Louisville, Ky., television station, WAVE 3, recently aired a hidden camera investigation about insurance fraud. The station allegedly caught a sales representative employed with DNS Auto Glass attempting to file a claim with an insurance company for a windshield replacement when the windshield only suffered a small, repairable crack.

During the investigation an undercover vehicle with a windshield chip about the size of a pencil head was used. On the video the technician tells the undercover reporter that he can get a free windshield because Kentucky residents are not charged a deductible when comprehensive coverage is possessed


I didn't see the tape..I don't know anybody from DNS or compete with them.

Isn't it the customers choice whether they want to repair a chip or replace THEIR windshield?

The way I see it is:

If the technician inspected the vehicle and informed the customer that the glass wasn't repairable and it was?

Then he committed fraud.

If the technician inspected the vehicle and informed the customer that the chip was repairable..and then explained to the customer that it was their choice whether they wanted to replace or repair it and that "neither one would cost them anything out of pocket"?

This is not fraud.

your post says "a windshield chip about the size of a pencil head was used"

It also says "sales representative employed with DNS Auto Glass attempting to file a claim with an insurance company for a windshield replacement"

Sounds like fraud to me.

They joke that 95% of the lawyers make it look bad for the rest of them. In this case, 1% of glass guys make it look bad for the rest of us.

DNS...don't you mean Coast to Coast? Same company, guys.

Oh, and you are supposed to give this outfit a "pass" because they are only a shady company b/c Slite says so due to C2C being a threat to their TPA model.

Right Sglass?

I wonder how many safelite techs go out to do a repair, but happen to have the w/s for that vehicle with them??

I also wonder how many repairs that s-lite cannot do that most real qualified repair techs CAN repair.

Does s-lite replace ANY that could of or should of been repaired?

I believe the answers to those questions will reveal the real fraudsters.

I can say I turn MANY more replacements into repairs, than I do repairs into replacements.

Verily.... I hath seeneth the video. They hath replaceth many windshields due to a small surface pitteth. When confronted the "salesman" spewed forth fire and brimstone foul language and droveth away. Moses laugheth at him...

Plainly insurance fraudeth...

Dear Original Ta Ta,

Your entire post is speculation, with exception of the part about how you approach your business. Good for you.

However, the in disputable part is DNS being caught on tape. Way to dodge the real issue though. :)

Thank you Dots for valueing my input so highly.
Some day mabe if you read enough of what
I post, you'll understand it.
Actually I don't have an opion on this. I don't know enough of the true facts to formulate one.

Their business model stinks on ice. All the sub-contacted segments of their operation are prone to abuse. My research reveals a web of seemingly legitimate entities forcing themselves on the public with almost no vested interest in the communities in which they operate.
I saw the video, the pinhead size ding was clearly dead center drivers view. Grey Area, inconclusive. They could have put that ding anywhere else to make the argument more credible. What was truly Damming was all the used windshields an ex employeee had saved, and proceeded to bang the against a fence to show how stable they were.
Unfortunately, When we harvest, reap what we sow , we'll be subject the scrutiny of a truly F -Rated shop(s).

Dear Dots.....It is NOT speculation, I assure you. And actually if you read what I wrote, I was asking questions. Because I know more than a few s-techs, and have heard from them many times how they put a little extra pressure on the chip so it would grow and become a replacement. You see the bigger incentive is for them to replace, That my friend is part of your sgc problem.

As for DNS it sounds like the majority jury has already spoken, and yes if in fact they were trying to get the customer to replace and it was not damaged than that would be fraud. Also if the customer goes for replacing when nothing was wrong then they too are in the fraudulent zone.

But I have had many jobs sent over from that favorite network for a replacement, only to find a very repairable chip, and the bottom line is.... IT IS UP TO THE CUSTOMER TO MAKE THE FINAL CALL. I can advise from my years of experience but the customer is King.

Anyway I did not dodge the issue at all, but if fact lets get a secret little camera out and start seeing the fraud the big red machine is committing. Now that would be the whole story.......no speculation, just the facts.....I see it on a small scale in my back yard, and I bet bottom dollar on a national level S-lite is replacing millions in repairable w/s's, if they had the right techs and system of repair. And that my friend can be proven.

