Ever since insurers began offering claimants the option of having their vehicles repaired at direct repair provider (DRP) shops, the auto collision repair industry has been divided on whether or not to participate in DRP programs. Shops were slow to sign on to DRPs initially, and even some insurance companies were uneasy about the new DRP claims model that Allstate pioneered. It was, after all, a radical departure from the old three-estimate rule that had been the preferred method of paying claims for decades. But we have come a long way since those days. Now, well into a new millennium, most major insurers offer DRPs in some form, and they seem to be gaining steam consistently in shops across the nation. Whether you consider yourself an opponent of DRP, or a proponent, my crystal ball says that they are here to stay.
Each year my colleagues and I watch as Body Shop Business (BSB) Magazine publishes its annual industry survey, and there is a clear trend that shows the number of shops participating in DRPs increasing. Overall, 47 percent of respondents to BSB's most recent survey (2004) claimed affiliation in one or more direct repair programs. High volume repair shops doing more than a million dollars per year in business led the way with 88 percent participation. On the other end of the chart, shops in the smallest volume category, doing sales up to $249,000 per year, showed the least participation - less than 15 percent.
The DRP Concept is Flawed
The major problem with DRP's is that participating shops are most-often bound by contract to two parties, each with ideals and goals that oppose the other. First, DRP shops contract with vehicle owners to produce repairs at whatever level of quality was agreed upon when the repair authorizations were signed. Consumers typically want repairs that restore cars to their pre-loss condition. In most cases they are entitled to receive this level of quality - whether in a first-party claim where their own insurance company is paying, or in a third-party claim where another person's insurance is paying. It is safe to conclude, generally speaking, of course, consumers are of the mindset that when an insurance company is picking up the tab, the consideration for high quality workmanship comes first, certainly long before any consideration of price or down time.
On the other hand, DRP shops are also bound by contract and/or agreement to insurers who, by and large, are tight-fisted to the point of stingy. After all, insurance companies are profit-driven companies, so in an effort to maximize profits, they want to pay out as little money as possible to settle claims.
To be considered by an insurer for a DRP deal, shops must usually promise to produce repairs of high quality that restores cars to their pre-loss condition, but, there's a catch. They must also agree to provide the insurer a discount from their posted labor rate. This is the primary concession asked of shops being considered for DRP partnership status. Certainly, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that taking money away from shop's bottom line limits their ability to do their best work for consumers.
In the body shop world, the price concession game plays out something like this: In an effort to secure a DRP deal with an insurer, an owner or manager may agree to cut four to six dollars or more per hour off of the shop's posted labor rate. Because technicians often get paid a percentage of labor, they too take a cut when working on cars steered to the shop by an insurance partner. Often technicians rush these cars through the repair process in order to move on to better paying jobs, and as you might guess, the quality level on hurried jobs usually plummets.
Another concession that limits the ability of DRPs to do superior work is their mandated and heavy use of salvage and aftermarket parts. We'll call these parts "alternatives" to new original equipment parts (OEM) produced by the manufacturer of an automobile. Insurers monitor the percentage of alternative parts DRP shops use. In most cases, alternative part usage must hold steady above an agreed upon percentage threshold in order to continue partnering with the insurer.
Insurers often prefer giving DRP deals to large shops as opposed to smaller shops because large, high-volume shops are usually better equipped, and technicians are better trained - at least in theory. Many times, large shops will also have an abundance of amenities available that convince insurers that their customers will be conveniently served - amenities that smaller shops cannot afford. Coffee and donuts, a courtesy shuttle service and rental cars, and a website that allows progress notes and photos to be uploaded several times per day - These are but a few of the conveniences insurers are looking for on behalf of their customers.
It's All About Saving Money
In addition to negotiating niceties that make the repair experience more palatable for claimants, insurers "negotiate" DRP contracts and agreements that ensure perks and profitability for insurance companies, too. It's not difficult for insurers to do that since they write the terms and conditions, and present them as a take it or leave it deal to prospective shops. So much for negotiating, huh? Seeking to rid themselves of labor-intensive clerical work at the shops expense is the most obvious example of insurer's self-serving attitudes. To facilitate this shift, many companies will only consider shops for DRP deals that agree to purchase a specific computer system and software that will communicate with the insurer's favored package. With this communication tool in place, it becomes the shop's responsibility to post schedules and routine clerical updates to the computer during the repair process, allowing the insurer to monitor a repair without having to physically input data or visit the shop.
