Here is a quote from a Glassbytes story,
"“That would not cure the First Amendment problem,” they argue. “Rather, it would force Safelite to convey a message with which it disagrees strongly: That the state has forced it to disclose other companies because it is somehow inappropriate or suspect for Safelite to recommend its affiliated shops. In addition, the awkward script the District Court wrote clearly suggests that the state itself views these shops as appropriate alternatives. And if Safelite really were to take up the District Court’s invitation to start affirmatively disparaging the other shop it mentions, the consumer would likely be turned off by this caddish, aggressive behavior. The law will have forced Safelite to change its corporate persona and ‘go negative.’”
http://www.glassbytes.com/2014/03/safelite-files-new-brief-over-ct-anti-steering-law-arguing-for-appeal-*****ction/#at_pco=tcb-1.0&at_si=535159965cfeec16&at_ab=-&at_pos=2&at_tot=5

LOL!

Apparently Safelite has no problem with an insurance company script that they are required to go by that "aggressively and caddishly" casts aspersions on competitor shops. So they are already creating a "negative persona". But when the tables are turned and the state of CT requires them to mention a "LICENSED"(emphasis added) non-affiliated shop before they can promote one of their own shops, all of a sudden, they realize it is not so fun to be the victim of steering. Safelite's attorneys argue that the customer might think something is wrong with Safelite if they are forced to mention a "LICENSED" (emphasis added) competitor.

What do they think a customer will conclude when they are told that their chosen shop is not on a list of preferred providers and that they may be exposed to out of pocket expenses and that their insurance company cannot stand behind their chosen shops warranty? Sounds pretty aggressive and caddish to me.

Now, the reason for the added emphasis above. Supposedly, over 70% of glass repair shops surveyed by Safelite responded that they felt unregistered and unlicensed shops were a major problem in the industry. So far, I think Connecticut is the only state requiring licensing and Safelite is currently embroiled in a huge lawsuit against the state of CT due to a law that went into effect this year. The same lawsuit referred to above!

I think 100% of the non-Safelite glass repair shops, if surveyed, would agree that the number one problem in the auto glass industry is the lack of enforcement of steering laws as well as other antitrust violations with a close second problem being a corrupt business model that colludes with insurance companies to funnel policyholders to one specific company.

If the powers that be can't or won't enforce the laws already on the books, I will not support any more regulation until the current laws are enforced.

p.s. If you type the letters i n j u n in place of the asterisks in the above URL, it will take you to the article in question. Apparently, we do not want to offend any of our native American friends.

It comes down to this: Our nation can live through much suffering and, rising from the canvas, sustain faith in both the individual and the collective.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/america-ugly-age-greed-fraud-article-1.1761488

Stanley Crouch - "America’s ugly age of greed and fraud"

QUOTE: "Apparently Safelite has no problem with an insurance company script that they are required to go by."

I have a serious problem with this statement. First off, how many insurance companies does SGC affiliate with? Almost a couple hundred? or a few hundred? (or 3)

PLEASE tell me how it is possible that the same gosh-darn script, or almost identical script, is used for every FNOL, or claim? How is it remotely possible every insurance company wrote the same script? I think anyone with half a brain can figure out this is a direct LIE. And when it comes to pricing, how is it that a network says is SET by an insurance company, and then coordinated with the network,,,, ahh,,,,, wait, if 1 or more entities collaborate to set or control a price,,, ahhhh what is that called????? any answers?

How can it be that anyone can believe the insurance companies are writing the script, or even setting a price??????? Come on now how gullible are you Auto glass industry?

Correct answers are encouraged.

R U SURE,
Yes, I am. It doesn't make any difference who writes the script. Ultimately, the insurance company is the responsible party for what is in the script.

The whole point of the post was to point out that Safelite talks out of both sides of its mouth. When they benefit from steering it is okay, but when another shop might benefit it is NOT okay.

They are the ones that coined the phrase "aggressive and caddish behavior."

Safelite's testimony removes any separation from Safelite Solutions and Safelite Autoglass. Essentially, when an insurance company contracts with Safelite Solutions it is also contracting Safelite Autoglass. Safelite is Safelite is Safelite.

Using a TPA is supposed to be to reduce "administrative" costs not to steer, or to control pricing.

JB, he was reinforcing your point, not voicing opposition.

SL is no more than a stooge for their insurance company clients. The scripting, which is promulgated by their clients has been around forever. If you doubt the insurance companies are behind it (wrote it), take a look at the FL anti-trust class action suit the collision industry has going. They use the exact same tactics/scripting on these guys...and TPAs are not involved in their claim transactions. They are handled directly by ins. co. adjusters.

--> http://www.glassbytes.com/2014/04/state-farm-denies-allegations-in-florida-repair-shops-antitrust-lawsuit/

Look guys, you say potato I say potato. Lies weren't invented by insurance companies or TPAs, they have just become experts at using them to our detriment.