The biggest news to emerge from the Collision Industry Conference in Atlanta April 15 is not about what happened, but what didn’t happen.
Industry activist and trainer Toby Chess was scheduled to give an update on aftermarket structural parts, but instead informed the gathering of collision repairers that he could not give his presentation because he had been threatened with a lawsuit if he followed through on the meeting agenda item. The usually talkative Chess was mum about the company that issued the threat, saying he had to meet with his lawyer before making a public statement.
Society of Collision Repair Executive Director Aaron Schulenburg, who received the call threatening the lawsuit against Chess if he proceeded with his presentation, also would not comment on the company.
However the next day, Jeff Hendler, CIC administrator and past chairman, said the threat of a lawsuit was from LKQ Corp., the largest nationwide provider of aftermarket collision replacement products, recycled OEM products and refurbished OEM collision replacement products.
“We’ve never had to cancel an agenda item for this reason in the history of SCRS or CIC, going back to 1983, and nobody is happy about it,” Hendler says. “I find it very odd that any company would try to stifle information in the manner they did.”
A spokesperson for LKQ provided the following written statement:
“LKQ believes the collision industry needs accurate and relevant information. In an effort to determine the veracity of Mr. Chess’ “sawzall” test at NACE in November 2009, we attempted to replicate his test of the OE rebar. Our results were significantly different! The saw cut through the OE rebar with relative ease.
“Questioning the relevance of a sawzall test, we chose to conduct crash tests of the aftermarket part. The results of the tests, which more accurately replicate actual accident conditions, showed the aftermarket rebar met FMVSS208, the federal standard for occupant safety.
“That both the OE and aftermarket rebars performed well in the crash test was not surprising. But, by performing the sawzall test ourselves, it is very clear to us that there is a lot of misinformation being spread. LKQ believes that it is important for the consumer and the industry to receive relevant and accurate information, so we have communicated that message to the parties involved.”
Hendler responded to the statement by saying, “I don’t care how they tested them, the two parts that were made to replace the same crash parts did not perform the same, so they are not like kind and quality.”
This is the latest chapter in a series of events (see article links at end of this story) that Chess kicked off during the November CIC meeting in which he demonstrated how several aftermarket parts did not measure up to the quality of original equipment parts.
In that meeting and in a subsequent CIC meeting in January in Palm Springs, Calif., Chess demonstrated how certain aftermarket parts were made of lower quality steels and other materials that could compromise their effectiveness in a crash. He cut through an aftermarket bumper reinforcement beam for a Toyota Corolla using an extrication saw. The saw was unable to do any damage to the OEM part.
His demonstrations have resulted in significant publicity, not only in the collision industry press, but also in the mainstream media and even in the legislative arena where state legislators are getting an education on structural aftermarket parts. In addition, insurance companies and parts providers have taken notice.
After the Palm Springs event, LKQ pulled the Toyota bumper reinforcement from its inventory, and said it would perform testing on additional parts. LKQ subsidiary Keystone Automotive announced it would only sell aftermarket bumper reinforcement bars that qualified under its quality assurance programs, or that were approved through third-party testing.
Later in January, the Auto Body Parts Association (ABPA) notified its membership that they should review the material and testing their suppliers used in parts manufacturing, and ensure that the parts met OEM standards. The Taiwan Auto Body Parts Association advised members to stop selling and manufacturing non-certified structural parts.
In February, the Collision Repair Association of California issued a letter to Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner asking that insurers be required to review claims where aftermarket bumper supports were used.
At the end of January, GEICO sent a notice to its adjusters that it would no longer specify aftermarket bumper reinforcements, brackets and energy absorbers. The company also modified its claims management software so that estimates would be automatically flagged if adjusters selected any of these parts.
Shortly after the GEICO announcement, Esurance Insurance Services informed its network shops that it would only specify OEM bumper absorbers and bumper brackets in its estimates. According to the company, its previous OEM-only policy applied to bumper reinforcements and core supports.
Schulenburg cautioned that despite the buzz around aftermarket parts certification, the industry is rife with internal, proprietary standards that can vary from company to company, and there has been no industry standard testing or certification mechanism specifically for structural parts. Manufacturer Diamond Standard, however, announced a third-party certification program, and the Certified Auto Parts Association (CAPA) said it had developed new standards for rigid steel bumpers and bumper reinforcement parts after two years of testing.
Further complicating this issue is that while automotive manufacturers have procedures in place to facilitate recalls in the event that a part is found to be defective, no such mechanism exists in much of the aftermarket. However, LKQ said its Key Trac program has the ability to support a recall of parts. The company said it believes it is the only aftermarket company with this capability.
Most aftermarket parts are manufactured overseas by a variety of companies, and change hands multiple times before arriving in U.S. distributors' warehouses. It would be difficult for many of them to trace the origin of these parts and to determine which vehicles those parts were installed on.