Most major insurers also want shops that will accept direct payment from the insurer via computer to eliminate the necessity of printing and mailing drafts to individual claimants. Oh! And when it is necessary for a claims adjuster to actually visit a DRP shop, it is a given that a private office and an array of office equipment will be made available for their use.
Recently, the demands have escalated to levels never dreamed, and almost daily it seems insurers are raising the bar, expecting more and more of shops who wish to continue their participation in DRP programs. Some recent stipulations mandate that shops pick up bills for consumer's rental cars when repair processes get delayed for any reason. Additionally, shops on some programs must carry high limits of liability insurance, and agree to hold-harmless and pay all legal costs incurred on their insurance partner's behalf should a dispute arise.
If concern for the well-being of shops and the free enterprise system is not enough to convince a person to shun the DRP, consider some tactics that allow gain for the insurer at the consumer's expense. Take a deep breath because this is sure to upset you! For example, at least one particular company's DRP contract encourages its partnering shops to dupe consumers by overlooking minor damage that is not blatantly obvious to vehicle owners. Likewise, during times when damage IS noticeable to claimants, DRP shop personnel that want to befriend insurers work hard to convince their customers to forego some necessary and costly repair or replacement procedures in exchange for an appearance allowance. An appearance allowance is a small, token amount of money to be given directly to the claimant as opposed to a larger amount of money spent on a repair that he/she would otherwise be entitled to. Insurers love the savings and prefer to work with shops that have no problem pushing unscrupulous practices such as these.
DRP Networks Built on Fraud and Deception
It is my opinion that the entire DRP system is based on fraud and deceit, and could not survive without the illegal act of insurer's steering. Steering vehicles to particular shops restricts the ability of all of the other shops in a marketplace to honestly compete for a consumer's repair job. Couldn't these remaining shops also equip themselves to be attractive to insurers and thus be accepted into DRP networks too, you ask? No. The programs would not be advantageous for insurers if they allowed every eligible shop to participate. The effect would be like having no DRP program at all, and thus, no control of shops. For this reason, only a few businesses in each market will be allowed to join, and insurers consistently pit shops in the program against one another to muscle more freebies and concessions from them.
But worse than the restriction of trade for shops, the DRP concept survives and thrives by taking advantage of less knowledgeable consumers - most who have wrecks so infrequently that they are ill-informed of how shops and insurers ultimately manipulate them. Here's an example that takes place daily:
Whether a consumer asks a neighbor, relative, friend, or an insurer for a shop recommendation, he/she almost always desires the name of the repair business that does the
best work in town. Many consumers unknowingly believe that the shop being touted by the insurer - the DRP shop - is, in fact, the best qualified facility based on the most pertinent factor - quality of craftsmanship. But little do they know, overall, insurers choose shops to partner with based mainly on price and concessions, never giving consideration to the highest quality producer of automotive repairs in a marketplace. Therefore, insurers often respond to the request for a recommendation with the name of the
least expensive shop in town as opposed to the name of the best shop in town. Sadly, many consumers are none the wiser until their car falls apart prematurely because of shoddy repairs.
Insurers give lip-service to quality to appear concerned for the consumer's best interest. They even have their customer satisfaction index (CSI) that measures shop performance so they can brag how close to one-hundred percent a shop performs. You have probably seen one of the postage paid survey cards at one time or another that asks really tough questions such as these:
"Were you treated courteously by shop personnel?"
"Were the bathrooms clean?"
"Did the signage point you where you needed to go without confusion?"
I think you would agree with me that these questions are hardly a measure of actual repair performance. To measure shop performance insurers would have to ask questions to which the average consumer couldn't possibly know the answer.
"Is the repair safe?"
"Have the dimensional tolerances been restored to OEM specifications?"
"Have all safety systems been restored to their originally intended
performance levels and designs?"
Oh! But if these were characteristic of the questions asked on CSI surveys, consumers would have to hire auto repair specialists like my colleagues or myself to assess a vehicle's true post-repair condition. And the last thing DRP shops or their insurance partners want is a collision repair expert shining a bright light into those dark hidden corners, checking the quality of their repair work. A DRP shop once confided, "I don't have to do the best work in town, I only have to repair cars better than the other shops on the program I compete with."
Often consumers rate the quality of a collision repair job by the appearance of paint work alone. They seem oblivious to the fact that the restoration of the structural integrity and safety system are foundational in the vehicle's ability to fold predictably and dissipate energy around passengers in a subsequent crash. In many ways, it is similar to the manner in which many people rate the skill of a surgeon and his/her ability to save a life. They errantly do this by checking to see how straight the stitches are. If the stitches are straight, they assume the surgery was a success.