Dot's, back to your cubicle, before your superior see's you not working.

it astounds me that folks like Original dot can spew outright incorrect information and believe in it so thoroughly.

You are simply wrong on every major point you espouse my friend.

but hey, type it enough times and it is automatically true.... at least that is how it works on this site.

I'm waiting for "The artist formerly known as IGA, Mike from NY" to ride in defending DNS... They are frauds...end of story.

And you have the absolute truth and know all the facts in this case because?
Who are you & what are your credentials to hold the undeniable truth up for all to see?

Wait....I think I've got it now.

DNS - innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The video taped occurence doesn't count I guess

SGC - guilty until proven innocent, for poor installs, legislative cases, and on and on. And even then, still guilty.

Do I have it right?

That may be on the SL techs to increase their pay, but I wouldnt expect corporate to promote the practice of spidering out chips. SGC contracts with insurance companies on a cost per claim basis. They recieve the same amount for a chip or replacement, and obviously it costs less to repair. Why do you think their advertising is so repair focused?

cullen vs statefarm

Mike is totally correct. Corp would NOT promote it but the techs do what they have to do to make a few bucks.

And yes the ads are 2 fold. promote repair, and to stack the deck against the fight of steering that doesn't happen. At least they can say "hey we get all these jobs because of our great ad campaign." It's worth it for them to spend multi millions to cover the tracks.

But their system of repair does not work very well on cracks any longer than about 1/2" an inch. they can't even get close to what a quality repair tech can do. Seen it first hand many times. See if they can repair a chip with a 1-2 inch crack spreading out, it will get replaced every time. That's why they always bring the shield with them on inspect or repair, remember the slogan if they repair they will replace.

Could it be that all the repairs done by "affiliates" are submitted as Safelite work and then the "affiliates" are paid $50-$75 while Safelite keeps the difference???????? Just wondering...

...,

The reality is that people do commit fraud. When caught they should be severely punished. What I want to know and I have been asking for years, are Safelite Techs exempt from committing fraud?

Of course, because there is no glass fraud. The way you hear people on this forum talk, everyone is out to just help their fellow man. Except Safelite, who eats babies and is out to take over the world.

Safelite uses the media just like we use cold knives. The media is a bunch of useful non-thinking dolts to lazy to understand the issue. It's about capturing the market, and driving the quarry to the safelite script.

Was DNS really caught doing anything? There are so many holes in this story it makes swiss cheese look solid.

The reporting on the story by all media organizations makes ultra conservitive news look like a newly minted Saint.

Here are the questions we should be asking:

1) Why is the "nark", "whistle blower" etc. hiding his identity? Was he involved in the Kennedy assasination or a more sinister government cover up?

2) Why did said "nark", "whistle blower" etc. keep all of that glass ahead of his alleged pay dispute? Seems like a very large horse before the cart move if you ask me.

3) How is it that an "inspections services company" can operate unlicensed in Kentucky? What is their motive to be part of the story and how can they "explain to policyholders the benefits of repairing a chip or small crack versus replacing the entire windshield. We then educate them on proper repair or replacement techniques depending on their claims."????

Look, we all know ROLAGS states that a pit that is 1/8 inch is qualified for a repair (or replacement).

Not defending any sides here but we really should insist on getting factual information and establishing the real underlying motive behind this "investigative report".

Gary Hart,
IGA Executive Director

Well this is interesting, The "national director" takes a case where any rational person would see a stinking mess and diverts attention to the "nark" (it is "narc" by they way, but since I haven't used the term ever in business communication, I would have to check that out). Adds some obscure ROLAGS reference and diverts attention away from what anyone with one iota of common sense would see as an overt fraud attempt. You forgot to to use "Fair" or rationalize the guys hurt feelings as he told the reporter to get the **** out of his face....

Nice entry into the spotlight. Gives me hope for the organization. I didn't think it was possible to lean further left than IGA (not) Mike, but there you have it. Even he threw the guy under the bus.

