From: ledman_70@xxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Ill. Supreme Court Overturns $1 Billion Aftermarket Parts
Decision i
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:46:21 +0000
[AD removed for archives]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you a lottery player?Play smarter! Improve your
odds and detect winning patterns. Access the best
kept lottery secret on the Net. Easy to use!
caadOubbWhUNma/Lottery Vault
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I see a down side of this, too. I have used after market parts before
and the fit was terrible. That's not to say all after market part
manufactures produce inferior parts, but if it's up to the insurance
carrier to decide, you may end up with a shoddy-looking repair on your
late model car.
Jeff
bschleic57@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
>
> This is huge for the old car hobby, as you know the aftermarket sheet
> metal guys like Goodmark rely on crash part sales to form the base of
> their operations. Success here allows them to continue to develop more
> replacement parts for our old cars. Can a full 63-5 Plymouth or dodge
> two door quarter panel be far behind?
>
> WHS
>
> CHICAGO (BestWire) - Robert Hurns said he used to joke his grandkids
> would be the ones who found out the conclusion of an Illinois
> class-action lawsuit against State Farm over the use of aftermarket
> parts.
> In the original 1999 decision, a jury in the class-action lawsuit Avery
> vs. State Farm awarded the plaintiffs $1.2 billion in damages. An
> appellate court lowered the award to $1 billion but let the decision
> stand. In 2002, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed to hear the case
> (BestWire, Oct. 4, 2002).
> "It was worth the three-year wait," Hurns, a spokesman and aftermarket
> parts expert for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America,
> said. That's because the Illinois Supreme Court not only overturned the
> $1 billion award against State Farm and found the use of aftermarket
> parts did not breach the company's contract with policyholders, nor
> violate the state's Consumer Fraud Act, but also found the class action
> was improperly certified.
> "Categorically, this is a huge win for the insurance industry and for
> consumers, for competition and for class action reform," Hurns said.
> "The message here is there are rules for class certification, and those
> rules were bent and ignored in order to reach a conclusion favorable to
> the plaintiff. The Illinois Supreme Court here is clearly saying this is
> wrong. The huge message here is to courts who would twist the rules to
> bring class actions. I think courts are going to be a lot more careful
> now."
> American Insurance Association vice president David Snyder said the case
> was a "classic example of class-action abuse."
> The court decision found the lower court improperly certified the class
> status of the case and that there was no commonality amongst the State
> Farm policies on which to base a class-action suit. The decision called
> the lower court's certification of the class status "an abuse of
> discretion."
> Sherman Joyce, president of the American Tort Reform Association,
> praised the decision for its "common sense approach" and "respect for
> the rule of law."
> State Farm spokesman Dick Luedke said the company was "very pleased."
> "This really touches everyone," Snyder said "A legal cloud over the
> ability to have a competitive market has been lifted. A major obstacle
> to use of aftermarket parts has been removed."
> State Farm voluntarily suspended use of aftermarket parts three days
> after the 1999 verdict (BestWire, Oct. 4, 2002). Other insurers have
> been watching the case with trepidation.
> "The initial verdict had a chilling effect," Hurns said. "Now companies
> are free to evaluate whether or not they want to use the parts."
> Luedke said the decision allows State Farm "to review market
> developments" as far as use of aftermarket parts goes.
> Aftermarket crash parts are generic sheet-metal components of vehicles,
> such as fenders, hoods and door panels. These generic parts can be used
> in auto repairs instead of parts from the vehicle's original
> manufacturer, or OEM parts. According to the Insurance Information
> Institute, OEM parts used to sell at "much higher prices than they can
> today" before the advent of generic parts. But once aftermarket parts
> hit the market in the 1970s, the price of OEM parts dropped an average
> of 30%, the Institute said.
> "The presence of competition holds down the price of OEM parts," Snyder
> said. In addition, the price difference between an aftermarket part and
> an OEM part can be as much as 40%, he said.
> Hurns said an OEM car hood could fetch as much as $400, while an
> aftermarket hood of similar quality would cost $100.
> "If this case went the other way, it would have affected premiums,"
> Hurns said. "We would have gone back to the stone age with the OEM
> parts."
> Snyder said the cost of some sheet metal parts rose by nearly 300%
> following the 1999 decision.
> While the plaintiffs in the case argued aftermarket parts are
> "categorically inferior" to OEM parts, the Insurance Institute for
> Highway Safety's crash tests found no safety problems with aftermarket
> parts. Sometimes they actually scored better than OEM parts, Hurns said.
>
> But the court decision said even if the aftermarket parts were not as
> good as OEM ones, an insurer specifying their use is not fraudulent,
> overturning the lower court ruling. The court used the example of
> selling "Chevrolet automobiles while knowing that they are not as good
> as Cadillacs." No one would call that fraudulent, the court reasoned.
> In 2004, the top five writers of private passenger auto insurance in the
> United States, according to A.M. Best Co. state/line data based on
> direct premiums written, were: State Farm Group, with 18.24% market
> share; Allstate Insurance Group, with 10.37%; Progressive Insurance
> Group, with 7.25%; Berkshire Hathaway Insurance Group, with 5.58%; and
> Farmers Insurance Group, with 4.97%.
> (By Rick Cornejo, associate editor, BestWeek: rick.cornejo@xxxxxxxxxx)
> Copyright 2005 A. M. Best. Source : Financial Times Information Limited.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Jeff Adams
64 Polara
[AD removed for archives]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Get up to $1500.00 Fast and Easy!
No Credit Checks! No Paper Hassles! Nothing To Fax!
Apply Online and We'll Contact You Within the Hour!
caadOuobWhUNmf/911PaydayAdvance
-------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person --
directly to that person. I.e., send parts/car transactions and
negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended
recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect
your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content
signal to Mopar topic. Thanks!
'62 to '65 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html.
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network