On or about August 6, 2014, the IGA was served a subpoena by Safelite Group, Inc. and Safelite Solutions LLC commanding the IGA to produce certain information relevant to Connecticut General Statue 38a-354a and then a bunch of really far reaching stuff that you can read for yourself in the actual subpoena by going to this URL: http://tinyurl.com/poundsand

When the dust settles, can S/L be forced to pay legal expenses necessary for replying to their absurdly frivolous subpoenas?

Just say no.

Sorry Nancy. Simply IGNORING a subpoena by just saying no ain't good.

Please help me understand what harm was caused, what extra expense was incurred by serving you at dinner time.

Why do people think because they where embarrassed or got their feeling hurt they are entitled to Sue somebody or deserve compensation for it.
Take your subpoena like a big boy, but you can still cry to your mom ...she won't tell

The real question in all of this is, simply, "WHY?".

The fact that the requested data is not relevant to the case, that some, if not all, of the parties it's being requested from, are not relevant to the case, either by participation or by the data requested, makes little sense either.

So, what's their point? I see few possibilities. No relevance to the order I name them; most to least likely or vice-versa.

1. Bullying/Scare tactics.
2. Fishing expedition.
3. A clandestine method to make the industry at large define in court what "proprietary information" is, FOR them, before it's requested or subpoenaed OF them?

Frankly, I see no sense or gain in any of the three, but can't seem to understand what explanation makes any sense really, at all.

In fact, that the tactic could backfire seems even more likely than any of the scenarios above.

JMHNLO, and speculating today over a cool glass of tea! But, break's over.

They are fighting for their business model.

Which is?

Insurance company sponsored/Drive the unsuspecting consumer into an artificial environment of "no choice", just a quick slight of hand that books the job and ends with "...thank you ma'am, can I do anything else for you today?". Safelite gets the retail job, Safelite gets the TPA fee and SGC gets to move another chinese windshield through their distribution system. Adding true consumer choice to this rigged environment will bring this business model down.

The insurance companies know that their customers are practically steered to Belron locations. Fine with them: the TPA has allowed the Insurance companies to eliminate their glass claims dept's while the business side of Solutions keeps prices (miraculously) in check.

The TPAs and the Insurance companies are in CAHOOTS 9Non legal term)

Duh,
You nailed it, but you forgot that Safelite is moving its patent pended reverse engineered glass through its distribution division too.

The insurance industry has figured out a way, through Safelite, which only has about 870 retail locations to control pricing for the rest of the auto glass industry which has 50,000 auto body repair shops and another 4000 non-Safelite glass shops. In other words, 2% is allowed to control the other 98%.

Glass shops that cave in to the coercion to join networks to keep the insurance TPA's from spewing "aggressive and caddish" remarks about not being preferred providers and planting seeds of doubt regarding warranties are only sealing their own fate. There is no other reason to join Safelite's network since referrals have all but dried up.

Glass shop owners need to just say no to the network nonsense and realize that when they sign the network agreements that they are falling into the insurance industry's trap. Through the networks, insurance companies are able to establish artificial "market" rates. These are rates that are not necessarily reasonable but ones that other shops have agreed for which to do the work.

When a non-network shop bills a reasonable rate, the insurance companies short pay it because they say the network shops will do it for less. In other words, they are pitting us against ourselves! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

Ever notice how the network agreements automatically renew every year but there is never any cost of living increase in the rates? Ever notice how the artificial "market rates" either remain relatively stagnant or actually decrease! An increase, if any, is meant to appease and not to help keep up with inflation. Ever notice how insurance premiums still go up all the time?

Ever notice when an insurance company changes TPAs that the new artificial "market" rates are lower at the new TPA than they were at the old TPA?

Why do we even need TPAs? We don't, insurance companies do! Originally, TPA's were only meant to help insurance companies cut administrative costs.
Now, look what they have morphed into especially Safelite Solutions, LLC!

How can a TPA that doesn't even do auto glass repair and replacement negotiate a guaranteed average invoice (GAI) with an insurance company? IT can't, unless it is in CAHOOTS, as Duh put it, with a company that does repair and replace. Does the word "Safelite" strike a familiar note to ya?
Shops do not need to belong to the network in order to bill the insurance company.

Shop owners, do your selves and the rest of the auto glass industry a favor and terminate your agreements and then think long and hard about ever signing one ever again.

Davey is right on.

Since we are slingin':

Wonder if Big B is one of those companies that is able to avoid US taxes by their foreign ownership? Has Feeney ever addressed the question of taxes with the press or the public? Watch a little of the business channels and you see that Inversion is a hot topic.

To borrow a phrase - Just sayin'

Keep rooting for Connecticut and the collision boys anti-trust suits. And now, Louisiana AG is in the mix. Nice! That's the only pressure the insurance companies recognize or respect. They are the cause of the illness in the AGRR industry...Safelite is simply their puppet...not that they don't reap considerable reward for thier puppet role in the scamming of America. If you read the collision boys complaints, same as AGRR. That's not a coincidence. Insurance companies wrote the same script for both industries a very long time ago.