Could it have some connection with Gary, DNS and AZ?

Third verse, same as the first. Clock is ticking, 6 months left.

So one diversionary post deserves another, is that it?

No diversion on that post. I think when a "leader" of a national organization hangs his name and title on a post, it becomes fair game to question said position. If it was just his opinion, a simple GH would have sufficed.

If the post was legit, I would be interested in knowing if the Director feels it is appropriate to use his title to leverage credibility of his opinion; or if that is the "official" IGA standpoint on this story.

It seems that the dues paying members should know what their leadership is espousing in their name. I for one wouldn't attach my name to that position.

I've watched the leadership of this organization use the credibility of their membership to pursue a limited, narrow, often personal agenda for more than a decade, and by such, destroying any opportunity to gain momentum or make real progress. It just gets old seeing the whole "lather, rinse, repeat" cycle.

I guess as long as there are checks to cash, software to sell, and emotions to leverage, this will continue...so be it.

Everyone that is remotely ethical watched that video and felt a little dirty for our industry. It is unethical at best, close to criminal at worst and any attempt to minimize it by attacking the source or attempting to justify it via a stretch interpretation of standard, just adds to the issue and further degrades the professionalism and ethics of industry...which costs us money. But when did common sense enter into this?

i just checked the membership and neither of us are bothered. are there more than two of us, i figured the royal influence had run the rest off.

So you really believe this was a fairly reported story? Windshield Bullies/Harvesters, etc. impact our industry as far as the IGA membership is concerned. Getting to the bottom of all industry marketing, installation, etc. practices is important to the membership.

This industry wants change, yet all most of you do is bash and never get involved. My door is open for you to visit, call or even email. If any of you really want to change the industry, put your energy into providing real information and solutions.

On the subject of IGA members, here are some points that are being discussed by actual IGA members for your consideration on other forums regarding this story:

"We've got a windshield here that did, or did not, have a crack at the point of the pit? Seems to be a bit vague, just like the focus was in the video when they zoomed in. If no crack, little question, it was not a needed replacement. If it was a crack/pit in the driver's direct vision, that could interfere with his vision after repair, then ROLAGS dictates the automatic and required choice, not the consumer, correct? "

"We've got a person who says he's an ex-employee/installer for DNS, with a backyard full of glass parts that we are told came from consumer's cars, that have no damage. Why is there a tempered back glass in the pile? Are "harvesters" telling consumers that pitted tempered parts need to be replaced? Why didn't he bang windshields on the fence to point out that the parts weren't broken? "

"Why do all the parts in the backyard that were shown, seem to be marked with classic yellow paint pen, with year range, make, and model of cars they fit, just like salvage yard parts are commonly marked? Did they come from consumer's cars, or from a salvage yard? Are they marked for application in this person's yard for resale, or were they obtained from a salvage yard marked that way? Why were they NOT marked for documentation of what consumer's car they came from, and with a DNS invoice the consumer was given, or were they? It seems that plenty of DNS invoices were supplied to the reporters and shown in the video, and a reporter could have then easily contacted the consumers in question for the video investigation, but didn’t? "

" Why is the identity of the ex-employee/installer concealed? This person has admitted he was fully participating in what he described as the fraudulent replacement practices of his alleged ex-employer, apparently multiple times, but took his information to a news reporter, but not to the authorities? Wouldn't this person be just as guilty of the alleged crimes as his employer? Did this person grow a conscience after the pay dispute with his employer, or before? If we were speaking of any other type of crime, such as a car theft ring, would we be asking this question?"

" All the invoices shown in the video reveal approximate prices of $300, but a suppliers invoice from PGW is shown to point out "What they COULD have charged for" at over $1000, which we all would quickly surmise as beings a Nags or PGW list price on the part printed on the supplier invoice, and has little relevance in pricing to the consumer as to "what....(DNS)....COULD have charged". Were there any instances of fraudulent overcharging, or was this nice detail added to remind us of the investigation of the Washington shop that was convicted of fraud? Is buying low and selling high a crime, especially when the insurer/network is setting the shop rates? Why was this even mentioned?"

