A typical example of this is the discovery of the black screen of car repairs: the settlement of $2. 85 million, $12,000 taken by agents, and the remaining $165,000 split between three repair plants, which actually cost less than $10,000 for repairs。
In this case, the repair plant, in order to maintain its modest profits, has become a common industry phenomenon in spare parts and working hours, as well as in 4s stores。
It is worth noting that the detailed division of maintenance hours at this workshop has raised concerns, and this practice has already been implemented by group 4s。
According to industry sources, the internal software at bmw 4s will break down the accident vehicle maintenance project to take the initiative in negotiating with insurance companies。
Similar practices in common repair plants are not likely to work, owing to their vulnerability and lack of voice in negotiations with the division。
“if paul had expressly refused to close the case, it would have been very difficult to turn the case over unless the repair plant had been connected”. Industry said。
— complete text. Thank you for your patience
