I sent this email to Leo and was curios if anyone would be interested in joining a committee if the NGA or someone else decide to form one?

Dear Leo,
I enjoyed your article entitled "open invitation to insurance customers". I believe that a lot of the animosity and frustration comes from the entity that bridges the gap between our businesses. I feel that most of the information that we receive from the insurance industry comes on a one page fax sheet from the TPA’s (LYNX or SGC). The problem is they (TPA”S) are the one communicating for us and it is only natural that they look out for there own interests.



Because the retail installer has no direct line of communication with the insurance companies to rationally discuss our partnership we find ourselves venting on places like glassbytes. Possibly you and the NGA can help bridge this gap by setting up some type of communication forum, consul, committee or whatever you may suggest that will bring us closer. I realize that we would not be able to discuss things like pricing but I am certain we both could learn things from each other.



What ever you want to call it we need a group of people from our industry to sit with people from their industry and discuss the important issues that affect both our customers. Let the TPA’s manage the transactions and the NGA can help open the lines of communication between us.

While I find this idea interesting and born from great intentions, I have a question.

You note in your post that:

"The problem is they (TPA”S) are the one communicating for us and it is only natural that they look out for there own interests."

What makes you think the insurers have not, are not, and will not continue to, look out for THEIR best interests?

Old saying: Never take advice from people that owe you money.

Of course, the insurers don't "owe" us anything, so why are we having a discussion with them in the first place?

I know I'm repeating myself, but if the insurers aren't contracting repairs to consumer's cars with us, then why are we sitting down at a table with them to discuss anything?

Unless it's about how we want to be paid for doing all of their claims processing for them.....

Leo's article was on point in many respects.

Communication is a key ingredient. Lack of communication certainly leads to misunderstanding.

I believe Leo has some plans to get both groups together.

Outstanding Hal!

What shall the topics of discussion be?

We can start with Hal answering the fair and reasonable questions he never answered. I must say this is the first time I can recall you are at a loss for words, Hal.

Fair & reasonable is impossible to cover with one brush stroke at the present time. What is fair & reasonable for an auto glass facility that offers a customer waiting area, employee benefits, etc. is different than for an outfit that doesn't. I personaly don't think you should be considered for the same fair & reasonable rates if you don't meet those standards. Until everybody agrees to what standards their customer's(insurance co's included) and the employees of those companies deserve we will never have a true fair & reasonable answer.

Believe it or not.
There was a time when you requested to be on Insurance Co.’s vender list, you had to have a location, a waiting room for people and a customer bathroom. If not you were not a vendor for them.

GREAT POINT SGLASS,

I believe Safelite started the trend of closing stores and covering longer distances. And I believe D/T started the trend that it is better to give the glass away for free just so no one else gets the job. It's embarrassing to know that companies as large as these would agree to one price fits all schemes just to get contract and then have to close a store on Main Street USA to make a profit?

I certainly don't see PPG, Allstate, Enterprise Rent a car, GEICO, Progressive or CARMAX moving their locations to the low rent districts just to survive. But until we learn how to say "NO" pricing will continue to decline. Especially the big guys!