"Who is AGIS? At their website, I see a man who bought an appraisal service in 1998, and has now moved into windshield inspections. No problem there, and I'm sure it's just coincidence that he's targeting the zero deductible states first, or just good business to go where he's requested to go, but what are this man's credentials to be considered an auto glass "EXPERT"? No offense to him, but a host of collision repairers that are experts in their field, will tell you that an experienced appraiser is no collision repair expert, no matter their appraisal experience, and that they gain their knowledge of repair from expert repairers, so I have to ask what credentials this person has as an auto glass replacement and repair "expert". I ask this question not because I doubt his ability to recognize the difference between a surface pit and a crack, but because he states on his website that he educates consumers about proper repair and replacement techniques. I see his site contains links to AGRSS and ROLAGS, a good start. "

Let's try to be patient, wait for a PROPER investigation, not fill in the blanks, but wait for the facts to surface, because so far, what I'm reading and seeing, raise far more questions than it provides answers.

Dues paying IGA members, which you appear not to be, want answers and they want change. They want to know that any story was covered fairly good or bad. In this case, this story was not fairly reported and that is a fact, not just made up out of thin air.

I use my real name and title to establish that I am who I am a not just another joker hiding behind the mask of the Internet.

Yes, the IGA membership DOES KNOW what their leadership is "espousing in their name" because we send out weekly communications with this information or links to it. Each and every current or perspective member may contact myself or their IGA zone leader to raise discussion on any point the association is making because... the IGA is their voice and organization.

When I watched those reports and read the follow up, I didn't feel dirty for the AGRR industry, I felt shame for the poor reporting that has become common place. It is clear that this report was pushed along by a competitior in that market that has an axe to grind. Regardless of what company was the target of the story, the issues that remain of are standards that need to be addressed.

Perhaps Kerry Wanstrath or Rich from the NWRA would like to chime in on the focus of the story which is the damage they filmed.

According to the ROLAGS standard, it appears even a pit that is 1/8 inch is qualified for a repair (or replacement). The only thing that shouldn’t be repaired or replaced is a pit smaller than 1/8th; however, it looks to me like the threshold is wide open according to the ROLAGS standard. If you haven't read the standard, have at it here:
http://www.rolags.com/pdf/FinalANSI+NGA+R1_1-2007_by_ANSI.pdf

Did you notice the name on the post? This isn't about all of the ways you can defend DNS (motive still not clear). It is about the propriety of a national leader that uses name and title on an anonymous chat board to defend a PR nightmare.

If you believe in it and your members want to carry the DNS flag, by all means do a press release...I'd just make sure all of your members are comfortable defending an individual that carries himself that way or a company that would employ him. If you want to throw your opinion out there, do it like the rest of the board...it doesnt' matter who you are, it matters what you say. IMO your post was beyond unprofessional for someone that is a "leader"... "dude".

Back to the issue...It DOESN'T MATTER how many people you can get to defend the chip, or how many questions arise because of the idiot with a salvage yard full of windshields behind him...what matters is the perception of our industry that was created by the simple fact that the company representative that handled the situation was a moron and ACTED GUILTY...He didn't take the opportunity to support his company business practices because he CANT. He chose the "**** off" route. They are dirty and the entire industry knows it.

The story happened. Public perception has been formed. Defending the guy by questioning the discovery is simply bad strategy and does NOTHING to help independents. It simply appears as a diversion to what everyone saw. Perhaps rebuke of the professionalism displayed, acknowledgment of the problem (it is real) and an appeal for more investigation and visibility to things that further your agenda would have been a better choice?...but what do I know...lol.

Applying the IGA to this issue is either extremely immature on your part, or a rather large strategy gaffe by the organization.

tick tock.

Well since you tend to have all the answers, then who are you? Make your self known so that you can be judged by the merits of who you are.

I am not defending the actions of the guy, DNS or anyone else; I only said the reporting was horrible and more information is required. Is that wrong? According to you it is but you are no one until you provide your true identity.

