ABAC has also identified concerns with NH House Bill 432, which “gratuitously draws a distinction between ‘mechanical’ and ‘auto body’ repair work and the reimbursement for the same. This distinction is misleading and would only serve to further distort the cost of auto body repairs. Why would NH seek to legislate that mechanical repairs be worthy of being paid that amount which is ‘normally and reasonably charged … to retail consumers who are not using insurance coverage,’ but that same standard would not apply to auto body repair? That’s like saying, ‘We support efforts by insurers to illegally conspire to suppress fair market rates for auto body repair, but not for mechanical repairs.’”
Additionally, ABAC objects to the final section of the bill, which references paint and material reimbursements, for the same reasons.
The group explains, “We support efforts by repairers to be paid on a [fairer] basis, but legislating a direct reimbursement from an insurer to a repairer contradicts the dynamics of the relationship and puts insurers in a greater position to influence how vehicles are repaired---something that is harmful to consumer safety and to quality repairs.”
For more information on the ABAC, visit abaconn.com.