The "Corrective Repair Epidemic" Plaguing the Collision Repair Industry

Over the past few years, we have seen a number of poorly repaired vehicles at different repair facilities. Many of the repairs to these vehicles had to be completely redone; in some cases, the repairs needed to correct the problems made the vehicle a total loss. These vehicles are coming from both DRP and non-DRP repair facilities. We have found that about 90 percent of these incorrect repairs stem from a lack of adherence to the manufacturer's repair procedures, not utilizing OEM parts and materials and, most obviously, not having pride in workmanship.

Attitude also has a lot to do with it. Many times, we have been told, "My techs know what they are doing," "We/they/I have been doing this for X amount of years and have never had a problem," "I know what I am doing; I know better than the OEM," and so on. This attitude, coupled with insurance industry interference and the collision repair industry's lack of knowledge of the law, has led to an epidemic. Now, you might think this article will talk about putting a stop to this, and it will, but first we need to talk about handling these types of vehicles if you come across one in your shop.

You have probably had a vehicle in your shop with a light hit to the front that required a peel-off nose. After removing the front bumper cover and fenders, you discover some previous repairs. How do you know there are previous repairs? You see corrosion, hammer impact marks, poor welds and misalignment. How many have been in this situation? How about a vehicle that comes to your shop with a leak? While performing a water leak test, you discover excessive corrosion and evidence of previous repairs. How do you correctly handle these types of situations? If you elect to repair the part of the vehicle that is only associated with the current claim or attempt to repair – and not replace – the existing damage, you can be held liable for all of the damage, even though only some of the repairs were performed in your facility. You are the last professional to touch the vehicle.

So let's say this happens to you. What do you do? What are the steps to follow? The first thing to do is contact the consumer and find out where the repairs were last performed, and under what circumstances. Prior to disassembling the vehicle, ensure all parties are informed of the issue(s). Then:

• Contact an independent expert in post-repair inspections (PRI) or quality of repair assessment (QRA), as you may need one.
• Choose the option to receive restitution for the re-repairs (see options below).
• Take photos of the vehicle and damage.
• Disassemble the vehicle to view all damage, and take more photos.
• Document all of the incorrect and/or improper repairs.
• Write a complete damage report to repair the damage.

Once this has been completed, you now have a few options:

1. If the vehicle was repaired at a DRP shop, either in a first- or third-party claim, then the insurance company must pay for the re-repairs based on their guarantee/warranty for the program.
2. It may be more difficult to collect if the shop is a non-DRP, but many insurance companies will elect to pay for the re-repairs under the comprehensive portion of the policy if it is part of the policy and in effect at the time.
3. Contact your state's collision repair governing body. For example, the Department of Motor Vehicles in New York has safety inspectors who help investigate and resolve these types of issues.
4. Help the vehicle owner retain a lawyer to sue the shop that performed the repairs.
5. Do not repair the vehicle and let the vehicle owner find another shop.

Case Studies

Case 1: 2011 Porsche 911 Carrera. The vehicle was impacted on the right side and forced into a "Jersey barrier." A DRP repair facility performed the repairs. The front and rear bumpers, hood, left and right fender panels, right front door, right rear quarter panel, all airbag modules and three rims and tires were replaced. Additionally, the structure was damaged. The vehicle wrote for approximately $56,000 and took about seven months to repair. After the repairs were complete, the owner drove the vehicle to his Porsche dealer for inspection. Upon inspection, the dealer suggested their certified repair facility examine the vehicle. The certified repair facility discovered that the vehicle was anchored by its pinch welds for structural repairs and the rims were reconditioned – a NO NO for Porsche vehicles. Overspray was found all over the vehicle. Incomplete welds and a lack of corrosion protection were observed. Both front strut tower mounting holes were elongated to allow more adjustment to caster and camber. Multiple deformities were observed to the upper uni-rails, and measurements of the vehicle showed severe dimensional variances.

When the insurance company representative arrived, read our report and examined the vehicle, he elected to total the vehicle. Since the vehicle was brand new (with an odometer reading only 950 miles) at the time of the collision event, they paid the full price of the vehicle (about $96,000) and the investigative shop's charges (about $15,000). We later found out from the original repair facility that they were charged not only the $96,000 and the $15,000, but also the original $56,000 for the repairs for a grand total of about $167,000. They were then removed from the DRP program and given five days to send restitution.