What was unprofessional about anything I posted? Please, do enlighten the rest of us.

Plenty of good is coming from our "discovery" because we now have learned how this started, who is backing these national market campaigns and more.

If you have anything else to say about this, call me anytime....but we all know you won't. Man or woman up is what I say and yes, that is professional, the ability to face your acuser.

Well, lets start with who I am. It doesn't matter. This site doesn't require it. Weigh the response or "judge the merits" on the words contained. That seems to be what you don't grasp. I've been around a long time and know enough to post. That is all required. Credibility is in content, not author. Which is why I questioned you.

You DID defend the actions by attacking the production of the piece. Nowhere in your response did you do anything to mitigate the damage done by the report. You simply attacked the credibility of the messenger and gave a buffet of reasons why the report could be wrong. Whether it was right or wrong, the piece brought focus to unethical business practices. I challenge you to show the piece to anyone in the public and then show them your response, complete with the multiple "nark" references and the "weight" of your title and organization and then see how they feel about the credibility of our industry.

Not to be trite, but YOU started this little exchange - as described, in detail in the three posts before this, and I am simply playing on the same field you decided to use, using the rules provided. I don't care to call you, write you, or even give you more than a passing thought. I didn't write a letter to the IGA, the IGA, through you, used a public, anonymous chat board to divert attention away from a legitimate issue. You and Mike seem to share the same "meet me in the schoolyard" mentality...problem is, it doesn't work in grownup land.

You really could stand to read some Sun Tzu...or at least take a marketing class.

tick tock.

All warfare is based on deception. Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be ineffective.

you have taken my teaching to the exxtreme.

He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.

故善战者，求之于势，不责于人。

Strategy 101,

The discussion aside on the video, it is you and your ilk through your passive stance that allow the problems in your industry to continue. Unless you folks organize in a constructive manner with an organized strategy, and quit being naive and attacking the people that want to help you, you will keep spinning your wheels in the mud. I continue to be involved as an outsider because I know, and have known from day 1 when I started in this industry that what is taking place is grossly unfair. I don't have a clue whether you are on the side of independents or just a trouble maker from the other side but you need to grow up. If you have been in this industry a long time you should be embarrassed. I can tell you that what I did while at the helm of the IGA would make your head spin because I cared. But I and the board could not do it alone. You my friend do not have a clue.

And that my friends...

"I challenge you to show the piece to anyone in the public and then show them your response, complete with the multiple "nark" references and the "weight" of your title and organization and then see how they feel about the credibility of our industry."

...is called hitting the nail on the head.

And THIS is why it should be challenged, because an INDUSTRY is being painted as fraudulent, NOT a few players, which seems to be EXACTLY the point of the video(s).

And Dots just confirmed all of my questions as being valid.

I believe I've used the phrase before...."Witch Hunt".

Anyone that cannot see that this is intended to attack not only fraudulent practices, which are easily prosecutable under any and every state's current and existing laws, but to further the goals of those that would aspire to be "the industry policy", are the ones being naive.

Need proof of "prosecutability"? Look at Allstate in New York. No problems there, they're filing so many lawsuits over fraud, they're going to start demanding discounts for that too.

Strategy 101 has confirmed this "perception" issue in his posts, clearly: He feels "dirty" and had nothing to do with it, and admits it's about the public perception about the piece(s).

If fraud is taking place, PROSECUTE it. But get out of my yard, "THEY/THEM" is not "I", and take your McCarthyism with you.

I mean, for crying out loud, people, open your eyes and take a look at the bigger picture here.

And I also don't want to hear any more of this crap about "defending a fraudster" just because I happen to have a brain, and choose not follow the crowd in a media frenzy.

JMHNLO

Mark - you make good points for sure. I won't contest what you said. I do have one final thought, and it was really my intent of contributing to the thread all along.

And I'll use a Mikey from NY or sglass spin to it...using the whole "trust me, it's happening all the time, I've seen it and lived it" approach. Granted, this approach tends to only work when talking about Slite. But without further adieu or digression, here goes:

Anyone who actually thinks that this is NOT the M.O of DNS/C2C is delusional, and is kidding themselves.

