Legislative News | Collision

Search Autoparts/Abrn/Legislative-news-collision/

Aftermarket parts bill withdrawn in Maryland

Monday, March 28, 2016 - 07:00
Print Article

The sponsor of a bill targeted at limiting insurer’s ability to require uncertified aftermarket parts has withdrawn the bill from the Maryland House of Delegates.

House Bill 1258 would have prevented insurers from requiring the use of aftermarket collision parts during the first two years of a vehicle’s life unless the owner gave written consent. After two years, repairers would have been required to use only certified aftermarket parts unless they had written consent from the owner.

The bill called for the aftermarket parts certification entity to be a non-profit, nationally accredited developer of standards, which developed standards “in a consensus-based public forum that allows for public comment.”

On March 18, the Property and Casualty Subcommittee voted down the bill after a contentious hearing. Its sponsor, former body shop owner Richard Impallaria (R.-Baltimore), withdrew the bill from further consideration.

During the hearing, Impallaria sparred with LKQ government affairs representative Ray Colas after a display in which bill proponents demonstrated that an aftermarket bumper reinforcement bar from LKQ differed significantly from its OEM counterpart.

The Washington Metropolitan Auto Body Association and CAPA worked together on the bill language. The Maryland Automobile Dealers Association also supported the bill.

The insurance industry opposed the bill, as did LKQ, NSF and the Auto Body Parts Association.

According to the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI), the bill would have increased costs for Maryland consumers.

“After an auto accident, consumers need all the help they can get to save money on necessary car repairs,” said Oyango Snell, state government relations counsel for PCI. “Aftermarket parts are generic affordable quality repair parts. Limiting consumers’ choice of auto repair parts takes money out of their pocketbooks.”

NSF objected to the requirement for a unique serial number on each part.

See the bill text here.

Article Categorization
Article Details
< Previous
Next >
blog comments powered by Disqus