While average consumers may not possess the ability to rate the quality of repair work that is hidden beneath a beautiful paint finish, post-repair inspectors have tools and techniques that can expose the true condition of an auto - even on some parts you can't see. If you do not have the skills to make the determination whether or not a job is good or bad, hire a professional inspector that is competently trained in the intricacies of collision repair to make the determination for you. You should be able to collect from the responsible insurer the money you pay for this service, as well as any loss in value that can be proven.
The average consumer has thousands of dollars at stake, and their chances of collecting are often reduced every day that they wait to file a claim for additional damage. So, for best results, a consumer should retain an expert while repairs are still underway, so he/she can be ready to move immediately after word is received that work on the car has been completed.
Should You Follow the Trend and Allow Your Car to be Repaired in a DRP Shop?
There are advantages and disadvantages to doing business with DRP shops, much of which we have explored in the text above. But before saying anything else on the subject, let me make this clear. As a post-repair inspector, I have seen shoddy repairs produced in shops that span all volume categories. Some shops had DRP affiliations while others did not. Ironically, some of the best repairs I have witnessed came from the same shops that produced some of the worst repairs I've encountered. Therefore, it is my opinion that it is merely a crapshoot to determine beforehand the level of repair quality that a consumer will receive on any given day in any given shop. For that reason, it is our policy never to recommend repair shops to consumers who ask our advice.
The scorecard shows your likelihood of getting a proper repair is not very good regardless who chooses the shop. WreckCheck's national statistics show that for every ten cars repaired, seven have remaining damage and flaws that cause them to lose market value prematurely. Four are repaired in such an egregiously unsafe manner they should not be on the road. Additionally, four are missing parts and procedures the consumer paid for, which we often find are acts of blatant fraud against consumers. WreckCheck also noted this alarming statistic: shops referenced by insurers defraud consumers as often as do the shops outside insurer programs.
There is one advantage to using a DRP that we would be remiss in overlooking - and it is a big advantage. If you honor the wishes of an insurer and allow their DRP shop to perform repairs, then find through a post-repair inspection you got cheated or the repairs were performed poorly, you are in a much better position to negotiate with the insurer for a proper settlement than if you had chosen a shop not on their reference list and thus, outside their control. A proper settlement doesn't necessary mean you must go back to the same slothful shop for re-repairs that couldn't fix your car right the first time. In many cases, my colleagues and I have been involved in cases where insurers have bought poorly repaired cars from their owners for their full retail value, just to send them to junk yards and prevent the potential for life-threatening injuries in a future accident. Others received cash compensation or replacement autos. Visit our RESULTS page for some examples.
Consumers Want Freedom to Choose Repair Shops Themselves
Insurers have put a lot of effort into promoting their DRP programs and bragging about their stellar levels of customer satisfaction. But, unbiased statistics in a J.D. Power and Associates (JDPA) 2003 Collision Repair Satisfaction Index Study reflects insurers programs are failing to please consumers because they want to maintain too much control of claimant's choices. The study, published November 20, 2003, concluded that consumers expressed greatest dissatisfaction when using shops stipulated by insurance providers as opposed to choosing repair shops without insurer's intervention.
Personally, I don't think the dissatisfaction is due to the quality of craftsmanship in network shops being worse than the quality produced in non-network shops. We Americans just don't like being told what to do. Insurers would be wise to remember that most of us would rather make our own choices, even if we are occasionally wrong.
Responses to the JDPA 2003 Collision Repair Satisfaction Index Study came from 5,622 consumers, all of whom had collision repairs performed during the prior 12 months. The study found that independent garages faired best in satisfaction. And despite the fact that 30% of the respondents chose to have the work performed at new-vehicle dealerships, these consumers were least satisfied.
Regardless of whether you accept the recommendation of an insurer and allow its DRP to repair your car, or find a shop on your own, proceed cautiously. Many shops on both sides of the fence will try to impress you with gold-trimmed certificates of accomplishment. They will often point to an array of plaques hanging on the wall and brag about their affiliations in auto body trade associations, their areas of certification, and their commitment to ongoing training programs. Don't be deceived. While the deeds they boast of may have some measure of value, what you see on paper does not accurately convey a shop's ability to perform repairs at the level of quality you are entitled to receive. Knowledge and performance are two distinct things. However, the shop that can blend the two successfully and guarantee repairs to pre-loss condition, while being willing to accept penalties for failure is one you might want to consider.
Note: In the near future we will be making available a document that auto repair consumers can present to a prospective repair shop in an effort to hold them accountable for the promises they make regarding costs, quality, and downtime. More details will be released soon.