Dippin....

I think you are seeing dots. I said fraud happens..no one condones it and those who commit fraud should be punished. But when fraudulent claims are flowing through a TPA that also owns its own glass shops and wants to play fraud police with their cohort the NICB, I ask again. Are Safelite Techs exempt from committing fraud? That is a very simple and straightforward question to which no one wants to answer. And it is so easy to throw the F word around, especially when you want to strengthen the roles of the TPAs. Case in point, when the State Farm lobbyist said that there were 10,000 fraudulent claims when they were trying to push through the legislation in AZ in 2010. How many of those 10,000 claims were prosecuted? Again, no one seems to have the answer. I will argue that the fraud hype is overblown and part of a conspiracy to strengthen the unfair system that is currently in place. Not every company that directly markets its services at car washes, etc is committing fraud and you all need to understand that.

I have to admit, in this specific case I've no idea what the actual truth is.
But the TPA gets paid any way, in every way, Its a win, win, win situation for them so its not going to go away. What I'm saying is we have to get past it, it won't end and theoretically it doesn't matter. In this case
One bad apple dont spoil the whole bunch.
You can't police the police that police the police, etc., etc..
It's very simple, buyer beware, let the customer decide. Got to step up your game, get your story straight and tell it to the world. Nothing new. I could go on but .....

ok, last post...

Understand this...my posts were not about fraud, nor were they meant to dredge up debate on the validity of the story that aired. Media is media. I responded to a "leader" of a national organization putting a juvenile, knee jerk post up under name and title; thus putting the entire memberships name on his personal view. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they aren't entitled to dictate mine by inclusion.

I questioned the strategy of doing such in the face of an overwhelmingly negative perception of the issue.

I questioned the wisdom behind defending through diversion the practice of the "representative" on the video.

I don't care what your stance is, the guy on the video was awful and did damage to our credibility. Debate the issue all you want, what "John Q" thinks is all that matters. If you think you can overcome that by calling the reporting bad and ignoring the obvious idiot, you have, once again, misplayed your hand.

The pattern is so predictable it is funny. Same rhetoric, same tactics, same results, same finger pointing.

Gary and Mike both really like to play the "everyone sits on the sidelines" card. The elephant in the room is that it isn't the flocks job to be motivated by the shepherd, it is the shepherds job to motivate the flock. That hasn't happened and it is a 100% indicator that the tactics are wrong, or the messengers are inadequate.

BTW Mike, don't confuse me and my "ilk's" criticism with apathy. I spent about an hour on these posts and not once did I name call. Because my opinion is different than yours, you choose to tag me as "the other side"..or whatever name you pull out that day. Understand this - "I" think "YOU" and "THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR" are WRONG. I am not apathetic. I have an opinion and am posting it.

Simple common sense and results would indicate that my "ilk" is the majority. The only ones in the room that don't understand that your methods are NOT WORKING are those that choose to hang titles and point fingers. Ultimately, results, not rhetoric, indicate effectiveness. How's that working over the last decade or two?

you can have whatever agenda you choose if you can convince people to follow you and commit. If you fail, over and over again, you should rethink your agenda. This isn't a "feel good" story about how good overcame evil. This is a group of individuals that could be developed into successful business people by putting focus on making them better at what they do and positioning that correctly, which includes condemnation of those that damage your credibility as a group.

Or you can just focus on S and ignoring everything else...that will do it.

But, there are jobs to gain (and lose) and software to sell with fire and brimstone..so by all means, carry on.

tick tock.

So how do you bridge that gap, as a business owner and shaker, if the cat dont know , the cat dont know period


Your job should be to bring obscurity into focus, insults will not do.


Some prefer the argument, so dont be frustrated, some thrive off your argument, so dont feed it.


Ultimately,

"those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"...George Santayana

There are lessons to learn from dozens of industries regarding how to harness the power of association. Our industry seems to have missed those comparisons outside of the body shop business.

