The Hartford Insurance Co. said it was disappointed in a Connecticut jury’s verdict that it broke the law and will appeal the verdict and the $15 million fine assessed against the company.
"We are disappointed with the verdict as it relates to labor rates for auto body repair, and we will ask the court to overturn that decision,” Hartford said in a prepared statement. “We are pleased, however, that the jury appears to have recognized the benefits that The Hartford's direct repair program provides to our customers and affirmed that the operation of that program complies with Connecticut law. It is important to us that our customers have a choice and access to a program that provides great service."
A Stamford Superior Court jury on Nov. 17 awarded $15 million to a group of auto body repair firms after saying Hartford engaged in unfair business practices.
The class action lawsuit filed by The Auto Body Association of Connecticut (ABAC) and three of its members alleged that the insurance company engaged in a pattern of unfair practices that violated Connecticut law.
The jury agreed that The Hartford artificially suppressed body shop labor rates by eliminating the use of independent appraisers and relying exclusively on its own automobile service representatives to perform appraisals so the company could control their content, including labor rates. The result: consumers do not get fair, independent appraisals of the damage to their automobiles.
“We are gratified that the jury agreed that The Hartford systematically violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act,” says Bob Skrip, president of ABAC and owner of Skrip’s Auto Body in Prospect. “This is just one more step in a long road against The Hartford and other insurance companies that seemingly disregard both regulations and consumers’ best interests. It is a positive development for consumers and body shops statewide, but it remains a long process. We are more confident than ever that we will ultimately prevail.”
The accusations against The Hartford were supported in the lawsuit by extensive documentation including internal memoranda detailing company policies, as well as several depositions by company employees, Skrip said.