Case 2: 2010 Pontiac G6 Convertible, at a non-DRP repair facility. The vehicle impacted a pothole on the right side of the vehicle and the right front rail collapsed and shifted the roof assembly. The repair facility contacted us after they obtained the prior estimate and insurance company photos. Additionally, the repair facility asked us to help retain a lawyer for the vehicle owner. The original repair facility was sued, as was the manager and technicians. The original estimate wrote for $18,000, and the case settled when the original repair facility agreed to purchase another vehicle for the Pontiac owner and pay for all invoices from the investigation. Time to receive restitution: Five months.

Case 3: 2009 BMW 328xi Sedan. The vehicle owner complained about a leak in the trunk. The BMW dealer sent the vehicle to one of their approved repair facilities to solve the issue. During the disassembly of the rear of the vehicle for water testing, the technician discovered severe corrosion, water in the battery tray and incomplete welds with a lack of corrosion protection. The repair facility obtained the original repair estimate from the DRP facility and then contacted us. The vehicle had the rear bumper assembly, rear body panel and right rear quarter panel replaced five months earlier. Our examination uncovered severe corrosion of the battery cables; they were so corroded that the vehicle could have caught on fire at any time. The rear body panel and quarter panel were weld-on with MAG plug welds and STRSW. This is incorrect, as BMW requires their outer panels to be rivet-bonded. Additionally, we did destructive testing of the welds and found little to no metal tear out; all the welds failed visual and destructive testing. The original estimate was written for $6,000 and the re-repair was $15,000. To our knowledge, the original repair facility is still on that DRP program.

Case 4: 2011 Mercedes-Benz E350 Sedan. A DRP repair facility performed the repairs. This vehicle was impacted hard in the rear. The DRP supervisor and shop agreed to install a "rolling clip" onto the vehicle. The vehicle owner picked up their vehicle and proceeded to put about 1,000 miles on it when the oil service reminder came on. The owner brought the sedan to a Mercedes-Benz dealer to perform the service. When the Benz technician lifted the vehicle in the air, it separated in two. All the welds fractured. I don't think we have to explain what we observed on this one. The original repair facility told the dealer to have the vehicle owner pick a new 2012 and send them the bill.

These are just some examples of the types of investigations we have performed, and the number keeps growing. Four years ago, we performed five QRA exams; three years ago, we did 15. Last year, we did 60; this year alone, we have viewed 25 so far. And we don't even advertise for this service. If you are interested in setting up your own PRI/QRA inspection center/program and want training on how to perform it, Technical Investigative Training Resources (www.Tech-ITR.com) offers courses on this subject, and the International Association of Collision Damage Analysts (www.IACDA.org) offers a certification in this field.

We hope this article has helped the industry to understand the importance of following OEM repair procedures and parts/materials requirements as well as how crucial it is to take pride in your work to ensure correct, proper and safe repairs. We also hope you realized another service you can provide to the industry and consumers in performing post-repair inspections. Feel free to contact us if you have any questions.

Larry Montanez, CDA is co-owner of P&L Consultants with Peter Pratti Jr. P&L Consultants works with collision repair shops on estimating, production and proper repair procedures. P&L conducts repair workshops on MIG & Resistance Welding, Measuring for Estimating and Advanced Estimating Skills. P&L also conducts investigations for insurers and repair shops for improper repairs, collision reparability and estimating issues. P&L can be reached by contacting Larry at (718) 891–4018 (office), (917) 860–3588 (cell), (718) 646–2733 (fax), info@PnLEstimolgy.com (email) or online at www.PnLEstimology.com.

Jeff Lange, PE is president of Lange Technical Services, Ltd. of Deer Park, NY (www.LangeTech.net). Jeff is a licensed New York State professional engineer who specializes in investigating vehicle and component failures. Lange Technical Services, Ltd. is an investigative engineering firm performing forensic vehicle examinations and analysis for accident reconstruction, products liability and insurance issues. Jeff can be reached at (631) 667-6128 or by e-mail at Jeff.Lange@LangeTech.net.