Quoted from Hal's Post: "We are not trying to screw or cheat anyone. Insurers wish to pay a fair price. Trouble is, this can be hard to define. Most shops are quite competitive in their markets--a few are not."
Key words here folks is "a FEW are not". Being more competitive is only compromising the quality of the materials and safety of the drivers. The pricing we are getting has not even stood up to the cost of living increases in our country. How are we able to give raises to our employee's to keep up with the C.O.L. in our country? This also makes it hard for employers to keep the good technicians when they want to move to the next employer that will pay them what they need to live.

Second Quote from Hal: "It is not reasonable to expect either an insurer or the public to willingly fund an inefficient shop."
What is your opinion of a inefficient shop?
Why is it that so many insureds are willingly directing their insureds to a shop that has unsafe materials and poor installation practices? Or, to the shops that have a higher warranty re-do ratio. Wouldn't that be considered an "inefficient" company? I would sure like to see if there is a report showing the quantity of customer complaints or warranty issues that the networks have. It would be interesting to see. This should be another factor in determining just who the insureds/networks are referring repair business to as well.

Problem is GlassWoman, HAL would ask SGC for that warranty report and just who exactly do you think would have the HIGHEST warranty rate, and who do you think the SGC report would show to have the LOWEST warranty rate?

HAL still does not understand that SGC will do whatever it has to in order to make itself look like the best value to HAL. I hope HAL uses or will use INDEPENDANT reporting companies, although SGC could still only provide them with faulty data for their report I suppose.

It is absolutely quite clear Hal's idea of an inefficient shop is a shop that makes too MUCH money, in their view. While they (ins. co's)continue to build new offices adjacent to golf courses and amass unbelievable profits/fortunes, they can't stand to see a glass shop or body repair shop do well also. They want it all, and to leave us with what scraps they see fit.

It is funny how the insurance companies expect us all in an area to do a replacement for the same $$$, and yet have any of you looked for auto insurance for your car? Put in the same data on each online qoute site and you will get a different premium amount from each insurance company. Seems hypocritical to me for them to ask US to perform our services for the same price when THEY all charge a different amount for the same services.

I guess they just don't care.

HAL - Can you explain why your competitors charge more or less than you do for coverage on my car? It is the same car, the same driver, and the same insurance coverage after all.

You are regulated by the state's correct? And states allow you to request rate hikes or force decreases is that correct?

Sorry I post so much everyone. But this entire industry/situation is just wrong and we HAVE to find a way to TAKE BACK our businesses and industry.

As much as I value Bob, HAL, and others from the insurance companies dicsussing matters with us, it becomes more and more visable that they simply do not care. Much like politicians their primary concern these days is what is in it for them, with little regard for the welfare of the little guy, be that policyholder or the service provider.

'95 Civic, liability only coverage: Progressive $75.00/month, West Bend Mutual 32.00/month. Clean driving record. Progressive glass discount through SGC we all know how ridiculous that is. West Bend's discount (or lack thereof off NAGS) is very fair, and their TPA does not compete with us. Guess who insures this car?

My turn, but first let me say I wish I could ask so many questions of my customers. Some questions asked were occupation?, education?, and marital status?. Would be nice to charge my customers more based on how they answer these questions.

6 months full coverage. $100 ded comp/coll.
$585 Safeco
$586 Liberty Mutual
$600 AIG (actually $1200 as they only offer annual)
$649 Progressive

Yet the insurance industry wants all of us in a given area to install a DW01341GBYN for the EXACT SAME PRICE without knowing any information about the customer(which they required to even get a quote), the condition of the vehicle, or the parts needed to restore the vehicle to pre-loss condition.

The problem with SGCs warranty reports isn't necessarily false information, but instead the fact that many of their customers don't even know they've been done wrong! I've come behind many SGC jobs that in my opinion were terrible, but the owner of the car didn't realize there was a problem. It didn't leak or have air noise so the customer didn't notice. The customers don't look under the windshield or at the bead of urethane or under the molding for rust...they don't realize their cowl has been glued down because the fasteners were cut off or that one side of the windshield is slightly lower then the other because a gravity stop was sheered.

Just a thought...sorry if I got long winded.