As far as my responsibility, it is to run a successful business, be innovative, understand, minimize and avoid my competitors strengths and exploit their weaknesses in an ethical, profitable way. The more successful I am, the more success my family and my employees families enjoy.

It is hard work, but it seems to be working pretty well, without legislation or empty rhetoric.

Strategy,

I would hardly say what I wrote is name calling. Anyway, associations belong to the membership, not the other way around. So your characterization of sitting on the sidelines is accurate. There is a lot of talent in your industry and some sharp minds and if all that talent and energy were put to constructive use, you all might have the opportunity to build your successful businesses even more.

Mike, are you like the guy who breaks up with a girlfriend, but then stalks her? Were you ex-girlfriend and we do not want you that's why we broke up. Now go on now.

Not alot of men with that name, are there percy?
Mike has the right to be wrong just like the rest of us.

Speak for yourself, Percy!
We need all the help we can get.

Back to the thread. If the truth be known, fradulent auto glass claims represent less than one tenth of one percent of all comprehensive coverage claims.

In other words, insurance companies would recover much more money if the same efforts were spent on other fradulent claims as were spent on auto glass claims.

Conclusion....Safelite is sensationalizing the problem for self serving purposes i.e. to try to blackball any competitor that actually goes out and activly seeks business by inspecting windshields for damage.

I agree. They're called "Claims Harvesters" or, as NICB has coined the phrase, "Windshield Bullies". They actively seek out consumers with damaged glass, and sell their services at car washes, gas stations, service centers, malls, or other public locations.

Of course, if you have the insureds CALL YOU with notice of damage, then market your services to them, the "harvester" and "bully" applique no longer apply, nor does the inference of any illegal activity.

Funny how that small detail washes one's hands of the apparent bad smelling substance associated with steering. Excuse me, I meant to say aggressive marketing.

Personally I don't like either business model, but that's not really the issue here, though many would have you believe it is.

JMHNLO

I started this thread to "defend" the practice of educating the insured of their rights when replacing or repairing a windshield. I get the feeling it has turned into a feud between the replace/repair shops versus the repair only shops.

JB,

You hit it right on the head. The windshield bullies program between Safelite and the NICB was designed in an effort to undermine direct marketing. Fraud is fraud whether done in a shop or in the field. Any person who commits fraud should be punished but these people would make you feel that it is widespread so they can defend the necessity of the TPA system. I have said from day 1 that the NICB and their headlines are nothing but tabloid journalism.

did a repair for customer today she told me dns was out in front of walmart with a tent ib baltimore look at her ws and said they could repair her ws as long as she would give them her ins information she told them to pound sand they have alot of nerv

DNS and other companies that "consumer direct" market auto glass and repair are here to stay. What should be understood is these companies are not unique to the auto glass industry. They exist in the other industries as well (home remodeling, etc.).

In my opinion their operating model (claims harvesting) is not any different than a company that runs multi-million dollar media blitzes or companies that offer incentives to consumers (steaks, gift cards, etc.) to influence an insured customer to create "a shop of preference". Singling out one company from many that have similar models should not be a talking point. The practices are real, factual and relevant in today’s auto glass industry.

With this in mind, these factors separate glass shops owned or managed by businessmen/businesswomen who know how to approach a competitive business factor versus a glass technician that might have great installation skill but limited business acumen who miss this point.

Hence I come to my conclusion. Regardless of your business skill level acknowledge the competitive factors in today’s auto glass industry. To use a quote from a great Clint Eastwood character: "Improvise, Adapt and Overcome". If you can’t then you will continue to struggle to capture market share in a low demand business climate.

JMHO

"improvise, adapt & overcome"
Since referrals from TPA's are now negligible, terminate all O&A and/or affiliate agreements.

Then the competition won't be able to advertise that they cover 95% of the country.

Demand that insurance carriers provide an alternative way to file claims if they use a competitor to administer their auto glass claims. Demand that they not release proprietary and confidential business information to your competitors.

Continue to provide excellent service and you will "overcome".

What ever became of DNS Auto Glass?

still around, MANY NAMES!!!!!

who does honest quality work anymore? no one!