Position Statement - www.iCan2000.com

After Market Body Parts

As used herein . . .

“A/M Parts” are defined as Replacement Body Parts not manufactured by the Original Manufacturer of the subject vehicle or a licensed authorized sub-contractor of the Original Manufacturer.

“OEM Parts” are defined as Replacement Body Parts manufactured by the Original Manufacturer of the subject vehicle or by a licensed authorized sub-contractor thereof.

  • The most appropriate body parts to be employed in the repair of a consumer’s vehicle are parts manufactured by, or on behalf of, the vehicle’s original manufacturer (OEM).

  • A/M Parts do NOT meet “OEM” standards for fit, finish, corrosion protection, construction or safety.

  • OEM Parts Manufacturers provide Material Safety Data Sheets as Required by OSHA and in a form and format specified by OSHA. A/M Parts Manufacturers Do NOT provide MSDS info.

  • There is growing evidence that Taiwan manufacturers are recycling Radioactive Scrap Metal. Absent legitimate MSDS information, there is No Assurance that A/M Parts are safe for the US Market. Though given little coverage in the US media, this problem has been exposed by the Taipei Times.

  • There is No mechanism for notification or the recall of dangerous or defective A/M Parts.

  • A/M Hoods have come open at hi-way speeds, blocking the view of the driver, causing body and glass damage to the host vehicle, putting at risk the safety of the occupants of the host vehicle as well as that of the occupants of the vehicle with which the host vehicle shared the road.

  • A/M Parts are Not warranted by the vehicle’s original manufacturer and may compromise the remaining warranty on the undamaged portion of the vehicle.

  • According to Consumer Surveys, a vehicle repaired with A/M Parts will sustain a post-repair reduction in resale value (Diminished Value) of approximately DOUBLE that which would be expected of vehicles repaired with OEM Parts.

  • The claims payment savings realized by insurance companies by mandating the use of A/M Parts have not translated to lower auto insurance premiums. Mandating the use of A/M Parts in 1st party physical damage claim situations - where the policy contract fails to specifically assign that authority to the insurer - has been determined to be an act of Criminal Fraud (Avery v State Farm).

  • When insurance companies pay only for A/M Parts, the insurance industry pockets all the savings, the consumer adsorbs the immediate excess loss in value and risk of potential injury and, the repair facility assumes the down-line liability. This is not equitable.

  • In Minnesota, where the mandated use of A/M Body Parts had been virtually banned, insureds have enjoyed a pattern of auto insurance premium rate reductions. State Farm, the state’s largest insurer, supplemented their rate reductions with a $13.2 Million premium surplus refund to Minnesota policyholders. Click Here to read more on this point.

  • Attempts to collect on A/M Parts Limited Warranties commonly involve a frustrating convoluted avenue of finger-pointing between the insurance carrier, repair facility, A/M Parts distributor and A/M Parts manufacturer.

For the reasons outlined above, the Insurance Consumer Advocate Network Does Not endorse, approve or condone the use of A/M Parts in the repair of Consumers’ Vehicles. We are opposed to the practice of insurance companies mandating the use of A/M Parts without the contractual authority to do so. It is our opinion that the policyholder should been made aware of the insurer’s right to mandate the use of A/M Parts PRIOR to the covered event that precipitated a physical damage claim.

After Market Body Parts - - Hazardous - - Compromises OEM Warranty - - Compounds Diminshed Value