It would be fun to do a poll of some sort with the Glass Technicians who have worked for various glass companies. See how they rate different companies. Or a poll on the differents brands of glass & materials.
Then publish it for ALL to see.

Yes AGN, and that is where all of us and AGRSS come in.

AGRSS needs to not only inform the public of the standard, but also inform them that it is still VOLUNTARY and because of that here are some things to look for to help insure your windshield WAS installed correctly. The safewindshields.com site is a great start and is very effective. Especially the "questions to ask" section, but we all know it is easy for glass shops to say "yes" to those questions. We need to educate consumers how to post-inspect the installation (as best they can) and then how to report or who to call when they think their installation was not done according to the standard. Maybe a toll free AGRSS hotline? Maybe someday that will be possible.

AGRSS will never have the money to fund a hotline, most shops either do not have the funds to pay AGRSS or just say they follow standards and refuse to pay.

I have seen many posts here say they will not pay for a formal AGRSS certification.

AGN said a mouthfull.

I have yet, in all the poor installations we have seen, had a customer that realized the problem, realized how dangerous the problem was, or realized it was from a poor previous job.

Unless it leaked..."THAT" they can quantify and associate cause, effect, and blame. But that's the extent of their understanding. Until we explain it.

I have had customers with WS literally flopping in the breeze, duct tape holding them down, and still don't realize the gravity of their situation driving this car around.

I will never forget (don't have to remember, I have the tape of the call) the conversation between myself and an insurer of a lady driving a 2000 Grand Prix with a HUD, (but no HUD WS), where the WS was sucked halfway loose from the car when she met a semi on a windy day. Scared the h-e-double toothpicks out of the poor lady when it happened. (Classic no-primer-on-the-glass-trick)

The insurer refused to pay for the loss because the WS wasn't broken, said it was a mechanical failure, not a sudden and castastrophic comprehensive loss.

I asked the insurer if it would have been sudden and casatrophic if the lady and her two kids had been killed. She replied "YES".

I queried further if the insurer was happy that didn't happen, and that they weren't paying policy limits to the husband for three deaths, and she replied again "YES".

I then explained that payment for death or injury was likely exactly what was going to happen, because this was the family's only car, and they were still driving it, and thanked her and hung up.

She was calling back in about two minutes with an OK to proceed. THe customer heard the tape, thanked me, and said I "have a customer for life, literally."

That's what this is all about kids, and that's exactly what the insurers want to avoid; the liability for their acts, while we save them costs by whatever means are necessary. THere simply aren't enough dead people yet to make the bean counters change their ways. It is sad indeed, that the rules of change in this country are always written in blood.

On the other hand, the move to safe, high quality repairs by rule and regulation, by word, act, and by deed, is encouraging.

It's similar to when enough traffic accidents happen in a certain stretch of road, or at a particular intersection; once enough people (quota) DIE, action is then taken. Until then, a certain amount of death is acceptable, as long as it's cost effective not to fix the problem. Balancing profits with an acceptance of a certain amount of fatalities is what insurance is all about (ask any actuary). I hope fatalities never occur to any insur. co. execs' families and/or friends due to an "efficient shop" not priming or fixing rust on a w/s replacement.

louise,

lets imagine first the definition of an inefficient shop? i would guess the first obvious reply from hal would be a shop with no computer, no network contracts, and not leaving the ins. co have access to your bank account.

none of which would be covered in my definition. i obviously need some help with this definition.

i would guess the inefficient glass shops have gone the way of the dinosaurs, i doubt there are any small shops that don't have people doing more than one job responsiblity.

claiming inefficiency is an old an excuse as i can imagine, that card has been played for a long time, and it didn't have legs to stand on in the beginning let alone now.

please help me with more definitions of inefficient shop?

is outsourcing your claim processing to a TPA is part of the definition of being efficient? only if you can do it without consumer knowledge, kind of crooked. i have a hard time believing that anyone takes pride in their work the same way as prior to this happening. Oh sorry, taking pride in your work is probably not efficient, neither is giving your customer your word and standing by it.

TPA's short changing rates, and charging insurance companies higher rates than we are charging, in addition to being paid per ticket to process claims; i would also guess is considered efficient. Kind of crooked in my opinion, but i am a dinosaur.

i am begining to get the impression that efficiency to hal is passing the buck, with the results of your decisions slipping off like you are covered in teflon?